Another Cypherpunks Investigation?

[Tim May]

On Friday, September 12, 2003, at 06:32  AM, Jim Choate wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I had an interesting experience yesterday. I got to talk to a person
> claiming to be with the DoJ in Philly (if memory serves). Apparently 
> they
> are investigating one or more posts in the Aug. time frame for 
> something.
> They were interested in a subpeona regarding technical information 
> about the
> list.
>
> The person didn't make it clear exactly who they were investigating. 
> The
> questions were focused on how the mailing list worked and where there 
> was
> editorial opportunity. They were also interested in mail and network 
> logs
> for that time frame (which I don't normally keep past 3-4 days). I was
> very carefull to explain that IP spoofing was easy to do so that the
> veracity or reliability of the logs was in question.
>
> I'm deciding not to provide the persons name and contact info since I'm
> not sure what the effect would be. I requested they talk with my 
> lawyer in
> regards to future information and that I wasn't interested in getting
> involved.
>
> That's about all I have on the topic at this time.
>

I was curious about which messages in August could be of interest. 
Seeing none (via the lne.com feed I am subscribed to), I searched via 
Google for various articles mentioning "cypherpunks" and variations on 
"philadelphia," "pittsburgh," and "pennsylvania." And I narrowed the 
search to posts in July and August.

I got some almost immediate hits (no pun intended). I've made it easy 
for anyone to find them via Google. Search on this search string:


pittsburgh "professor rat"

Search also on some of the names in the first article which pops up, 
i.e., on:

"Mary Beth Buchanan"



My comment is that this "Professor Rat," whose posts I have not seen 
for as long as lne.com has been my feed, is probably in some real 
difficulty. His posts are very direct threats, not veiled in any of the 
vague, political "politicians ought to be given a fair trial and then 
hanged" or even the "I hope Washington is nuked" sorts.

(One rule of thumb I use is to never, ever use actual names of 
burrowcrats. Except for a few at the top, I don't even make any effort 
to remember the names. It's hard to be charged with making a direct, 
credible threat when no specific person is either named or alluded to.)

Were he in the U.S., I'd expect he'd face serious charges. Being that 
he's in Australia, as far as I know, I doubt extradition will occur. 
And even if he were prosecuted, by Oz or by the U.S., his various 
articles indicate "mental disturbance" could be a winning defense, with 
him ordered to get back on his Prozac or Zoloft or whatever.

The questions being asked of Jim may have to do with the Feds making 
the only prosecution they can make: that those passing on such threats 
via mailing lists are somehow guilty of some crime. This is just 
speculation on my part.

If so, the case may hinge on issues of "common carrier" status. Also, I 
believe Congress passed a bill explicitly saying that sysops are not 
liable for the e-mail passing through their systems...Declan will 
likely have the latest on this.

Anyway, I'll bet good money this is the series of messages in question. 
Nothing else I have seen either rises to this level or seems to involve 
Pennsylvania in any significant way.

--Tim May