Re: layered deception
I rather like the idea of encrypting the logs on the fly and shipping them offshore. Your offshore partner will be instructed to turn over the logs only if you are not asking for them under duress. (A reasonable protocol can probably be worked out. Would a court order instruct you to lie? If so, would it be valid?) -Declan On Sat, Apr 28, 2001 at 03:45:38PM -0600, Anonymous wrote: In view of the recent gimme-the-logs-or-we-fuck-you activities of armed men (http://www.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=36912group=webcast , http://seattle.indymedia.org/display.php3?article_id=3013 ) what would be the legal consequence of the following: 1. A virus is designed that spreads itself in some standard way and that deletes log files of popular http server implementations. 2. Files are deleted when virus receives a packet on a known port. 3. Detection of virus requires more than average admin can do. So when logs are requested an outside 3rd party can maliciously remove logs. The first several ISPs to contract this virus will probably get fucked, but by then it should become obvious that the ISP cannot effectively control the virus.
RE: layered deception
Right, in most circumstances you're not required to keep logs. But there are some cases, albeit a fairly narrow subset, in which you'd want to have log files that are available to you but not an adversary using legal process. -Declan At 01:15 AM 4/29/01 -0400, Phillip H. Zakas wrote: there is no requirement for maintaining log files (unless specifically directed otherwise.) log files contain either marketing value or sysadmin value -- in both cases specific ip addr info isn't necessary to maintain that value (except in case of anomalous activity). one could collect info without identifying information. same principle applies to e-mail. once mail is deleted from a pop or imap or whatever server, there is no requirement to keep the backup tapes of e-mail. in fact the larger isps no longer keep deleted e-mail...they maintain only e-mail headers for up to six months. smaller isps should follow in these steps (though i'd argue you shouldn't even keep header info.) don't save it if you don't really truly need it. phillip -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Declan McCullagh Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2001 11:46 PM To: Anonymous Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: layered deception I rather like the idea of encrypting the logs on the fly and shipping them offshore. Your offshore partner will be instructed to turn over the logs only if you are not asking for them under duress. (A reasonable protocol can probably be worked out. Would a court order instruct you to lie? If so, would it be valid?) -Declan On Sat, Apr 28, 2001 at 03:45:38PM -0600, Anonymous wrote: In view of the recent gimme-the-logs-or-we-fuck-you activities of armed men (http://www.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=36912group=webcast , http://seattle.indymedia.org/display.php3?article_id=3013 ) what would be the legal consequence of the following: 1. A virus is designed that spreads itself in some standard way and that deletes log files of popular http server implementations. 2. Files are deleted when virus receives a packet on a known port. 3. Detection of virus requires more than average admin can do. So when logs are requested an outside 3rd party can maliciously remove logs. The first several ISPs to contract this virus will probably get fucked, but by then it should become obvious that the ISP cannot effectively control the virus.
RE: layered deception
I think Matt is a bit too quick to conclude a court will charge the operator with contempt and that the contempt charge will stick on appeal. Obviously judges have a lot of discretion, but it doesn't seem to me like the question is such a clear one if a system is set up in the proper cypherpunkish manner. -Declan At 01:04 PM 4/29/01 -0400, Matthew Gaylor wrote: Declan McCullagh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Right, in most circumstances you're not required to keep logs. But there are some cases, albeit a fairly narrow subset, in which you'd want to have log files that are available to you but not an adversary using legal process. -Declan Which would/could get you charged with obstruction of justice/contempt/conspiracy etc, etc. You can protect your log files safely enough by not having any- But protecting your real ASSets is a bit more difficult. Regards, Matt- ** Subscribe to Freematt's Alerts: Pro-Individual Rights Issues Send a blank message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the words subscribe FA on the subject line. List is private and moderated (7-30 messages per week) Matthew Gaylor, 2175 Bayfield Drive, Columbus, OH 43229 (614) 313-5722 ICQ: 106212065 Archived at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fa/ **
Report from NORML conference in Washington, DC
http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,43232,00.html Pot Backers Call for Reeferendum By Declan McCullagh ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) 2:30 p.m. Apr. 23, 2001 PDT WASHINGTON -- Hundreds of drug war critics gathered here this weekend to share political tips, marijuana cigarettes, pipes and bowls, and a growing sense of optimism about the future of drug legalization. The occasion was the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws convention, an annual event usually held around April 20, a date that has the same kind of significance to cannabis users that, say, July 4 has to patriots. In the ranks of the legalize-weed movement, NORML has a venerable history. It's been around since 1970, and has held 27 annual conventions so far -- only to see the drug war escalate during that time to include military troops, longer prison terms, and the creation of a federal bureaucracy that has become the arch-enemy of pot smokers. So why were the roughly 250 conference goers sounding almost, well, happy? It wasn't just the plentiful herb at the event. NORML believes that thanks to pro-legalization politicians like Gov. Gary Johnson (R-New Mexico) and Rep. Barney Frank (D-Massachusetts), state action on medical marijuana, and the spread of the Internet, public opinion may be shifting. We don't live in an isolated world anymore, said Allen St. Pierre, the executive director of the NORML Foundation. We can be watching people indulge in cannabis in an Amsterdam cafe via a webcam. St. Pierre said Johnson and Frank's support is heartening. We have not had a major political figure since the '70s come out and endorse a departure from the status quo. That's important and noteworthy to say the least. St. Pierre is talking about what former President Carter said in 1977: Penalties against drug use should not be more damaging to an individual than use of the drug itself. Nowhere is this more clear than in the laws against possession of marijuana in private for personal use. [...]
Epilogue: U.S. v. Jim Bell trial in federal court in Tacoma
Security number. Now Bell has been convicted for get this stalking government arm-twisters. Stalking? Well ... that's what they call it. Bell gathered the sort of information on them that they compiled on him and many, many other people for years. For that offense, the feds decided to send Bell away again, and they did everything in their power to fix the trial. A cypherpunk and libertarian, Bell originally got official skirts in a bind when he penned Assassination Politics, a provocative think piece that postulated an Internet-based system for anonymously rewarding people who knock off abusive government officials. All hot and bothered by the article, the feds made Bell a target of an intense investigation. Soon, he was an unwilling guest of the government, and the powers that be thought they were done with yet one more thorn in their sides. [...] Whatever the paper charges, Jim Bell was clearly arrested and prosecuted for loudly criticizing the government and for being abrasive and unrelenting in the process. Bell may be something of an eccentric, but he had enough moxie to make federal agents nervous. That's the worst crime as far as any government official is concerned. [...] *** http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=01/04/11/238254 [...] Government prosecutors now appear to qualify as technical experts on the cypherpunk phenom, having scrutinized listmember behavior as ants under lenses. London told the jury yesterday that "the one unifying theme that defines someone as a cypherpunk on the Internet is the ability to encrypt mail." One could say the same thing about a NAI marketing flack, but that wouldn't be as quotable. It's all so sad and predictable and sad again. The cypherpunks list had its glory days: Wired magazine cover stories, blossoming technology, and, yes, even those damnable tentacles. Now it's become a convenient way for the Feds to land convictions. *** Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2001 14:14:32 -0400 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: John Young [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Breeding Rats Galore Anonymous writes: [Quote] Over the past few days, I found the story about James Bell in Tacoma who is being hung out to dry it seems. I thought that the group I am associated with would enjoy reading all the info you have on James Bell, so I pieced together some of the posts about him and the link to Wired's articles. That post was not incredibly controversial, nor were any threats made against any person or group by myself or the respondents, yet I have evidence that starting today, I am being watched, and trailed as I drive. Is there something magic about the James Bell case that causes alphabet agencies to investigate those that openly discuss it? This is a real question to which I hope you will reply: Considering the type of data you post on your sites, do you find that you're being watched, or has that period come and gone? Have you ever requested your FBI file through the FOIA? I don't know that I have one, but I may send off a request just to see. I would love to hear your suggestions on how to react to "being watched" if you've been frustrated by similar experiences. Also, on the FOIA. [Unquote] Would the DoD, CIA and FBI use Jeff Gordon's pissant operation to conceal a burgeoning homeland defense Stasi octupussy? Yes, and here's why: Federal Register: April 13, 2001 DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Defense Science Board SUMMARY: The Defense Science Board Task Force on Intelligence Needs for Homeland Defense--Follow-On Initiative will meet in closed session on April 11, 2001, at Los Alamos National Laboratory, Albuquerque, NM, April 12-13, 2001, at Sandia National Laboratory, Albuquerque, NM. This Task Force will explore the intelligence ramifications posed by a changing spectrum of threat regimes, including biological, chemical, information, nuclear, and radiological weapons. [Snip. Complete document at http://cryptome.org/dod041301.txt --DBM] ** Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 02:23:09 -0600 From: Jim Burnes [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Day #2: U.S. v. Jim Bell report from federal court in Tacoma On Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 12:33:54PM -0400, Declan McCullagh wrote: - Forwarded message from Declan McCullagh [EMAIL PROTECTED] - "It's still on the Internet today," London said during the second day of the trial in federal district court. "He has not retracted it." Maybe London would prefer China, where thought crime is punished by life in slave labor camps. During your communist "rebirth" process you are made to renounce your opinions on a daily basis. London said that while Bell may not have directly threatened IRS agent Jeff Gordon, "he has done it indirectly through 'Assassination Politics.'" Why don't they charge him with conspiracy to murder
Re: Cypherpunks, Feds, and Pudgyfaced Voyeurism
Hmm. Anyone know what are some extant web-to-email remailers, and what Type I remailers exist? -Declan On Wed, Apr 11, 2001 at 06:43:10PM -0700, Ray Dillinger wrote: On Wed, 11 Apr 2001, Declan McCullagh wrote: It's all so sad and predictable and sad again. The cypherpunks list had its glory days: Wired magazine cover stories, blossoming technology, and, yes, even those damnable tentacles. Now it's become a convenient way for the Feds to land convictions. Perhaps it is time to consider a new and different mailing list which accepts messages ONLY from remailers. It would be publicly archived and unmoderated just as cypherpunks is, and monitored by the lions just as cypherpunks is, but now that the thought-crime laws are setting in full force, it could provide a forum where there wouldn't be such a simple evidentiary chain from post to poster. Given the recent spate of events, and the fact that some forms of political speech now seem to be a crime, or at least grounds for legal harassment and admissible as evidence of other crimes, I will probably have to set up such a list -- more info when it's ready to accept posts. The best name (cypherpunks) seems to be taken. Hmm. I will have to consider. The naming of things is a ticklish business. Bear
Re: the link doesn't work......
We would be delighted to help you for our usual consulting fees. -Declan On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 07:54:18AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was trying to check out the link on your "code cracking" page maybe you could help me. I was trying to find out if this is a page containing info. on how to "crack codes" if it is, or if you have some info for me regarding "code cracking" e mail me back and let me know. thanx...
biochemwmdterror in DC today
HOUSE SELECT INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE Terrorism Briefing Full committee Speaker's Working Group on Terrorism holds briefing on intelligence matters. Location: H-405 U.S. Capitol. 12;30 p.m. Contact: 202-225-4121 http://www.house.gov/select **NEW/CLOSED**
fun with the CIA
Speculation over why aliens would want to observe us: http://www.foia.ucia.gov/scripts/cgiservlets/NavigatorServlet.pl?docNumber=44116partNumber=2method=generateFrameSettotalNumber=2 CIA reports on Russian police scrambling over UFO sighting: http://www.foia.ucia.gov/scripts/cgiservlets/NavigatorServlet.pl?docNumber=98713partNumber=2method=generateFrameSettotalNumber=2 CIA report on Barbados sighting: http://www.foia.ucia.gov/scripts/cgiservlets/NavigatorServlet.pl?docNumber=43362partNumber=2method=generateFrameSettotalNumber=2 CIA summarizes news articles on UFOs in ancient China: http://www.foia.ucia.gov/scripts/cgiservlets/NavigatorServlet.pl?docNumber=42351partNumber=1method=generateFrameSettotalNumber=4
Re: Microsoft Trial Judge Based His Break-Up Remedy On Flawed Theory, Not Facts
On Tue, Feb 27, 2001 at 11:46:58AM -0800, lizard wrote: "Colin A. Reed" wrote: I'll admit that the trial was fucked up from the start by the decision to center it around netscape rather than something more blatant like stac. Anyways, this has nothing to do with FC, unless you think that enterprise is fundamentally expressive and Microsoft's vicious suppression of competition has limited the ability of others to be heard. But if source code is free speech, isn't a judge ordering some code be removed/edited/changed an intrustion on free speech? Isn't saying "Remove Explorer from the core install!" the same as saying "Remove this chapter from this book!" Sure, the chapter can then be republished separately, but who is the judge to decide what elements of a work of speech belong together? Code IS speech. And this has implications beyond DECSS and PGP. I'll go further. The First Amendment is part of the U.S. Constitution, and antitrust law is not. When the two are in conflict, the law must give way. :) (This is pretty much in jest, you antitrust scholars note. Yes, I have read media antitrust cases, etc.) -Declan
DeCSS ruling in DVD case must be reversed, eight amicus briefs say
Eight different coalitions -- from cryptographers to journalist groups -- are filing amicus briefs in the DVD/DeCSS case. The briefs -- an unusually high number -- urge that the Second Circuit Court of Appeals overturn the district court's ruling of last August. Wired News article on the briefs being filed today: http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,41441,00.html The journalist/media brief, which focuses on the right to link: http://www.politechbot.com/docs/linking-amicus.012601.html The computer scientists' brief (the only one filed earlier in the week): http://cryptome.org/mpaa-v-2600-bac.htm Photos from trial, protests, anti-DMCA march: http://www.mccullagh.org/theme/dvd-2600-trial.html http://www.mccullagh.org/theme/2600.html http://www.mccullagh.org/theme/dmca-protest.html http://www.mccullagh.org/image/950-5/tshirt-cssscramble.html Other briefs include one by the ACLU, one by the ACM, one by law professors, and one by Ernest Miller, Siva Vaidhyanathan et al. that says "to be governed by the District Court's version of the DMCA is to be stripped of the right to make the valuable fair uses of copyrighted materials upon which new contributions to the field are so often based." Judge Lewis Kaplan's ruling last August: http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,38287,00.html EFF is funding 2600 magazine's defense and appeal. The appeal brief to the circuit court, filed last Friday, is here: http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/MPAA_DVD_cases/20010119_ny_eff_appeal_pressrel.html http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/MPAA_DVD_cases/20010119_ny_eff_appeal_brief.html Brief of MPAA member companies is due February 19. Their amici must file a week later. Some of the briefs, including ones I've perused, are still in draft form. EFF promises to have all of them online shortly. ACLU says their brief -- still in draft form -- will be up on their site by noon. -Declan
Re: oppose nomination of John Ashcroft
On Sat, Jan 20, 2001 at 08:32:14AM -0800, James A. Donald wrote: -- On Fri, Jan 19, 2001 at 04:13:32PM -1000, Reese wrote: Then why were the troops laying siege to the compound, instead of snatching koresh when he made one of his frequent trips into town? At 11:54 PM 1/19/2001 -0500, Declan McCullagh wrote: Because sometimes a show of force is perceved as necessary. Heck, employers do it to employees all the time. I cannot recall any employer ever calling security to stick guns in my face. You're thinking too literally. Show of force: When an employer reminds a slacker that having a job is not a right. -Declan
Re: John Ashcroft
On Sat, Jan 20, 2001 at 01:06:43AM -0800, Raymond D. Mereniuk wrote: Declan McCullagh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote But I wonder who really believes Ashcroft is being absolutely genuine in his responses to Feinstein? In the last election in Texas when G.W. Bush was running for governor he was accused by his opponent of only using the governvorship of Texas as a base to run for the presidency of the US. He promised to serve a full term. So did Clinton. -Declan
Re: oppose nomination of John Ashcroft
At 12:07 AM 1/21/01 -1000, Reese wrote: It wasn't a right for the what, 40,000 in flint michigan, either, was it? It's called at-will employment: You keep your employer happy, you get your job. (I'm starting to think you're not only very educated, but not very educable. I'd love for you to prove me wrong; that would likely involve refraining from mouthing off.) -Declan
Bush's whitehouse.gov launches with embarrassing errors, bugs
http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,41319,00.html Anybody Home at Whitehouse.gov? by Declan McCullagh ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) 4:00 p.m. Jan. 21, 2001 PST WASHINGTON -- President Bush not only got the keys to the White House this weekend, but he also took over the official whitehouse.gov website. While the new president's speedily organized inaugural celebration concluded without incident in a chill rain, the launch of the Bush administration's Web presence was not as successful. Dozens of links return error messages, and the home page appears to have sported an unusual slogan on the left-hand rail when it first went up on Saturday: "Insert Something Meaningful Here." At high noon on Saturday, as Bush and Vice President Cheney took oaths of office on the Capitol building steps, the new administration officially took over the whitehouse.gov domain. Many of the text-only whitehouse.gov pages, designed for readers who are visually impaired or have low-bandwidth connections, return broken links. Clicking on the text-only option from the search page results in a malformed link with the title: "www.whitehouse.gov/--%20INTERFACE%20LINK%20." Links at the bottom of the White House History page -- including past first families, first ladies, or tour information -- return "404: The page cannot be found". In the children's area of whitehouse.gov, the Historic Moments page includes broken links to images of Abraham Lincoln and Franklin Roosevelt. On the home page, the placeholder message "Insert Something Meaningful Here" briefly appeared on the left side of the screen, according to a Wired News reader who saved a screen snapshot. The message, according to the snapshot, appeared under "President George W. Bush is Inaugurated as President of the United States" and above "Recent Additions." [...] Remainder at: http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,41319,00.html Snapshot of "insert something meaningful here" (also submitted by other readers): http://www.brianwestbrook.com/whitehousegov.html Examples of pages with broken links: http://www.whitehouse.gov/kids/text/moments.html http://www.whitehouse.gov/tours/text/map.html Or, for example, click on "text only" from the search page: http://www.whitehouse.gov/search - POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list You may redistribute this message freely if it remains intact. To subscribe, visit http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ - - End forwarded message -
Re: oppose nomination of John Ashcroft
Reno probably didn't expect the situation to, um, blow up in her face. It is also undisputed that if they wanted to avoid a show of force, they could have nabbed Koresh during his jogs around the property line or whatnot in the morning. Reese, you blather too much. -Declan At 09:19 PM 1/19/01 -1000, Reese wrote: At 11:54 PM 1/19/01 -0500, Declan McCullagh wrote: On Fri, Jan 19, 2001 at 04:13:32PM -1000, Reese wrote: Then why were the troops laying siege to the compound, instead of snatching koresh when he made one of his frequent trips into town? Because sometimes a show of force is perceved as necessary. oh geez. Why was it necessary to bring in tanks, special forces and gunships for overflights? Why, when if all they wanted was koresh, all they had to do was wait for him to go to town again, and snatch him off the street as he walked down the sidewalk? Who benefited from this "necessary" show of how forcefully Reno et al. could burn wooden buildings with people inside them? Yeah-yeah, the evidence is contested, re: who started the fires. What isn't contested is the armored vehicles poking gun muzzles through the walls. Reese
Re: oppose nomination of John Ashcroft
At 10:52 AM 1/20/01 -1000, Reese wrote: It is also undisputed that if they wanted to avoid a show of force, they could have nabbed Koresh during his jogs around the property line or whatnot in the morning. I said something to that effect, yesterday. Missed it, did'ja? Pardon me if I don't pay terribly close attention to your deathless prose. Reese, you blather too much. Blather? As opposed to what you do? I think it's preferable. But I get paid by the word for mine, generally speaking. -Declan
Re: John Ashcroft
I agree with the below. But it is mistaken to treat civil asset forfeiture as an issue marked by broad bipartisan condemnation. Quite the opposite is true; hence, we still have it. -Declan On Fri, Jan 19, 2001 at 01:14:46PM -0600, Harmon Seaver wrote: 1. Cops and Robbers: Exposs Find Ashcroft Encouraged Constitutional Violations in Missouri Asset Forfeiture Cases, Police Agencies Kept Funds Intended for Schools http://www.drcnet.org/wol/169.html#copsrobbers An article by investigative journalist Dan Forbes, released yesterday evening by the Progressive Review (http://www.prorev.org), has confirmed something that drug war observers had strongly suspected: John Ashcroft, as Missouri Governor, agreed to "look the other why" while state police
Re: oppose nomination of John Ashcroft
On Fri, Jan 19, 2001 at 04:13:32PM -1000, Reese wrote: Then why were the troops laying siege to the compound, instead of snatching koresh when he made one of his frequent trips into town? Because sometimes a show of force is perceved as necessary. Heck, employers do it to employees all the time. We do it to our pets when teaching them a lesson. Why should cops be any different? And _you_ think _I've_ bought into a statist line. Um, sure. -Declan
Re: What are you all about???
Where's Tim's old .sig when we need it? -Declan On Fri, Jan 19, 2001 at 09:18:47AM -0800, William Weinmann wrote:
Re: oppose nomination of John Ashcroft
Quite right. Ashcroft is objectionable, as is any candidate George W. would propose, but he is arguably less objectionable than Reno. Here's what he said yesterday about Microsoft: http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,41264,00.html -Declan On Wed, Jan 17, 2001 at 01:18:32PM -0800, Greg Broiles wrote: On Wed, Jan 17, 2001 at 01:29:28PM -0600, Harmon Seaver wrote: Just heard Asskroft on the radio during the hearings affirming his support for the assault weapon ban ( and Herr Busch's support of same) and their intention to reimplement that ban when it sunsets. So much for his being against guncontrol -- he made it pretty clear that he believes the 2nd is about sporting arms, not military weapons. Yeah, and they made him apologize for telling the tired old joke about how the only thing found in the "middle of the road" are moderates and dead skunks. Sounds like everyone's taking this process real seriously. Confirmation is more like a ritual hazing and has absolutely nothing to do with a candidate's fitness for the job. We've survived Ed Meese and Janet Reno, we'll survive John Ashcroft, too. -- Greg Broiles [EMAIL PROTECTED] PO Box 897 Oakland CA 94604
Re: John Ashcroft
More on Ashcroft's tech record: http://www.politechbot.com/cgi-bin/politech.cgi?name=ashcroft But I wonder who really believes Ashcroft is being absolutely genuine in his responses to Feinstein? -Declan On Thu, Jan 18, 2001 at 10:55:10AM -0500, Matthew Gaylor wrote: I happened to catch some of the confirmation hearings on CSPAN last night. Of particular interest was John Ashcroft's responses to Dianne Feinstein's, (D-Calif.) questions. Basically Ashcroft stated that both Brady and the assault weapon bill are constitutional and that he supported their continuance. He said something to the effect that "We need to move forward on these issues". He also mentioned that he favored closing the "gun show loophole" (A view shared by Republican sellouts). On both 1st and 4th amendment issues, John Ashcroft has one of the worst records on Capital Hill. Ashcroft sponsored the "Methamphetamine Anti-Proliferation Act" would have criminalized certain drug- and drug policy- related discussions on the Internet, and would have allowed police to conduct secret searches of homes, with the residents never being informed before or after that the police were there. It is my opinion that Yale grad Ashcraft is a phony conservative (aside from the abortion issue) and phony constitutionalist. Please visit http://www.StopJohnAshcroft.org today and help stop the appointment of John Ashcroft as Attorney General -- or, just call the Congressional Switchboard at (202) 224-3121, twice, have them transfer you to each of your two Senators in turn, and urge they vote "no" on the Ashcroft appointment. Regards, Matt- ** Subscribe to Freematt's Alerts: Pro-Individual Rights Issues Send a blank message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the words subscribe FA on the subject line. List is private and moderated (7-30 messages per month) Matthew Gaylor, 2175 Bayfield Drive, Columbus, OH 43229 (614) 313-5722 Archived at http://www.egroups.com/list/fa/ **
biochemcyberterror update
today... FOREIGN AFFAIRS Potomac Institute for Policy Studies (PIPS) News briefing on "Terrorism: Review of 2000 and Outlook for 2001." A special report on Osama bin Laden will also be released Location: National Press Club, Lisagor, White and Murrow Rooms, 14th and F St., NW. 1 p.m. Contact: Erin O'Connell, 703-525-0770 ext 241
Re: oppose nomination of John Ashcroft
I've written about Ashcroft's mixed records on tech issues: http://www.politechbot.com/cgi-bin/politech.cgi?name=ashcroft On Tue, Jan 16, 2001 at 07:54:00PM -0800, Anonymous wrote: "Me" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Original Message - From: "sparky" [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.opposeashcroft.com I'm not trying to get people into any arguments here.. I thought this might be appropriate since people here are concerned with civil rights. Quite right, I am very concerned. Lets examine the page: "He has voted against affirmative action and anti-discrimination laws, against a crucial AIDS provision." H... "Ashcroft has been hailed as an ally by the NRA, voting against trigger locks and the assault weapons ban while supporting conceal and carry laws and gun show loopholes to regulation." Excellent, he is clearly a firm supporter of civil liberties. Might I second that, in this case. Gee, maybe this website should be named http://www.supportashcroft.com/; I was feeling kinda lukewarm about his nomination until I saw it. Thanks, sparky! Unfortunately, I don't see any place on your web page to voice my support for his nomination? "In 1999, Ashcroft recorded radio ads urging Missouri voters to support an NRA-sponsored ballot initiative that would have allowed almost anyone - including convicted child molesters and stalkers - to carry concealed guns in Missouri." Maybe I should move to Missouri. I've always wanted to shoot a child molester.
GOP hopes for more porn prosecutions; Bush to weigh MS case
http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,41164,00.html As the Porn Peril Turns by Declan McCullagh ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) 2:00 a.m. Jan. 13, 2001 PST WASHINGTON -- The peril of online porn is why John Ashcroft should be the next attorney general, conservative organizations said on Friday. At a press conference organized to support Ashcroft's embattled nomination, the groups predicted that, among his other virtues, he would kick off a wave of Net-sex prosecutions. Beverly LaHaye of Concerned Women for America said that Ashcroft, unlike Attorney General Janet Reno, would enforce "laws against obscenity." Donna Rice-Hughes, the former Gary Hart gal pal turned antiporn activist, described herself as an "Internet safety advocate in support of John Ashcroft for attorney general." "The $1.5 billion online porn industry has continued to prosper with an anything-goes green light from the current Justice Department," said Rice-Hughes, who founded Enough is Enough. "When George W. won, the porn industry lost," said Rice-Hughes, who claimed that online prurience "exploits women, preys on men and invades the innocence of (America's) children." [...] http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,41163,00.html DOJ Pushes Case Against MS by Declan McCullagh 9:45 a.m. Jan. 12, 2001 PST President-elect George W. Bush and his cabinet will soon decide what to do about the Microsoft antitrust case, a spokesman said on Friday. "The incoming administration and the incoming attorney general will review them and make any decisions as necessary," Ari Fleischer, Bush-Cheney transition spokesman, said in response to a question about Microsoft and other lawsuits the Clinton administration has filed. Fleischer, at the daily transition press conference, said he would not comment further on the Microsoft case. But he said that in general, Bush believes that the feds "too often engage in litigation to solve problems." "The president-elect will not rush to litigate the way some folks in Washington enjoy litigating," Fleischer said. [...]
Re: The uses of pseudo-links
Right. Most news organizations nowadays provide some kind of "alert" service. Wired News has one that lets readers choose to be alerted by name of author or keyword: http://www.wired.alerts.com/wired/add_alert.jsp These, to buttress your point, are better mechanisms to be alerted to relevant articles than the cpunks list is. -Declan On Tue, Jan 09, 2001 at 09:42:07AM -0800, Tim May wrote: Your definition of "useful" is different from mine. I believe lists like ours should primarily be about discussions and points of view, not a third-hand CNET or Register or Slashdot. There are many Web sources of breaking news (not that a lot of the "functional quantum computer" sorts of stories are usually breaking news...). Personally, I like it when someone finds a news item, provides a detailed URL, even quotes (in ASCII, not MIME!) a paragraph or two, and then comments on it and connects it to Cypherpunks issues. Merely dumping out "general science" items, with general URLs, is just plain abusing the list. --Tim May -- Timothy C. May [EMAIL PROTECTED]Corralitos, California Political: Co-founder Cypherpunks/crypto anarchy/Cyphernomicon Technical: physics/soft errors/Smalltalk/Squeak/agents/games/Go Personal: b.1951/UCSB/Intel '74-'86/retired/investor/motorcycles/guns
Re: As Dot-Coms Go Bust in the U.S., Bermuda Hosts a Little Boomlet
On Wed, Jan 10, 2001 at 12:22:52PM -0500, John Young wrote: The full story of crypto is yet to be written, in particular its deceptions, perhaps a piece by Vin McLelland, one by Declan, one by Tim May, if not by distributed cyperhpunks not quite so malleable as solo individuals given privileged access on the condition that . . . True. As a journalist, I do my best to avoid those conditions. I think of them (probably not an original thought) as entangling alliances. I could easily cobble together a book proposal that would include chapters by cypherpunk types; I'd edit. I've been thinking of writing a book for a while -- even had meetings with publishers in '96 -- but it would take too much time. Editing would be far easier. What about that timing of CRYPTO release and the NSA show? Ah, it was a lackluster show and not that important. -Declan
Re: Refutations Considered Unnecessary
On Wed, Jan 10, 2001 at 10:06:25AM -0800, Tim May wrote: e) Brin's book would be just another drop in the ocean, anyway. His vision of the future is unlikely in the extreme (t.v. cameras in police offices...sure, whatever), so refuting his "bad memes" is just a waste of time Right. Everyone's forgotten it; books like that (and Crypto, and Database Nation) have a short half-life. As for his views toward "crypto anarchy," what else would one expect? If the future many of us think is likely is in fact _actually_ likely, then what does it matter whether Levy makes dismissive comments on his book tour or not? I didn't find him making dismissive comments in his book, which is what will be read, anyway. (And even if he did, see previous point...) He didn't make dismissive comments, and was actually more critical (though mildly) when we had conversations about it in the past. The thing, though, is that Crypto only spends a paragraph or two -- really -- on crypto anarchy. It's not a focus of the book, or even the chapter, its name notwithstanding. -Declan
Re: As Dot-Coms Go Bust in the U.S., Bermuda Hosts a Little Boomlet
On Wed, Jan 10, 2001 at 01:11:01PM -0800, Tim May wrote: I hope you don't do this. There have been several of these kinds of collections--a guy at MIT has done at least a couple of them (I forget his name, though three of my short pieces are in one of his books: the books cost $40-60 or so, for a damned paperback, which is why I don't have my own copy. Even at this high price, they don't pay for submissions and they don't even give out copies to contributors!). As someone who makes the vast bulk of his income from speaking fees, I wouldn't undertake such a project unless I could pay contributors and get a generous number of copies to hand out. Seems only fair. There's probably a role for a good book on, say, "digital money," with a mix of overview articles and detailed articles. This would be a _lot_ of work, and the editor would need to be well-versed in the field. Yep, and not something that I'd be that interested in. But a limited focus would be necessary. Maybe something titled "Crypto Anarchy." :) -Declan
Re: Declan's book
On Wed, Jan 10, 2001 at 03:48:53PM -0800, Tim May wrote: Colin Powell recently got paid $200,000 for a 30-minute off-the-cuff speech on some "why foreigh policy matters" b.s. topic. Of course, it was underwritten by a Lebanese "businessman" said in news reports to have close ties to Syrian intelligence, so do the math. A legal way to buy influence in our strange society. If Colin Powell can give N of these b.s. speeches a year, my thoughts are surely worth $10K for a day or two's worth of writing. Of course, this won't happen. Ah, your output for two days is not worth $10K, at least based on a publisher's estimation of market value. Sadly, politics may not be as rewarding as investing. * -Declan * Unless you're Colin Powell
Review of History Channel's NSA documentary
[The documentary aired again twice this morning on the History Channel, and it's a fair bet it'll show again later this week. --Declan http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,41063,00.html History Looks at the NSA by Declan McCullagh ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) 2:00 a.m. Jan. 9, 2001 PST WASHINGTON -- As anyone who watched Enemy of the State knows, the National Security Agency is a rapacious beast with an appetite for data surpassed only by its disregard for Americans' privacy. Or is the opposite true, and the ex-No Such Agency staffed by ardent civil libertarians? To the NSA, of course, its devilish reputation is merely an unfortunate Hollywood fiction. Its director, Lt. Gen. Michael Hayden, has taken every opportunity to say so, most recently on a History Channel documentary that aired for the first time Monday evening. "It's absolutely critical that (Americans) don't fear the power that we have," Hayden said on the show. He dismissed concerns about eavesdropping over-eagerness and all but said the NSA, far from being one of the most feared agencies, has become one of the most handicapped. One reason, long cited by agency officials: Encryption. The show's producers obligingly included stock footage of Saddam Hussein, saying that the dictator-for-life has been spotted chatting on a 900-channel encrypted cell phone. That's no surprise. The NSA, as Steven Levy documents in his new Crypto book (which the documentary overlooks), has spent the last 30 years trying to suppress data-scrambling technology through export regulations, court battles, and even personal threats. Instead of exploring that controversial and timely subject that's tied to the ongoing debate over privacy online, "America's Most Secret Agency" instead spends the bulk of an hour on a history of cryptography starting in World War II. Most of the documentary could have aired two decades ago, and no critics are interviewed. One of the few surprises in the otherwise bland show is the NSA's new raison d'etre -- infowar. [...]
Review of Steven Levy's Crypto
http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,41071,00.html Crypto: Three Decades in Review by Declan McCullagh ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) 8:20 a.m. Jan. 9, 2001 PST WASHINGTON --It took only a year or two for a pair of computer and math geeks to discover modern encryption technology in the 1970s. But it's taken three decades for the full story to be told. Transforming what is an unavoidably nerdy tale into the stuff of passion and politics is not a trivial business, but Steven Levy, the author of Crypto, proves himself more than up to the task. Crypto (Viking Penguin, $25.95), is Levy's compelling history of the personalities behind the development of data encryption, privacy and authentication: The mathematicians who thought up the idea, the businessmen who tried to sell it to an unsure public and the bureaucrats who tried to control it. Levy, a Newsweek writer and author of well-received technology histories such as Hackers and Insanely Great, begins his book in 1969 with a profile of Whit Diffie, the tortured, quirky co-discoverer of public key cryptography. Other characters soon populate the stage: The MIT mathematicians eager to sign documents digitally; Jim Bidzos, the Greek-born dealmaker who led RSA Data Security from ruin to success; and Phil Zimmermann, the peace-activist-turned-programmer who gave the world Pretty Good Privacy. Until their contributions, the United States and other countries suffered from a virtual crypto-embargo, under which the technology to perform secure communications was carefully regulated as a munition and used primarily by soldiers and spies. But what about privacy and security? "On one side of the battle were relative nobodies: computer hackers, academics and wonky civil libertarians. On the other were some of the most powerful people in the world: spies, generals and even presidents. Guess who won," Levy writes. (Full disclosure: A few years ago, Levy asked this writer to help him research portions of the book. For whatever reason -- perhaps he found what he needed elsewhere -- discussions ceased.) Throughout Crypto's 356 pages, Levy takes the perspective of the outsiders -- and, in some cases, rebels -- who popularized the technology. Although he provides ample space for the U.S. government's views, he casts the struggle between crypto-buffs and their federal adversaries in terms familiar to foes of government control. [...]
Re: Bell Case Subpoena
On Tue, Jan 09, 2001 at 02:44:57PM -0800, Tim May wrote: I expect this upcoming trial will not be the case which hinges on these kinds of issues, but some court will someday have to contend with this utter malleability of received mail files. Unlike paper letters which can be forensically analyzed, e-mail is nearly meaningless. Yes and no. Courts have figured out long ago how to deal with malleable computer files, of which email is a special case. And notes allegedly taken during a telephone call or meeting (which were important during the MS antitrust trial) are equally malleable. What the prosecution here is interested in is chain of custody, did you receive this message, can you verify that Exhibit A is what you received from [EMAIL PROTECTED], etc. with perjury as a deterrent. Then they can use phone records to show a defendant was online then via a dialup connection... It strikes me that this is a sort of link padding: If you're online all the time, those phone records will be virtually useless. -Declan
Re: Steven Levy Book Tour
I took a copy of Steven's book to Aruba and read most of it there. Very worthwhile. I'll review it soon. -Declan On Sun, Jan 07, 2001 at 06:29:51PM -0500, John Young wrote: Steven Levy writes: Here is a link to some sites for a book tour: http://www.penguinputnam.com/stevenlevy/tour.htm Not on there for some reason is a reading/discussion at Microsoft's Mountain View (CA) campus on Jan 12 at 3:30 p.m. that's open to the public. Another public event is Jan. 16 at the University of Washington bookstore in Seattle, at 7 pm. - Sorry I failed to mention previously the full title of Steve's new book (first posted, I thnk, by Commando Hettinga): "CRYPTO: How the Code Rebels Beat the Government - Saving Privacy in the Digital Age." And more: Endorsements for Crypto by Neal Stephenson, Kevin Kelly and David Kahn: "You've got to hear this story of how renegade geniuses and unlikely heroes liberated crypto from under the noses of spooks, and installed the code in the dream servers of dot-coms. This book persuaded me that despite the dangers of strong crypto (it gives a chance for evil to hide) providing it to the public was a Very Good Thing. Crypto not only makes e-commerce possible, it is also the first political movement in the digital era. Read about the future here." --Kevin Kelly, author of New Rules for the New Economy and Editor-at-Large, Wired Magazine "At last! The human story of the breakthroughs that gave us e-commerce and privacy on the Internet. Steve Levy has written cryptography's Soul of a New Machine.'" --David Kahn, author of The Codebreakers "Civilian crypto hardly existed three decades ago. Now we can't get cash from an ATM or buy something on the Net without it. To tell the story coherently is a service, and to tell it entertainingly is a favor to anyone with a stake in crypto--which nowadays means all of us. CRYPTO is a book that needed to be written and Steven Levy has written it. " -- Neal Stephenson, author of Cryptonomicon Author Bio Steven Levy is also the author of Hackers and Insanely Great: The Life Times of Macintosh, the Computer That Changed Everything. He is Newsweek's chief technology writer, a former writer for Macworld, and a frequent contributor to Wired.
Re: cell phone anonymity
Just got to your local cell phone dealer (even blockbuster here in DC) and buy an ATT prepaid cell phone for cash. -Declan On Sun, Jan 07, 2001 at 11:49:10PM +0100, Mats O. Bergstrom wrote: At 10:06 2001-01-07 -0800, montag montag wrote: Please post the actual experiences about obtaining a pre-paid cell phone GSM/Europe 1) Buy a cell phone and pay cash 2) Buy a GSM cash-card and pay cash 3) Dont send in the registration form to get that extra half hour! :-) To stall traffic analysis - buy many GSM cash-cards and change frequently - they are only around USD 10 (not counting the prepaid calling time). I don't believe the cell phone is sending it's serial number (but who - except for deep insiders and possibly Lucky Green - knows for sure?). //Mob
A libertarian protest? That'll get all of 10 people
- Forwarded message from Libertarian Party Announcements [EMAIL PROTECTED] - From: Libertarian Party Announcements [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: URGENT ACTION ITEM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 16:58:56 -0500 (EST) -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- === URGENT ACTION ITEM! FROM THE LIBERTARIAN PARTY === Watergate Office Building 2600 Virginia Avenue, NW, Suite 100 Washington DC 20037 Website: www.LP.org Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For information: (202) 333-0008 ext. 222 === December 14, 2000 === FBI agents plan protest at White House on Friday; Libertarians organize counterprotest! "Protest against the FBI! Meet us at 11:30am on Friday in Lafayette Park in front of the White House." (Further details below.) Dear Friends: A group of FBI agents plans to protest at noon tomorrow (Friday, Dec. 15) outside the White House to persuade President Clinton not to pardon Leonard Peltier, an American Indian leader convicted of killing two FBI agents in South Dakota in 1975. (See the article in Thursday's USA Today on page 19A, or go to http://www.usatoday.com/usatonline/20001214/2915953s.htm Americans who believe in equal justice under the law plan a peaceful counterprotest. Our point: If people who kill FBI agents belong in jail, don't FBI agents who kill ordinary Americans belong in jail as well? We are inviting you and your friends and colleagues to join us. We believe that equal justice under the law requires equal prosecution and equal punishment as well. Americans who commit criminal acts should be prosecuted -- regardless of whether they happen to work for the federal government. If Peltier remains in jail, justice requires that federal agents who have committed murder be sentenced to jail time as well. If they go free, so should he. Now imagine a huge group of us holding signs that say: "Thou shalt not kill. FBI, that includes you!" And: "Who pardoned Horiuchi?" We believe that's perfectly fair, because unfortunately, FBI and other federal agents who have killed innocent Americans have repeatedly gone free, in some cases free to kill again. Some examples: * FBI sniper Lon Horiuchi assassinated Vicki Weaver as she held her infant in her cabin at Ruby Ridge, Idaho in 1992. When it appeared Horiuchi would face state manslaughter charges, dozens of his FBI colleagues signed a petition to the court asking that he be set free because a trial would be "a traumatic ordeal for Lon and his family." FBI bureaucrats quietly managed to get the case transferred to a federal court, where a federal judge decided Horiuchi deserved "sovereign immunity" because he was acting "in his capacity as a federal law officer." Horiuchi was set free -- and the trigger-happy sniper later reappeared at Waco. * Dozens of FBI and BATF agents were involved in the shooting and burning deaths of 86 people, including 24 children, at Waco, Texas, on April 19, 1993. Despite photographic evidence that the FBI fired into the burning building, all government agents were exonerated by the government after a government investigation by the Danforth Commission earlier this year. (Is there a pattern here?) * On May 20, 1997, four Marines on an anti-drug patrol gunned down Esequiel Hernandez, Jr., a high school sophomore, as he herded goats on his own property in Redford, Texas, near the Mexico border. The Justice Department later described the killing of the boy, who was never even accused of drug smuggling, as a "tragic event" but refused to charge the Marines with a crime because there was "insufficient evidence that his constitutional rights were intentionally violated." We could cite countless other instances of agents for the FBI, BATF, FBI, DEA, and other agencies literally getting away with murder, but you get the point. It's outrageous enough that none of these government killers have been brought to justice -- but it's almost beyond belief that their colleagues have the nerve to demand that an individual who *has* been convicted and has served 24 years in prison, Leonard Peltier, should remain there while their own guilty colleagues go free. Because we don't want the FBI's ludicrous position that only non-federal agents should be jailed for committing murder to go unanswered, we'll be protesting their protest outside the White House. When 200 FBI agents protest outside the White House, that's news -- so if we're there we'll be news, too! We anticipate significant media coverage for our event, so please: * Dress well (and warmly)
Re: nambla
Only four lines of curses? Sheesh. Thought we'd rate at least five. -Declan On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 12:03:09PM -0800, gary seven wrote: You are under the Judgement of the LORD GOD OF HOST for the sin of the sea of babies, abortion and infant sacrifice to the devil. You will burn in the presence of the HOLY Angels. The seals are opened. PREPARE FOR YOUR DESTRUCTION CAMAEL ARCHANGEL OF DESTRUCTION THE PLAGUES OF THE LORD FOR THE SIN OF THE “SEA OF BABIES” UPON ALL NATIONS OF THE EARTH IAIAIAIAIOIOIOIOIO I AM BEFORE ALL BUT THE FATHER; MELOCH HEL ALOKIM TPHARET HOD JESAITH; BAHANDO HELESLOIR DEALZAT Cursed shall you be in the city, and cursed shall you be in the field. Cursed shall be your basket and your kneading-trough. Cursed shall be the fruit of your body, and the fruit of your ground, the increase of your cattle, and the young of your flock. Cursed shall you be when you come in, and cursed shall you be when you go out. "The LORD will send upon you curses, confusion, and frustration, in all that you undertake to do, until you are destroyed and perish quickly, on account of the evil of your doings, because you have forsaken me. The LORD will make the pestilence cleave to you until he has consumed you off the land which you are entering to take possession of it. The LORD will smite you with consumption, and with fever, inflammation, and fiery heat, and with drought, and with blasting, and with mildew; they shall pursue you until you perish. And the heavens over your head shall be brass, and the earth under you shall be iron. The LORD will make the rain of your land powder and dust; from heaven it shall come down upon you until you are destroyed. "The LORD will cause you to be defeated before your enemies; you shall go out one way against them, and flee seven ways before them; and you shall be a horror to all the kingdoms of the earth. And your dead body shall be food for all birds of the air, and for the beasts of the earth; and there shall be no one to frighten them away. The LORD will smite you with the boils of Egypt, and with the ulcers and the scurvy and the itch, of which you cannot be healed. The LORD will smite you with madness and blindness and confusion of mind; and you shall grope at noonday, as the blind grope in darkness, and you shall not prosper in your ways; and you shall be only oppressed and robbed continually, and there shall be no one to help you. You shall betroth a wife, and another man shall lie with her; you shall build a house, and you shall not dwell in it; you shall plant a vineyard, and you shall not use the fruit of it. Your ox shall be slain before your eyes, and you shall not eat of it; your ass shall be violently taken away before your face, and shall not be restored to you; your sheep shall be given to your enemies, and there shall be no one to help you. Your sons and your daughters shall be given to another people, while your eyes look on and fail with longing for them all the day; and it shall not be in the power of your hand to prevent it. A nation which you have not known shall eat up the fruit of your ground and of all your labors; and you shall be only oppressed and crushed continually; so that you shall be driven mad by the sight which your eyes shall see. The LORD will smite you on the knees and on the legs with grievous boils of which you cannot be healed, from the sole of your foot to the crown of your head. "The LORD will bring you, and your king whom you set over you, to a nation that neither you nor your fathers have known; and there you shall serve other gods, of wood and stone. And you shall become a horror, a proverb, and a byword, among all the peoples where the LORD will lead you away. You shall carry much seed into the field, and shall gather little in; for the locust shall consume it. You shall plant vineyards and dress them, but you shall neither drink of the wine nor gather the grapes; for the worm shall eat them. You shall have olive trees throughout all your territory, but you shall not anoint yourself with the oil; for your olives shall drop off. You shall beget sons and daughters, but they shall not be yours; for they shall go into captivity. All your trees and the fruit of your ground the locust shall possess. The sojourner who is among you shall mount above you higher and higher; and you shall come down lower and lower. He shall lend to you, and you shall not lend to him; he shall be the head, and you shall be the tail. All these curses shall come upon you and pursue you and overtake you, till you are destroyed, because you did not obey the voice of the LORD your God, to keep his commandments and his statutes which he commanded you. They shall be upon you as a sign and a wonder, and upon your descendants for ever. "Because you did not serve the LORD your God with joyfulness and gladness of heart, by reason of the abundance of all things, therefore you shall
Re: nambla
Matt, I didn't know you were the religious type! -Declan At 21:07 12/14/2000 -0500, Matthew Gaylor wrote: Our father, who's art is in porn ; Halloween by Thy name; Thy kingdom Cum; Thy wife will be done, on earth as she were in a whore house. Give us this day our daily blow job; and forgive us our sales taxes, as we forgive those who tax against us, and lead us not into D.C. ; but deliver us from Church. Amen. author unknown Regards, Matt-
Re: Ranks Of Privacy 'Pragmatists' Are Growing
Bill, this is splendid! Can I talk you into writing a similar screed about privacy leftists? I'll cite you in my weekly column. --Declan At 21:28 12/13/2000 -0800, Bill Stewart wrote: At 04:46 PM 12/13/00 -0800, R. A. Hettinga wrote: At 11:35 AM -0500 on 12/9/00, Declan McCullagh wrote: Privacy leftists We have a winner. Time to patch the old buzzword engine with something *truly* inflammatory... Of course, "Privacy Rightwingers" don't believe in real privacy either. (You can't use the term "privacy rightists" to parallel "privacy leftists" because it will be interpreted wrong, but "Privacy Rightwingers" is close.) After all, the government ought to be able to poke into your business, and tap your phone calls in traditional fashion, and keep track of your race, and keep track of your nationality in case you might be a furriner, and keep track of who lives where because there might be (gasp!) unmarried persons of opposite sex sharing living quarters, or otherwise shacking up. Motels, too. And anywhere Commies do anything. They probably don't insist on violating your privacy in everything - for instance there's no need to search people getting on airplanes, because if everybody took handguns on planes they could shoot any Commie hijackers trying to go to Cuba Then there's Barlow's definition of privacy in a small town "where you don't need to use your turn signal because everybody knows where you're going anyway." Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639
Only one horseman left!
today in dc: HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE Foreign Threats Crime Subcommittee hearing on the threat posed by the convergence of organized crime, drug trafficking and terrorism. Witnesses: Donnie Marshall, administrator, Drug Enforcement Administration, Justice Department; Michael Sheehan, ambassador at large/coordinator, Counterterrorism, State Department; Steven McCraw, inspector-deputy assistant director, Information, Analysis and Assessments Branch, Investigative Division, FBI; Frank Cilluffo, senior policy analyst/deputy director, Center for Strategic and International Studies; Ralf Mutschke, assistant director/sub-directorate, Crimes Against Persons and Property, Interpol General Secretariat; Raphael Perl, specialist, International Affairs, Congressional Research Service Location: 2141 Rayburn House Office Building. 10 a.m. Contact: 202-225-3951 http://www.house.gov/judiciary
Re: About 5yr. log retention
On Tue, Dec 05, 2000 at 07:22:30PM -0500, Greg Newby wrote: Bottom line, as usual, is to trust no-one, including ISPs or sysadmins that have a strong privacy ethic. On the web sites that I maintain, I have a stated policy that we intend to challenge subpoenas for our web logs and user database. Of course, talk is cheap, and I'd hope to find funding for lawyers or pro-bono work. Then again, it's a likely possibility: When I got a subpoena, I found pro bono counsel (and excellent one too). -Declan
Re: My plan to deal with subpoenas to testify
At 11:01 12/6/2000 -0800, Tim May wrote: (Of course, _serving me_ is problematic. I had a process server make several trips out to my semi-rural hilltop home in 1995 before finally reaching me at home. And that was when I still answering the doorbell. These days I use my peephole, or a t.v. camera I sometimes have set up. I doubt a process server could get to me.) When I was served with a subpoena in the CJ Parker trial, I had had a party the night before and let a friend of a friend sleep over in my living room. The process server showed up around 7:30 am the following morning and my houseguest let him into the foyer. Grr. -- I was surprised to see so many "affidavits" and "interviews" and "pre-trial statements" from various witnesses in the Parker case. Surely these people must have known that though their presence could have been compelled in Washington state, that they had no obligation to sit down with Federal agents and give interviews! When I was subpoenaed in the Parker trial, I did not give any pre trial statement or affidavits or whatnot. (There's no incentive for me to do so, and presumably little incentive for list members to do so, unless they see it as a way to avoid further involvement.) My lawyer was the person who had contact with DoJ. (Note about expenses: I had heard during the Parker trial that various witnesses called to travel to Washington were to "submit travel expense receipts." Is this true? What part of the Constitution says citizens must Yes. It's a standard government form. They also paid something like $25 a day while you waited outside the courtroom before being called to the stand, and $40 a day you actually testified. Yay. -Declan
Re: Scenes from the Supreme Court protests today
Hey, I shot a roll of BW 400-speed that I'm having developed now. I've hardly given up on analog -- some shots of Jesse Jackson marching I wouldn't have been able to get without a nice, fast 70-200/2.8 lens and a camera to match. The damnable CoolPix takes seconds to process each shot. I'm getting a review unit of the Canon D-30 digital SLR that can take Canon mount lenses; we'll see how that compares... -Declan On Fri, Dec 01, 2000 at 08:16:36PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Alright, Declan using his Nikon Coolpix 950! Screw that analog stuff. Got 340Mb? At 5:21 PM -0500 12/1/00, Declan McCullagh wrote: # http://www.mccullagh.org/theme/supreme-court-bush-gore-arguments.html
Re: Lost password
Aaargh. This "has anyone though [sic]" mail must be a troll.
-Declan
(though maybe it would be useful to have the toad.com addr bounce
back "here's the current info" mail rather than injecting messages
into the distributed majordomo network)
On Tue, Nov 28, 2000 at 10:07:47AM -0800, Console Cowboy wrote:
Has anyone though about setting this list to only accept mail from it's
members? That would seem to solve quite a few of these issues (issues
meaning lots of spam, like 2-5 messages a day of spam from this address.)
{ BE ---1011.1110-- [EMAIL PROTECTED] }
This must be morning. I never could get the hang of mornings.
{--- GPG public key @ http://www.technomystic.org/~everding/gpgkey ---}
On 29 Nov 2000, eGroups Notification wrote:
Hello,
Thanks for using eGroups, home to free, easy, email groups.
We have received your request for information about a forgotten
password.
* If you requested this notice and still don't remember your
password, please follow these steps to create a new
password:
1. In your web browser, go to:
http://www.egroups.com/lostpassword?[EMAIL PROTECTED]
2. Enter this reauthorization number: 68947
3. You will be asked to create a new permanent password.
Your new password cannot be the reauthorization
number.
* If you did not request this notice, please ignore this
message. Your eGroups account and current password have
not been affected and you can continue using our free
service as usual. If you believe someone is attempting to
misuse your email account, please forward this message to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Regards,
eGroups Customer Support
Janet Reno on Florida, children, violence
Today: ATTORNEY GENERAL JANET RENO'S SCHEDULE Attends Florida's Children Exposed to Violence "Safe from the Start" Summit, Palm Beach Community College, 4200 Congress Ave., Lake Worth, FL Location: Location Not Listed. Contact: 202-616-2771
Re: On 60 tonight
Yep. Tim's post is closer to what a cypherpunk would do if elected. :) I suspect that as soon as the election is over, probably in two weeks, we'll hear plenty of calls for "healing" and enough GOP leaders will go along with such a move. -Declan On Sun, Nov 26, 2000 at 07:59:59PM -0600, Mac Norton wrote: Use your head. One of the first things Bush does is pardon Bill Clinton. After all, given who's in charge of the prosecution, if Gore gets elected Clinton gets prosecuted so the Repubs can keep that circus going; if Bush gets elected, it's not only no longer important, it looks vindictive, which is inconsistent with the compassionate conservatism we've been hearing less and less about lately and with "turning this country around", whatever that meant. So Bush pardons Clinton, which has the added plus of forcing Clinton to the choice of taking it or not. That's *real* revenge. Not that W. is that smart/mean, but his daddy is. MacN On Sun, 26 Nov 2000, Tim May wrote: At 6:32 PM -0500 11/26/00, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My on-screen guide said "FISA", tvguide.com says, "Mike Wallace looks at one couple's claim that they were set up by the FBI and wrongly convicted of espionage." I notice you're babbling about what's on "60 Minutes" but not saying a peep about the certification of the election in Bush's favor. Now that an incoming Republican Administration will be able to prosecute Bill for his various crimes, Hillary for her tax evasion and insider trading and Algore on treason charges, I can hear Air Force One warming up its engines for its flight to Cuba. Fidel has offered asylum to Bill and Al,but not to Hillary. She's too far left even for him. Hillary may have to take refuge with either the Palestinians, where she can hug Yassir's wife all she wants, or ZOG. Maybe she can set up a double-wide in "No Man's Land." A lesbian sistah like her would no doubt like the sound of that. Regarding the Demonrats who tried to steal this election, I say it's time to take out the trash. --Tim May -- (This .sig file has not been significantly changed since 1992. As the election debacle unfolds, it is time to prepare a new one. Stay tuned.)
Re: Jim Bell
The affidavit/complaint we link to at cluebot.com contains an allegation from the Feds that Bell only 'fessed up to (in previous interviews with l.e.) authoring the AP essays. I do not recall reading about, or writing about, Bell being charged with deploying a working AP system. No, they've been prosecuting him using far more mundane allegations of SSN misuse, stinkbombs, and stalking. AP just gives it all spice, I suppose. -Declan On Mon, Nov 27, 2000 at 11:46:14PM -0500, R. A. Hettinga wrote: At 7:45 PM -0800 on 11/27/00, Tim May wrote: (I think any of us could be called as witnesses to refute a state claim that he was deploying a real system!) Which, unfortunately, and IIRC, he actually *pled* to, nonetheless. Sheesh. Cheers, RAH -- - R. A. Hettinga mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation http://www.ibuc.com/ 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'
Jim Bell arrested, documents online
Check out the affidavit/complaint at: http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/11/21/1944238 Background documents: http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/11/11/101218 Wired News article on arrest: http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,40300,00.html -Declan
Re: Conspiracy Theory #187389 (RE: Carnivore All-Consuming)
On Sun, Nov 19, 2000 at 08:56:31AM -0800, Ernest Hua wrote: What is the likelihood that the public just ignores this given the ruckus over the election? Very high.
Re: Is this Reno/wiretap stat true?
On Sun, Nov 19, 2000 at 12:00:29PM -0800, James A. Donald wrote: -- At 01:29 PM 11/19/2000 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Found in Usenet: #I don't know if Reno is a traitor, but consider this: #Between 1992 and 1997, there were approximately 2,500 #national security wiretaps requested by the FBI. Only one #of these 2,500 requests was turned down: Wen Ho Lee's! And #this turndown took place while Wen Ho Lee was still #downloading nuclear secrets from Lost Alamos. True/False? Any new, important and surprising fact reported on usenet without source or explanation is almost certainly a lie. In general you'd be right, but this might be an exception. Check out the annual wiretap reports on epic.org. (Admin office of US Courts publishes them.) -Declan
Wired article on Jim Bell, links to search warrant and photo
http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,40102,00.html IRS Raids Cypherpunk's House by Declan McCullagh ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) 2:00 a.m. Nov. 11, 2000 PST WASHINGTON -- When a dozen armed federal agents invaded Jim Bell's home this week, he wasn't exactly surprised. Ever since Bell, a cypherpunk whom the U.S. government has dubbed a techno-terrorist, was released from prison in April, he's predicted another confrontation with the Feds. "They're basically trying to harass me," Bell said in a telephone interview. He has not been arrested or charged with a crime. In 1996, Bell attracted the unwelcome attention of the IRS and the U.S. Secret Service after they learned he was talking up a plan to promote the assassination of miscreant bureaucrats through an unholy mix of encryption, anonymity and digital cash. Bell even gave his scheme a catchy title: "Assassination Politics." Four years, three arrests and one plea-bargain later, Bell was released from the medium-security federal penitentiary in Phoenix, Arizona. Since then, he's been busy trying to prove allegations of illegal surveillance on the part of the Feds, including his charge that they unlawfully bugged his home. For Bell, that meant spending the last six months compiling personal information about IRS and Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms agents, a move that appears to have led to the six-hour search of his home in Vancouver, Washington. Government offices were closed on Friday, and representatives were unavailable for comment. But the agents' search warrant cites "evidence of violations" of a federal law that prohibits intimidation of IRS agents. [...] *** I've included links to the original documents in this article: http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/11/11/101218mode=nested Feds Raid Cypherpunk Jim Bell posted by declan on Saturday November 11, @05:58AM from the now-who-saw-this-coming? dept. Crypto-convict Jim Bell, best known for popularizing the idea of offing Feds through anonymity, encryption, and digital cash, was raided this week by the IRS and BATF. He has not been arrested and is irate, vengeful, and computer-less, but otherwise fine. This happened just half a year after he was released from prison. We've placed JPGs online of the search warrant, vehicle search warrant, justification, and list of items taken. Note the justification includes items related to his "Assassination Politics" scheme. We also offer some background and a surprisingly flattering color slide photo I took of Bell. * Photo: http://www.mccullagh.org/image/9/jim-bell-3.html
Announcing PerpetualElection.com, political news/discussion site
PerpetualElection.com Launches News and Discussion Site Press Release NOVEMBER 10, 2000 -- PerpetualElection.com, the only website devoted exclusively to news about the first perpetual presidential election in U.S. history, launched on Friday. The site, operated by activists and journalists, is designed to provide an information and discussion area for Americans who want to follow the recent events in the Sunshine State. For example: Will Al Gore litigate? Did George W. Bush truly win? Why would over 3,000 people vote for Pat Buchanan anyway? Could the House of Representatives pick the next president? At PerpetualElection.com, we'll chart the story's development with the help of our readers. Unlike many other sites, PerpetualElection.com has liberals, conservatives, greens, and libertarians as editors. All have equal ability to post news and start discussions, and there is no single editorial point of view. Some of our editors, in alphabetical order: * Sonia Arrison of the Pacific Research Institute in San Francisco * Kathleen Ellis, a Baltimore system administrator and journalist * Declan McCullagh, Washington correspondent for Wired News * Jill Pelavin, a programmer living in Mountain View, California PerpetualElection.com is an open source project: It runs on a Red Hat Linux server and uses mySQL as a database. The Slash engine, made popular by Slashdot.org, is used for discussions and articles. For more information, contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (202) 986 3455 Voice (413) 845-5444 Fax Or visit: http://www.perpetualelection.com/ http://www.perpetualelection.com/about.shtml ###
Re: A successful lawsuit means Gore wins!
(As a followup, I should say I see "RIGHT" in the sample ballot, but that is not a requirement, but a suggestion, and I'd argue the ballots that were used probably have substantially the same form.) -Declan
Al Gore is only 630 votes away from winning the election
With 99.9 percent of the votes in Florida counted, Al Gore is only 630 votes away from winning the presidency. The Florida Department of State reports -- in numbers updated in the last five minutes -- that George W. Bush won 2,898,865 votes with Gore scoring 2,898,235. You can see the stats for yourself at: http://enight.dos.state.fl.us/SummaryRpt.asp?ElectionDate=11/7/00RACE=PRE If Bush does not win Florida he cannot win the presidency, based on the numbers calculated by CNN and the networks. Oregon and Wisconsin, the two states still labeled as tossups, have a combined total of 18 votes, not enough to propel Bush to the necessary 270 electoral votes without Florida. A win in Florida would guarantee Gore a victory. Third parties in Florida made a difference. Libertarian Harry Browne won 15,609 votes, and the Green Party's Ralph Nader received 94,201 votes in the state. Nader occasionally claims that he lures voters who would not otherwise go to the polls. But if even one percent of Nader's voters had turned to Gore -- a certainty -- the presidential election would have turned out differently. With only a 630 vote difference out of some 6 million votes cast in Florida, a recount could go a different way. As I write this, Gore has made a concession call to Bush, but I'd imagine the Dems would want a recount. That's what Gore's supporters are chanting in Tennessee, anyway. -Declan
How the Net gave the right Florida count
My article you received late last night: "Al Gore is only 630 votes away from winning the election" http://www.politechbot.com/p-01481.html Seems to have been the first article anywhere (3:35 am) to report that Bush's lead in Florida had dwindled to the hundreds, although CBS at approximately the same time had mentioned those numbers on the air. The politech article also appears to be the first to predict a recount. According to a wire service search, Dow Jones Newswire moved a similar article three minutes after the politech message (3:38 am), though it did not mention a recount: "WASHINGTON (Dow Jones)--Vice President Al Gore now trails Texas Governor George W. Bush by only 629 votes in Florida, throwing the U.S. election results into question, CBS News reported early Wednesday." AP had moved an advisory about 20 minutes before (3:11 am) saying that Bush's lead was in the thousands: "The lead in Florida for George W. Bush has dwindled to about 6,000 in the vote count." Dow Jones, in an article distributed at the same time (3:08 am), called the election even with those thousands of votes outstanding: "In an election that ultimately came down to a few thousand votes in Florida, Texas Governor George W. Bush has won the race for the presidency holding off a strong challenge from Vice President Al Gore." The networks, of course, had called the election for Bush at 2:17 am, after incorrectly saying earlier in the evening that Florida would go to Gore. Part of this mess comes from how mainstream media sources relied on Voter News Service for their results. For instance, CNN reported at 3:45 am that the Florida results were 2,890,321 (Bush) and 2,884,261 (Gore). That spread was still about 6,000 votes. For my politech article, I used the Net to go directly to the Florida secretary of state's website. The numbers there were about 20 minutes newer than CNN had at the same time. To their credit, CBS News apparently switched to those same numbers, although their hasty calculation of a 629 vote difference was incorrect. -Declan
Re: FW: BLOCK: ATT signs bulk hosting contract with spammers
Then, depending on your personal preferences and how valuable you think you are to prospective emailers, accept only email messages with $0.10, or $1.00, or $10.00... It's a market; you do the math. -Declan On Sun, Nov 05, 2000 at 08:14:34PM -0800, jim bell wrote: - Original Message - From: Alex B. Shepardsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Thu, 2 Nov 2000, Kevin Elliott wrote: You know, I don't like spammers any more than the next guy, but come on. Unethical? we're not talking genocide and it's not like it We ought to be. If spammers feared death as a result of their actions, they would be a lot less likely to spam. I've got a solution to thatoh, never mind. If "spammers" attached a digi-nickel to each spam, you'd only have to get 300 such pieces per month (10 per day) to pay for the typical ISP account monthly cost. Jim Bell
Ray Kurzweil talk at Foresight nanotech conference
http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,39967,00.html Kurzweil: Rooting for the Machine by Declan McCullagh ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) 1:35 p.m. Nov. 3, 2000 PST BETHESDA, Maryland -- Raymond Kurzweil doesn't merely predict that machine intelligence will surpass human brains by the end of the century. He's eagerly anticipating it. In a Kurzweillian future, the world would become a very strange place, where converging advances in nanotechnology, biotechnology and computer science combine to propel humanity to its next stage of evolution. "By the end of this century, I don't think there will be a clear distinction between human and machine," Kurzweil told the Foresight Institute's Eighth Conference on Molecular Nanotechnology on Friday. "We can expand the capacity of our brains by a factor of thousands or millions, and, by the end of the century, by trillions," predicts the inventor-turned-author of the Age of Intelligent Machines and the Age of Spiritual Machines. Technology, of course, has been part of human existence since our Cro-Magnon ancestors picked up a stone and realized it could be more than part of the landscape. But Kurzweil is talking about something a bit more ambitious. If he's right, exponential progress in science and engineering will allow us to merge with machines. We will become resistant to diseases, think faster, live better, and become transhuman in ways that would make even Superman green with envy. If he's wrong, well, then we'll continue to have buggy software, faulty memories, and lifespans that fall far short of the lowly leopard tortoise. [...]
soft money (for what it's worth)
- Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2000 7:42 AM Subject: Fw: Soft Money... Sascha --- you gotta see this. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2000 7:41 AM Subject: Soft Money... Kim, Hi There! Sorry for taking so long to email you back. I've been really busy---not just with schoolwork, either. And, no, I don't have a boyfriend. It's practically Election Day! And since this is my first time voting, participating and everything has been really important to me. Remember when John McCain visited my campus back in the spring, and I thought that his talk about campaign finance reform was pretty cool? Well, I've changed my mind. Reform would be nice, but right now the most important thing is the election. And this election is so close, it could really be decided by which campaign is able to run the most television advertisements. Which brings me to what I've been doing for the past few months. Which is, basically collecting soft money for the campaign and our candidates --- I call them Our Boys. And if anybody found out what I'm doing, there would be hell to pay. So I am totally trusting you to keep this to yourself, OK? Here's how it started: My father was a delegate at the convention this summer. I came along. It was amazing --- a whole week of partying and flirting. The food was fantastic. But I also listened to the speeches, and I really got energized, you know what I mean? I really got into the messages. I agreed with so much of what the candidate and his VP and everybody else had to say---I was totally tripping on the atmosphere. I asked MD if I could give $1000 of my savings account to the campaign, and they must have been tripping too, because they said yes. Silly me, I thought that once you give a thousand dollars, that's it. But when I turned in the check, the boy who took it asked if I wanted to match my contribution with another thousand dollars to the party. That's the "soft money" that McCain was talking about. When I told him that I didn't think I could afford any more, he said "ok," but that I might want to go out fund raising, to see if I could get anybody else to contribute. This is then when I had my---oh, let's call it a revelation. We were at this after-hours party the night before the last night of the convention, and lots of people---MD included---were trashed off their asses. Personally, I was soberer than sober. So this slick-ass middle-aged man in a suit comes up to me and asks me what I'm doing there, who I'm with, blah blah blah. We start talking, and he's all impressed with my intelligence and education and tan and my Prada minidress. So I tell him that I just contributed $1000 and he's all super-impressed with me. So the guy gets really close to me and murmurs something to the effect of: "How would you like to contribute another $1000?" He said that he had to contribute $5000 to get into the party, and that they were expecting him to contribute another $5000 the next day. He said that if I let him kiss me, he would increase his donation to $6000. Wow. I got all warm and uncomfortable all of a sudden. I'm sure I was blushing. I didn't know what to do. And he said, "what's the harm? This campaign is very important to you. It's important to me. They need my money. I want to kiss you. A thousand dollars for our team." "You would give them an extra thousand dollars, just for a kiss?" I said. "Well, I was hoping that you would also come back to my hotel room with me," he said, with a sly smile on his face. Right. "My folks are around," I whispered back. "They'll wonder where I am." "Fine. A stolen kiss in an empty corner it is," he said. He looked pretty disappointed. "$100 work for you?" I was imagining trying to kiss him. To tell the truth, he didn't look that bad. But I felt like he was changing the bargain. "I thought you said a thousand dollars." "Yeah, I guess I did. How about $250?" I nodded and smiled, and we left the big party and went into this little conference room with the lights out, and he flipped me over like a movie star and gave me this long, slurpy, oops-I' m-accidentally-rubbing-your-tits-aren't-I? kiss. Then he took out his checkbook, wrote out a $250 check to the National Committee, and gave it to me. Wow, I thought. That was pretty easy. I felt like I had given blood or something---drained but exhilarated. So the next day, while everyone was all at their little parties before the Boys were supposed to make their speeches, this other older guy comes up to me. "Hello," he says, with this little
Zero Knowledge changes business model (press release)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 06:55:11 -0800 Subject: Zero-Knowledge Introduces Managed Privacy Services for Businesses Hi Declan, Today, Zero-Knowledge Systems is introducing its Managed Privacy Services (MPS) offering to solve the privacy challenges that businesses face in today's privacy-conscious business environment. Privacy is good business. Companies in every industry are realizing they must institute the proper privacy policies, practices and infrastructures in order to succeed in today's digital economy. Zero-Knowledge Managed Privacy Services provides the tools and strategies that enable business to establish private customer relationships and earn consumer trust while ensuring legislative compliance and mitigating risk. As companies have become aware of the privacy risks and legislative hurdles facing them, many have turned to Zero- Knowledge for advice and solutions, and the MPS offering is the natural response to companies' needs for comprehensive privacy solutions. I've included the press release about MPS below. If you have any questions about Zero-Knowledge's Managed Privacy Services offering or would like to set up a conversation with Zero-Knowledge President Austin Hill, please give me a call at 503-552-3749. Best regards, Kristy Cory 503-552-3749 ZERO-KNOWLEDGE SYSTEMS INTRODUCES MANAGED PRIVACY SERVICES TO SOLVE THE PRIVACY CHALLENGES OF BUSINESSES Montreal -- October 31, 2000 -- Zero-Knowledge(R) Systems, the leading developer of privacy solutions, today introduced its new Managed Privacy Services(TM) offering to solve the privacy challenges of businesses and enable enterprise to thrive in a privacy-conscious climate. Delivering a unique combination of technology, policy and strategy expertise, Zero-Knowledge Managed Privacy Services (MPS) enables clients to turn privacy into a competitive advantage by leveraging rich data resources while building stronger and more profitable relationships with customers, employees and partners. MPS is based on responsible and ethical information management in accordance with relevant legislation and industry standards. "Privacy is good business -- and Zero-Knowledge Systems is the company that can deliver continued privacy value to companies that want to succeed in today's digital economy," said Austin Hill, president of Zero-Knowledge Systems. "Through expert professional services and technological solutions, Zero-Knowledge Systems works with companies to leverage and develop the rich data resources they need, while ensuring that their customers' personal information will not be abused, misused or sold without their permission." Employing a broad toolkit of privacy-enhancing technologies that control and protect data, MPS brings privacy-based services to a variety of markets for the first time. These include: financial services, health care, wireless, marketing, CRM and hosted solutions (ASPs). The Managed Privacy Services Process Zero-Knowledge MPS fuses sophisticated infrastructure design, advanced cryptographic systems and world-class privacy expertise to deliver strong privacy integration to a wide variety of business processes and system designs. Following a period of assessment and design, MPS culminates in the deployment of a tailored privacy layer that integrates seamlessly with the client's existing enterprise applications. * ASSESS AND ADVISE -- Managed Privacy Services begins with a thorough assessment of each client's data storage and usage patterns, as well as their business objectives. From this assessment, recommendations are made regarding areas where data can be better utilized through the addition of a strong privacy layer, and areas of potential privacy risk are identified. * DESIGN AND IMPLEMENT -- The assessment stage provides the framework for all aspects of the infrastructure design, and determines which Zero-Knowledge privacy technologies are best suited to the client's needs. The result is a solution that not only secures and protects the client's data, but also allows for a wider array of data-driven activities. Professional systems integration ensures that all the client's business requirements are met, and guarantees the final design will result in the most robust and flexible system possible. * VERIFY AND MANAGE -- Zero-Knowledge is able to manage all elements of the privacy infrastructure, allowing clients to focus on their core competencies, and providing third-party credibility to a client's privacy initiatives. Independent audits ensure that the system deployed is in compliance with stated policies, and that all controls are functioning as per the design specifications. Zero-Knowledge is committed to deploying systems that are transparent and accountable. In keeping with this policy, MPS will incorporate third party verification and split encryption key structures, as well as provide consumers with access to white papers, independent auditors' reports or
Re: Zero Knowledge changes business model (press release)
I spent perhaps half an hour on the phone with Austin Hill this afternoon. Here's what we discussed. * I suggested that Freedom had been somewhat less than successful in the marketplace. (Out of 3,500 cypherpunks messages I have stored here, only one nym appears, and this is presumably one of the target audiences.) I suggested that this is a change of strategy for ZKS in an era where investors want profitability. Austin denied it, and said that over 100 engineers "right now" were still working on Freedom. * I suggested the model they were moving toward was Andersen Consulting. Austin said no, "Verisign is the better analogy." He said one difference was that he anticipated ongoing licensing/fee arrangements between ZKS and clients after original work is complete. * ZKS will offer to store keys. "That includes us holding encryption keys." Austin described the key-splitting the same way Adam has here. He refused to say whether or not a third-party (Joe's Escrow Service) would ever hold keys. * ZKS appears to be targeting heavily-regulated areas like medical and financial sectors. They will come in, set up a privacy-protective system, perhaps provide some ongoing service, and (if so) collect ongoing fees. In those cases, "a consumer solution like Freedom allowing anonymity doesn't fit that market." * Austin mentioned cell phones/wireless as a major area. He envisions services such as if you call 911, your info is revealed, but not when phoning other numbers. * Tim below suggests that "Wouldn't a better approach be for Alice to protect her own privacy?" The answer, generally, is yes. I suspect the Brands patents can do much to that end. But Austin seems to be envisioning a market in which *some* third party in the transaction, be it a business, intermediary, or ZKS, possesses personal info about customers and only receives what is necessary. I welcome responses. -Declan At 10:30 10/31/2000 -0800, Tim May wrote: At 1:06 PM -0500 10/31/00, Adam Shostack wrote: On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 09:11:23AM -0800, Tim May wrote: | Zero-Knowledge is committed to deploying systems that are | transparent and accountable. In keeping with this policy, | MPS will incorporate third party verification and split | encryption key structures | | Split encryption key. I think that says it all. Geez. I don't know how we ended up with that wording. Multiple key would have made more sense. The goal is to have a set of keys which are held by different entities. Thus, your data is encrypted such that each of those entities needs to be involved to decrypt it. By split key encryption, we mean: E_a(E_b(E_c(data))) where E is a strong algorithm (3des, twofish, AES), and the keys (abc) are full strength, properly generated and stored keys for the system. Let's stipulate that the split keys are as strong as one can imagine. OK, let's set the stage with some players: * Alice, a consumer or customer * Bobco, a giant corporation dealing with Alice, collecting information on her, and all the usual stuff involving corporations dealing online with consumers like Alice. * Chuck and Debby, the holders of the "split encryption key," aka the "trusted third parties." (Extending the set to 3 or 4 or N such trusted third parties does not alter the basic discussion. Nor, by the way, does just having a _single_ trusted third party alter the basics of the legal/GAK structure: if the legal or national security system can force two parties to disclose, forcing one is easier, forcing 3 is slightly easier, and so on. But these are "polynomial" issues, so to speak.) I want to set the state so I can better understand just how and where this new ZKS system might be useful (to Alice, to Bobco, to governments). Given that we're doing this for businesses that are collecting data now, if you consider those parties 'trusted third parties,' then we're increasing the assurance that surrounds them. This business is what I called Bobco above. Now, suppose Bobco is using the ZKS system. I can see three regimes for any use of a crypto product: -- storage, at either Alice's or Bobco's site -- transit, between Alice and Bobco -- unlinkability: something to do with the linkage of purchase information with identity; how Bobco collects and disseminates information about customers like Alice The first two are conventional crypto issues, and don't need a new system. Both Alice and Bobco are responsible for securing their own data. Should laws require Bobco to secure Alice's data in some specific way, split key systems are still a poor solution. As near as I can tell, your concern about "privacy laws" has something to with the third main use for crypto: unlinkability. Am I right? Before I proceed further, let's see if this is where we're going. We consider them 'merchants,' 'shipping companes' and other such businesses who today get data from you. They're not trusted third parties in the Clipper chip sense, but
Re: Insurance: My Last Post
Maybe. I spent a weekend with Pierre last week in the mountains north of Montreal, and he nearly qualifies as a cypherpunk. I'll cite him as an exception that proves my rule. :) -Declan On Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 04:09:55PM -0400, Me wrote: From: "Declan McCullagh" [EMAIL PROTECTED] It must have something to do with being Canadianized. Only folks from Alberta seem to get it right. Pierre Lemieux?!
Re: Legislative approaches to ID theft?
Yeah, the sappy Congressional Privacy Caucus ("we ignore government
violations") is having a press conference in an hour to talk about
this bill:
http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/13/0350220mode=nested
I sent my intern.
Then there's the sappy media. I'll forward the complete note, but
one TV reporter just emailed me:
In addition to interviewing pioneers in the field, we are looking for
individuals who have experienced an invasion of privacy over the
Internet. More specifically, we are looking for men and women, over
the age of eighteen, who have experienced: stolen identity,
exploitation of personal information, loss of job due to employer
monitoring employee9s emails, etc. Our discussions with anyone who
responds to the posting would be strictly confidential unless he/she
gave written permission and agreed to an interview.
Sigh.
-Declan
On Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 11:59:22AM -0700, Tim May wrote:
BTW, something that's incredibly bad about modern online security is
the increasing number of financial companies and agencies that now
require "the last four digits of your social number" as an enabling
key. When I speak to a phonedroid about the absurdity and danger of
this, they act confused.
Declan is right about the above meaning new laws are coming. New laws
meaning more control. Government won't be affected...it rarely is
affected by its own legislation.
There are many ways to lessen the dangers of "identity theft."
Government could start by sticking to the original words on _my_ SS
card: "For tax and social security purposes only -- not to be used
for identification."
(Or words very similar to this. Somewhere I still have my original SS
card, issued in 1969, and this is what it says. I have heard that
this phrasing was dropped in later years, opening the door for the SS
number to be used for student I.D. numbers, military I.D. numbers,
financial record passwords, and all the rest.)
Fucking hypocrites.
Re: Insurance: My Last Post
On Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 10:35:53AM -0700, Tim May wrote: It's not so much that he's "wrong" as that he's "naive." He arrives on the CP list and begins regurgitating socialist blather he heard in his poli-sci and sociology classes. Junk about mandatory health care, True, true. It's probably not worth our time. It's not that he's not educable -- although we see no indication of that yet -- it's that there are better uses of scare resources. Anyone hoping to be taken seriously should at least have read some of the basic cpunk literature. And he has not. As I have said, and as Lucky just said this morning, the list has for some reason attracted a whole set of such naive and puerile people. One theory is that it's the "fall crop" of students. Another is that Probably. I remember on Usenet circa '91 we'd see an influx of freshmen polluting otherwise useful newsgroups. Lots seemed to come from psu.edu, for some odd reason. increasingly leftist and interventionist. (We have a Canadian branch of the Cypherpunks which is apparently led by a neo-fascist civil rights crusader who wants guns banned and is distrustful of free market solutions.) Righto. While anyone who wants to can call themselves a cypherpunk, anarchic labeling and all that, it's clear that some folks just don't get it. It must have something to do with being Canadianized. Only folks from Alberta seem to get it right.
Re: Insurance: My Last Post
Ah, no. Said individual was born in the U.S. from American parents (and then moved to BC). It's that Yankee blood that does it. :) -Declan At 12:21 10/25/2000 -0700, Tim May wrote: Not counting a certain someone, initials SB/SS, from British Columbia?
Re: Killing Judges
On Sat, Oct 21, 2000 at 03:49:52PM -0700, jim bell wrote: "Did the PI hear of this incident?". (There were presumably at least 100 people in the courthouse or nearby when this incident occurred: one might think that it would be very unlikely if ALL of them didn't call the news media.) Naturally, she had to point out that they were being "good citizens" by NOT reporting"every bomb threat".I should have asked her if I hate to defend my colleagues, but this is reasonable. I don't know if bomb threats that turn out to be fake are inherently newsworthy. I would probably have made the same decision, given limited resources. Unless there was some evidence that this was a pattern of threats, etc. At the time, though not publicly, I speculated that to try to counteract this, a small counter-media organization might be formed, containing as little as a sole individual.. I figured that it would announce itself as a sounding-board for this kind of thing. It would receive, anonymously, any sort of announcement, statement, threat, promise, warning, etc. It would combine these anonymous snippets, and deliver them (quite openly, in a recorded and documented fashion) to all the various news media organizations that might otherwise want to ignore what was being said.Since this What you're describing could well be a competing publication. You'd presumably have greater legal protection that way in any case. I can see it now: "CJ and JB's BombNewsWire" -Declan
Re: Declan My Lai
Nope, never expected it. This proves what those wise and neutral folks on NPR today were calling the media's fascination with triviality. (Me, I would say that voting is such an inefficient process of getting what you want that it is not rational to read up on all policy positions of the candidates, and you might as well focus on character, or what you perceive to be the same.) If I wanted to be a partisan political reporter, clearly it would be higher-profile. But that doesn't interest me much, so I shall diminish, and remain, well, you get the idea. -Declan On Sun, Oct 22, 2000 at 11:26:56AM -0400, John Young wrote: Declan, Pounding out the hundreds of deathless reports you've done did you dream it would be the Gore My Lai that got you onto the NYTimes opinion page today?
Re: Illicit words
It's too late; you're already on the TLA list since you posted to cypherpunks. If they know who you are, they don't need to scan your email for keywords. They can simply read all of it. -Declan On Mon, Oct 23, 2000 at 07:08:34PM -0700, Bruce J.A. Nourish wrote: I read somewhere that the FBI/NSA/some other Big Bro. organisation has a list of words that they check your email against, and if they find any, they have someone read your mail. Anyone know what they are? TIA HAND -- Bruce J.A. Nourish (keys - see header) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I.R.S. Seeks Credit Card Slips
http://www.nytimes.com/2000/10/20/business/20BANK.html October 20, 2000 - New York Times (front page) Taking Aim at Tax Havens, I.R.S. Seeks Credit Card Slips By DAVID CAY JOHNSTON The Internal Revenue Service, struggling against Caribbean havens it suspects of draining away at least $70 billion a year in personal income tax revenue, has set its sights on a new target — the credit card slips of suspected tax evaders. The agency has asked a federal judge in Miami to issue summonses for two years' worth of records of MasterCard and American Express card transactions in the United States that were billed to bank accounts in Antigua and Barbuda, the Bahamas and the Cayman Islands. Using the Internet and other outlets, banks in those nations openly solicit tax evasion in ways that the I.R.S. says have proved attractive to corporate executives, business owners, doctors and other wealthy people in the United States. Americans can legally move their assets offshore but are required to notify the I.R.S. of those transactions and to pay taxes on their income worldwide. Some Caribbean countries offer an alluring tax haven, however, because they impose no income tax and do not generally cooperate with I.R.S. efforts to track down incomes.
Re: House Passes Bipartisan Commercial Space Bill
To do the poor-taste thing of following up on my own message: I'm sure glad the House did such a thing. Without government help, there would be no incentive for companies to go into space. -Declan On Wed, Oct 18, 2000 at 06:49:28PM -0400, Declan McCullagh wrote: Committee on Science F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, JR., CHAIRMAN Ralph M. Hall, Texas, Ranking Democrat www.house.gov/science/welcome.htm October 18, 2000 Press Contacts: Jeff Lungren ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Jeff Donald ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) (202) 225-4275 HOUSE PASSES BIPARTISAN COMMERCIAL SPACE BILL Bill Enhances U.S. Commercial Space Competitiveness By Extending Launch Indemnification WASHINGTON, D.C. - With broad bipartisan support, the House yesterday passed H.R. 2607, the Commercial Space Transportation Competitiveness Act, by a voice vote. The bill now goes to the President for final approval. H.R. 2607 extends launch indemnification to the U.S. commercial launch industry for four more years, through the end of 2004. The federal government first decided to indemnify commercial launch companies against catastrophic losses as a means of rebuilding a launch industry that was critical for national security. In addition, the bill authorizes funds for the Offices of Advanced Space Transportation and Space Commerce in the Departments of Transportation and Commerce. The bill's sponsor, Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee Chairman Dana Rohrabacher, (R-CA) said, "Passage of H.R. 2607 signals continued congressional support of a highly competitive launch industry in today's global market. This legislation enables the U.S. Government to maintain a stable business environment so that the private sector can become more competitive. Moreover, by directing the Administration to examine more innovative legal approaches for indemnification, we begin a new chapter in U.S. space development in the 21st Century." House Science Committee Chairman F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr., (R-WI) added, "By extending commercial launch indemnification, this bill helps build a solid foundation for commercial launch companies. This foundation enhances our national security by encouraging private firms to invest in improving U.S. space launch capabilities and maintaining U.S. competitiveness with launchers from Europe, Russia, the Ukraine and China. I hope the President will quickly sign this important bipartisan legislation into law." Science Committee Ranking Minority Member Ralph M. Hall, (D-TX) said, "The Commercial Space Competitiveness Act was the top legislative priority for the American space launch industry. It is in our Nation's interest that we continue to be world leaders in the launch industry. This bill provides the framework of support and incentives the industry indicates they need to keep their premier status. I am pleased that the Science Committee could play a central role in moving this legislation to completion." Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee Ranking Minority Member Bart Gordon, (D-TN), also an original co-sponsor of the bill, noted, "The key achievement of this bill is an extension of the commercial space indemnification provisions. Those provisions, first enacted in 1988, have provided a highly effective risk-sharing system that has helped our launch industry compete with the world. Since their enactment 12 years ago, these provisions haven't cost the taxpayer one dollar in claims." ### 106-164 Jeff Donald Deputy Communications Director House Science Committee 2320 Rayburn House Office Building 202-225-4275 (phone) 202-226-3875 (fax)
Rep. Armey questions Justice Department review of Carnivore
And a Napster poll: http://freedom.gov/vote/vote5.asp http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/19/2251239 Justice Department Carnivore Review a Sham? posted by cicero on Thursday October 19, @05:44PM from the say-could-it-be-an-election-year? dept. Dick Armey, House majority leader and Republican firebrand, is once again making trouble for the Clinton administration. Armey this afternoon sent a letter to Attorney General Janet Reno, saying that the Justice Department's review of Carnivore appears somewhat less than objective: "I have questioned the independence of this review. Several in the media have questioned this review. Several universities refused to submit review proposals because, in their opinion, the review process was unfair." Having the supposedly secret names of the government-affiliated reviewers revealed last month sure didn't help. Neither did the information in the Carnivore documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act. (Armey's letter is below.) The letter: http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/19/2251239
Cypherpunkly convo on legal vs. tech protections of anonymity
http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/19/1952214mode=nested
RE: I created the Al Gore created the Internet story
At 17:44 10/18/2000 -0400, Trei, Peter wrote: Been there, done that, got the credit. I was one of the original developers of Apple Kermit (in 6502 assembler) at Columbia University. Amongst other Wow -- I'm impressed. I remember using that. Actually, by 86, the Mac was out, as was the PC/AT and (I think) the Amiga. These were much more capable machines than the Apple ][. True, and the IIgs was out in September '97. But it takes a while for folks to upgrade, which is why I said many of us were still using Apple IIs (I also had a Mac+ at the time). -Declan
Re: why should it be trusted?
On Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 09:46:25PM -0700, Nathan Saper wrote: Fine. My basis for my claim is that the NSA is the best funded and best equiped electronic intelligence agency in the world, and they have employed some of the smartest people in the world. Sorry, but this is hand-waving. There are smart people outside the NSA and there is money outside the NSA. Fine, it's a claim made by the clueless. I'm not claiming to be something other than clueless, but I am claiming to have not meant what I sent to this list. Again, not a good proofreader. Again, sue me. No, you'll just be ridiculed instead. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, and you have not provided it. Think of it from a longtime cypherpunk's perspective: We see people come in here and say the same thing as you every month or so, and offer much in the way of not-very-informed speculation but little in the way of proof. -Declan
Gore and Bush during debate: Equal-opportunity censors?
http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/18/042235mode=nested Gore and Bush: Equal-Opportunity Censors? posted by cicero on Tuesday October 17, @10:58PM from the affirmative-action-for-censorhappy-politicos dept. There was something absent from this evening's presidential debate, and it wasn't Al's horn-blowing sighs or Dubya's runny-nosed sniffles. What was missing was an appreciation for the benefits of free speech, the perils of blocking software, and the hazards of blaming the world's woes on the Internet. In response to an audience question about "the morality of our country," both candidates talked up rating systems, blamed Hollywood, and recommended having the government help parents who have, allegedly, failed. Al Gore, who likes to talk about privacy, waxed downright Carnivorous over a "feature that allows parents to automatically check, with one click, what sites your kids have visited lately.. if you can check up on them, then you -- that's real power." Quoth Bush, who had similar ideas: "There ought to be filters in public libraries, and filters in public schools, so that if kids get on the Internet, there's not going to be pornography or violence coming in." Bush was talking about legislation currently before Congress that ties filtering to checks from the Feds. Relevant excerpt from transcript: http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/18/042235mode=nested
I created the Al Gore created the Internet story
http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,39301,00.html The Mother of Gore's Invention by Declan McCullagh ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) 3:00 a.m. Oct. 17, 2000 PDT WASHINGTON -- If it's true that Al Gore created the Internet, then I created the "Al Gore created the Internet" story. I was the first reporter to question the vice president's improvident boast, way back when he made it in early 1999. Since then, the story's become far more than just a staple of late-night Letterman jokes: It's now as much a part of the American political firmament as the incident involving that other vice president, a schoolchild, and a very unfortunate spelling of potato. Poor Al. For a presidential wannabe who prides himself on a sober command of the brow-furrowing nuances of technology policy, being the butt of all these jokes has proven something of a setback. I mean, who can hear the veep talk up the future of the Internet nowadays without feeling an urge to stifle some disrespectful giggles? It would be like listening to Dan Quayle doing a please-take-me-seriously stump speech at an Idaho potato farm. Case in point: Mars Inc. lampoons the vice president in a hilarious new commercial for Snickers. In it, a cartoon Al brags that he, variously, invented the Internet, trousers, and when he wasn't busy elsewhere, "lots of other stuff too." When you're getting mocked by a candy company, you know your statesmanship rating has plummeted to a terrifying new low. No wonder one recent poll shows Gore to be solidly ahead of his Republican rival in only 11 states. It's simple: He's got no respect. Which brings us to an important question: Are the countless jibes at Al's expense truly justified? Did he really play a key part in the development of the Net? The short answer is that while even his supporters admit the vice president has an unfortunate tendency to exaggerate, the truth is that Gore never did claim to have "invented" the Internet. During a March 1999 CNN interview, while trying to differentiate himself from rival Bill Bradley, Gore boasted: "During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet." That statement was enough to convince me, with the encouragement of my then-editor James Glave, to write a brief article that questioned the vice president's claim. Republicans on Capitol Hill noticed the Wired News writeup and started faxing around tongue-in-cheek press releases -- inveterate neatnik Trent Lott claimed to have invented the paper clip -- and other journalists picked up the story too. My article never used the word "invented," but it didn't take long for Gore's claim to morph into something he never intended. The terrible irony in this exchange is that while Gore certainly didn't create the Internet, he was one of the first politicians to realize that those bearded, bespectacled researchers were busy crafting something that could, just maybe, become pretty important. In January 1994, Gore gave a landmark speech at UCLA about the "information superhighway." Many portions -- discussions of universal service, wiring classrooms to the Net, and antitrust actions -- are surprisingly relevant even today. (That's an impressive enough feat that we might even forgive Gore his tortured metaphors such as "road kill on the information superhighway" and "parked at the curb" on the information superhighway.) Gore's speech reverberated around Democratic political circles in Washington. Other Clinton administration officials began citing it in their own remarks, and the combined effort helped to grab the media's attention. Their timing was impeccable: In July 1993, according to Network Wizards' survey, there were 1.8 million computers connected to the Internet. By July 1994, the figure had nearly doubled to 3.2 million, a trend that continued through January 2000, when about 72 million computers had permanent network addresses. Small wonder, then, that as the election nears, Gore's defenders have been rallying to defend him. In a recent op-ed piece in the San Jose Mercury News, John Doerr and Bill Joy claim "nobody in Washington understands" the new economy as well as Gore does. Net-pioneers Robert Kahn and Vint Cerf, a Democratic party donor, have written an essay saying "no other elected official, to our knowledge, has made a greater contribution over a longer period of time" than the veep. Scott Rosenberg, in a recent Salon article, joined the fray: "The 'Gore claims he invented the Net' trope is so full of holes that it makes you wish there were product recalls f
Senate approves online booze ban; FCC, landlords, and telcos
http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/15/2120258mode=nested Senate Votes to Restrict Online Booze Sales posted by cicero on Sunday October 15, @04:19PM from the so-junior-doesn't-order-that-$45-california-merlot dept. The U.S. Senate voted 95-0 last week to restrict online alcohol sales. The purported reason: Beer and wine wholesalers claim it would protect children. "This law will put real power behind state efforts to enforce laws that require responsible marketing (and) ID checks," one lobbyist said in a Wired News article. The real reason: Wholesalers fear being bypassed by mail order firms -- that would mean losing lucrative markups -- and have handed millions of dollars in campaign contributions to Congress. The House has already approved the bill, part of an unrelated measure about trafficking in sex slaves, and the president is expected to sign it shortly. http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/14/1956211mode=nested FCC Wants to Force Net Access on Landlords posted by cicero on Saturday October 14, @02:47PM from the so-much-for-private-property dept. Adam Thierer of the conservative Heritage Foundation writes in with a recent article he wrote about the FCC. He's angry about a proposed regulation the agency is considering: It requires apartment and office building owners to let telcom companies wire the place, at a cost to be determined by the Feds. So much for private property, eh? Thierer's article is below.
Re: Ralph Nader sends privacy survey to Bush and Gore campaigns
At 23:38 10/9/2000 -0700, Bill Stewart wrote: I seem to remember Etzioni being tied into the Communitarian movement as well. Right. In fact, that's an understatement. He's essentially the anti-cypherpunk: Regulate corporations' data collection practices strictly, but don't regulate the governments' practices. -Declan
Re: Ralph Nader sends privacy survey to Bush and Gore campaigns
At 12:35 10/10/2000 -0500, Jim Burnes wrote: Yeah. In the dim, dusty recesses of my memory I seem to recall the Communitarian zeal with something the NWO types are calling 'The Third Way'. A way of involving business and government together to create social change. Last time I checked thats called Fascism. You don't even have to go as far left as the communitarians to find that. Check out the DLC, which Clinton headed and Lieberman now chairs: http://www.ndol.org/ The "third way" is their motto: http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ka.cfm?kaid=128 -Declan
Democrats on hate crimes in Defense Department bill
NEWS FROM THE HOUSE DEMOCRATIC LEADER FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE House Democratic Leader Richard A. Gephardt October 6, 2000 H-204, U.S. Capitol http://democraticleader.gov/ Gephardt Statement on Hate Crimes and Other Pending Legislation "In the last 24 hours, we've had three pieces of evidence that the Republican leadership is not interested in acting on the priorities of the American people. In a flurry of legislative maneuvering, Republicans have taken strong, sensible, bipartisan bills and they have tried to kill those bills by putting forward weak, watered-down versions that do nothing for the American people. "Last night, Republican conferees took a bipartisan, sensible hate crimes bill and they eliminated it from the Department of Defense Authorization bill. Republicans seem determined to file a DOD bill that is stripped of hate crimes, and their actions in the last 24 hours are an affront not only to the American people, but to a clear majority in the Congress. "Republicans defied the will of both Houses of Congress, denied the American people a strong, sensible bill that would have given law enforcement officers the enhanced tools they need to deal with horrible hate crimes, and they prevented the country from sending a strong signal that we as a society will not tolerate crimes committed against people simply because of who they are. "This is a bipartisan bill. The President has supported it for years, the American people support it in overwhelming numbers, and both the House and the Senate have voted in bipartisan fashion to include hate crimes in the Department of Defense Authorization bill. "I will continue to fight with Senator Daschle, President Clinton, and with my colleagues and all Americans who support this common-sense law, and I still hope that we can pass this bill this year and accomplish something meaningful for the American people. "Now, we've also had two other pieces of news in the last 24 hours that points to a pattern; and, sadly, the story with re-importation and with a Patients' Bill of Rights is similar to hate crimes. First, I am deeply disappointed that the Republican leadership has decided to defy the will of the American people and short-circuit a bipartisan effort to craft effective re-importation legislation that might have lowered drug prices for millions of Americans. Instead, Republicans went behind closed doors and came up with an ineffective, partisan half-measure that serves the needs of the pharmaceutical companies at the expense of the American people. "The Republican measure is full of loopholes that will allow pharmaceutical companies to get around the new law. It also sunsets after 5 years, so even if seniors did begin to see lower drug prices as a result of this bill, that benefit will not last. Republicans have once again chosen the side of special interests over the people. Democrats believe that all seniors should have permanent, reliable help with the high costs of prescription drugs, and we support effective, permanent re-importation legislation as a step in that direction. But the most important way to give seniors the help they need is to enact an affordable, reliable, universal Medicare prescription benefit. Republicans have blocked that measure, refusing, even, to let us bring it up on the floor for a vote. Their action on re-importation seems designed to distract us from the much larger issues at hand. "I am just as troubled by a last-minute effort on a Patients' Bill of Rights. Here, once again, they have decided to abandon a bipartisan bill and to seek political cover instead. Today, Republicans proposed a weak Patients' Bill of Rights that fails to give patients the protections they need from their HMO companies. The real Patients' Bill of Rights passed the House one year ago tomorrow by a strong bipartisan margin, and it remains the only bill that will actually do something meaningful for millions of Americans. "Democrats will continue to fight for good, common-sense, bipartisan bills that the American people want and that bipartisan majorities in Congress support: hate crimes--a strong Patients Bill of Rights-permanent re-importation legislation-and a Medicare prescription benefit that will be always be there for seniors. We will continue to work with all our colleagues to accomplish something meaningful in the few short days we have left." # Contact: Laura Nichols/Sue Harvey (202) 225-0100
Re: Guys, I need help
Guy, What do you suggest? This is cypherpunks, be a capitalist: Offer cash for setting up another anonymizer-type service that is not blocked. :) -Declan At 19:08 10/6/2000 -0700, M. Emad Ul Hasan wrote: Your anonymizer.com is blocked in Saudi Arabia via proxy. Can you tell me a way I can see this site
House scheduled to vote Tuesday on sex-wiretapping bill
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d106:h.r.03484: SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF INTERCEPTION OF COMMUNICATIONS IN THE INVESTIGATION OF SEXUAL CRIMES AGAINST CHILDREN. (a) CHILD PORNOGRAPHY- Section 2516(1)(c) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting `section 2252A (relating to material constituting or containing child pornography),' after `2252 (sexual exploitation of children),'. (b) COERCION AND ENTICEMENT TO ENGAGE IN PROSTITUTION OR OTHER ILLEGAL SEXUAL ACTIVITY- Section 2516(1)(c) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting `section 2422 (relating to coercion and enticement),' after `section 2321 (relating to trafficking in certain motor vehicles or motor vehicle parts),'. (c) TRANSPORTATION OF MINORS TO ENGAGE IN PROSTITUTION OR OTHER ILLEGAL SEXUAL ACTIVITY- Section 2516(1)(c) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting after the matter added to that section by subsection (b) of this section the following: `section 2423 (relating to transportation of minors)'.
Vint Cerf and Robert Kahn defend Al Gore
http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/09/29/0711253mode=thread Did Al Gore Really Invent the Internet? posted by cicero on Friday September 29, @02:11AM from the resuscitating-al-gore's-image dept. As the election nears, Net-pioneers Vint Cerf and Robert Kahn are busy defending Al Gore. The veep's invented-here crack about creating the Internet, they claim in their article attached below, has been terribly misunderstood. Now, we're fans of the TCP/IP-inventing duo, but it's been a long time in political ecology since Cerf famously joked 15 years ago in parody RFC968 that: "Twas the night before start-up and all through the net, not a packet was moving; no bit nor octet..." Things are more complicated now, and MCI's Cerf has morphed from an IETF geek into a Washington powerbroker and Friend of Bill and Al. Cerf showed up at the New Year's Eve White House millennium gala, spoke at an October 1999 White House "Millennium Evening" lecture, and appeared with the president and vice president at a July 1997 event to introduce administration policy proposals. We note that other prominent figures recently have made similar attempts to rescue Gore's tattered image among techies. But a more neutral description of the vice president's role in history is, we think, a fine 1999 article by author Virginia Postrel. Their article: http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/09/29/0711253mode=thread
Biochem convention violates privacy rights, study says
- Forwarded message from Patricia Mohr [EMAIL PROTECTED] - From: "Patricia Mohr" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: New Cato study on the Biological Weapons Convention To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 09:20:45 -0400 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 Cato Institute News Release September 28, 2000 Enforcement Of Biological Weapons Convention Would Be Unconstitutional Protocol would violate Fourth, Fifth Amendments and appointments clause WASHINGTON -- One unfinished piece of business on President Clinton's agenda is the development of a new "enforcement protocol" for the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC), the 1972 treaty that bars signatories from producing or using lethal biological agents. But whether the president submits the protocol to the Senate for ratification or leaves the task to his successor, enforcing the BWC is so fraught with constitutional problems as to render the effort futile, according to a new Cato Institute study released today. In "Constitutional Problems with Enforcing the Biological Weapons Convention," Ronald D. Rotunda, visiting senior fellow in constitutional studies at the Cato Institute, notes that while the United States should continue to renounce the use of biological weapons, "the protocol will undermine the privacy rights that U.S. citizens expect and that the Fourth Amendment guards, will interfere with the safeguards that the appointments clause was designed to guarantee, and will compromise the intellectual property rights that the Fifth Amendment protects." Instead of allowing foreign inspectors access only to public property, the enforcement protocol would expand access to allow searches of private individuals and companies "without the strict protections of the Fourth Amendment and its requirement that a search warrant be issued by a neutral magistrate only after a finding of probable cause," says Rotunda. "The protocol's search of private property must be unusually thorough to have any chance of working effectively, but such invasive searches create a greater risk of a violation." The Constitution invests the executive branch of government with the power to appoint all "officers of the United States." International inspectors under the BWC protocol "would have police power over private parties but . . . would not be subject to appointment and removal by any U.S. official in the normal manner," Rotunda says. "The Supreme Court has made clear that the framers created and limited the appointment power to 'ensure that those who wielded it were accountable to political force and the will of the people.'" BWC inspectors would have no such accountability. Finally, because the BWC protocol would give international inspectors access to private companies on the cutting edge of technology, "intrusive inspections create a serious risk of industrial espionage by foreign inspectors -- many of whom come from nations that often do not respect intellectual property rights," says Rotunda. Companies that have their trade secrets stolen would face difficulty in getting compensation guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment, as inspectors may be outside the jurisdiction of U.S. courts by the time the theft is discovered or may have diplomatic immunity. Foreign Policy Briefing no. 61 (http://www.cato.org/pubs/fpbriefs/fpb-061es.html) Contact:Ronald D. Rotunda, visiting senior fellow in constitutional studies, 202-218-4600 Randy Clerihue, director of public affairs, 202-789-5266 The Cato Institute is a nonpartisan public policy research foundation dedicated to broadening policy debate consistent with the traditional American principles of individual liberty, limited government, free markets, and peace. - End forwarded message -
Re: CDR: Re: Lions and Tigers and Backdoors, oh, my...
To respond to Ray's original message: I'm also intrigued, but skeptical. Ray wrote: Keywords to search by: "Help field" (in quotes), PKI, NSA, "40 bits" "Netscape" -- It's out there, mostly in smarmy self-congratulatory I've done the searches and come up with nothing. What URL should I be looking at? I'm quite interested in exposing any wrongdoing here, both personally and professionally. Check out my back articles (http://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,21810,00.html) for stuff I've written that's relevant here. My PGP key is on the servers; Wired's phone number is in the Washington DC phone book. -Declan Wired News On Wed, Sep 27, 2000 at 09:27:07AM -0400, Trei, Peter wrote: Can you document this claim of the existance of 'help fields' in Netscape? I am (to put it mildly) astonished by this claim, and more than a little skeptical. I was aware of the Workfactor Reduction field in the export 'aka International' version of Lotus Notes (which this 'help field' seems identical to), but was not aware of it being included in any other application. If you can document this, I'm seriously interested in following up. Peter Trei Cryptoengineer RSA Security Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- From: Ray Dillinger[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Reply To: Ray Dillinger Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2000 8:37 PM To: Michael Motyka Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: CDR: Re: Lions and Tigers and Backdoors, oh, my... On Tue, 26 Sep 2000, Michael Motyka wrote: From the article... Until recently the US government strictly controlled the strength of cryptography in software exported to different countries, in order to protect the government's ability to access and monitor communications data. The regulations were relaxed after pressure from industry but Madison believes that this may have driven the NSA to find ways to carry out surveillance. "They're not going to give in over exporting strong cryptography without getting something in return," he says. I can't believe that they would voluntarily enter a period of weakend capabilities. My guess would be that he has the event ordering wrong. Nope, he's got it right. There used to be, officially, a 40-bit key length limit on exportable software. This made american software products with any crypto capacity ridiculously weak, to the point where anyone concerned about security would not use it -- the software industry was losing to foreign competition, and the quality of the intercepts was going down because everybody was wise to it and nobody who mattered to them was using it anymore. New policy: The BXA approves export licenses for people who put all but the last 40 bits of the key in the headers or trailers somewhere, encrypted under a key that the NSA doubtless knows. Not that this is noised about too much. Feature AOL saying "yes, we broke the encryption in Netscape starting after version 4.07..." not bloody likely. After a little security skirmish with my (now Ex)Bank, I discovered this about Netscape and Internet Explorer; both have "help fields" in their headers that facilitate cryptanalysis of SSL connections if you have the key to the help field. As far as I know, the same is true of all software that has BXA approval for downloadable status. At least (name deleted -- a friend who works at netscape) confirmed that they couldn't get BXA approval for export, OR get anyone at BXA to tell them why not, except for vague wailing about "security considerations" until someone finally offered to put in a "help field". Anyway; people concerned about security from ordinary theives can now be reassured because only the US gov't gets the juicy bits, and the Uber-theives at the US gov't are reassured because they are getting the juicy bits again now that most people think US products have "strong" crypto. Don't get me started on this; I get so mad I can't see straight. Keywords to search by: "Help field" (in quotes), PKI, NSA, "40 bits" "Netscape" -- It's out there, mostly in smarmy self-congratulatory tones about how "We are pleased to announce that Netscape is working with us and will be in compliance with the Public-Key Infrastructure" by (Date -- I forget the date, but it coincides with the release of Netscape 4.5). Ray
Liechtenstein ends anonymous bank accounts
Liechtenstein Formally Announce End Of Anonymous Accounts From October 1st http://www.tax-news.com/html/oldnews/st_jliBankSecrecyEnd_25_09_00.htm by Ulrika Lomas, Tax-news.com, Brussels 25/09/00 The cards have been on the table for some time, and now the moment has come for Liechtenstein, finally, to close the door on banking anonymity. The Liechtenstein Bankers Association announced at the end of last week that their formal agreement to comply with, and enforce, the abolition of banking anonymity will take effect from October 1st... [snip] The Liechtenstein Bankers Association has stated that its members hope to complete their checks by the end of next year, but it does stress, unequivocably, that any further account details will remain under normal banking secrecy agreements. Even so, the Bankers Association says it expects some clients may refuse to reveal their identity and choose to withdraw their funds. The new system of identifying the names of depositors, known as "Know Your Customer", has been in force for some time but is currently non-obligatory - until October 1st that is. Just as the demise of the anonymous account will be mourned by many an investor, so too will it be welcomed by institutions such as the OECD and FATF... [snip] The pressure placed on Liechtenstein by the FATF has played a major part in removing banking anonymity, but there remains some tax jurisdictions outside Europe which will welcome depositors money without compromising their identity. However, given the mounting international scrutiny and the implementation of anti-money laundering initiatives, times are changing and perhaps it is just a question of time before they begin to come under the same amount of pressure as Liechtenstein. -
Meth bill resurfaces on Capitol Hill
http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/09/22/0247244mode=thread Methamphetamine Bill Resurfaces on Capitol Hill posted by cicero on Saturday September 23, @04:43AM from the accelerating-speed-bill dept. Everyone thought the Methamphetamine Anti-Proliferation Act had died this summer, but a source close to the issue tells us the Senate has resurrected this nasty bit of legislation. Among other things, the bill would ban links to drug-related websites. It didn't quite get enough momentum on its own, so some of our more censorhappy congresscritters attached it to the entirely unrelated Bankruptcy Reform Act, part of which could allow police to conduct secret searches of your home. That bill is currently before a conference committee, which has only about a week left to finish it before Congress adjourns for the year. You may want to contact your legislators before it's too late.
Re: Chaumian cash redux
At 15:52 9/22/2000 -0400, R. A. Hettinga forwarded: At the EFF end-of-RSA ball in SF last night David Chaum stood up and said a few enigmatic words [...] Well, I wasn't there -- we still were recovering from our own east coast bash the day before... But here's some stuff (below) that might be interesting. First, an article that appeared in the September 20, 2000 issue of American Banker. You'll recall that circa May 1999, Drew Hyatt and other folks bought the 16 patents from Digicash/Chaum and formed eCash Technologies. Excerpt from article: Back when Digicash Inc. was trying to sell its eCash electronic payment products to U.S. banks, there were few takers. But now the products are being offered by eCash Technologies Inc., which has struck at least one noteworthy deal: Metavante Corp., the technology subsidiary of Marshall Ilsley Corp., has agreed to integrate the products into its transaction processing system. Metavante said it could not discuss the deal because it is in a "quiet period" related to an initial public offering. The company, which provides data processing services for 700 banks, will begin by offering its members eCash's Monneta Debit software, which allows consumers to shop or send money online without exposing their actual debit card numbers. [...] eCash Technologies is marketing the electronic payment products under the name Monneta. The company is touting the Monneta suite -- which includes debit, prepaid, business-to-business, and person-to-person payment products -- as an anonymous way to make online payments. It uses a blind signature system, which means that customers can send money to one another through e-mail, or buy from any online merchant site, without revealing their identities. Joseph Nocera, editor-at-large at Fortune, is a smart fellow and a good interviewer. I know him from when I was also at Time Inc. He wrote in the August 2000 issue of Money magazine: But of course someone did think of it before. He was just too far ahead of his time. When I spoke to Chaum recently, he professed to have "burned out" trying to make Digicash work. He had sold its patents to another company and was no longer paying close attention to the business. He did tell me about a few of his more recent breakthroughs, however. One was called Digilock. "You take an ordinary key," he explained, "and put it in an ordinary lock, and it looks it up in a database and says whether the key is okay or not. It makes it possible for a person to have one key for everything." Yeah, I know: It sounds a little far out. But then, I used to think e-cash sounded pretty far out too. -Declan
Re: Canada outlaws anonymous remailers (was Re: GigaLaw.com Daily News, September 15, 2000)
I agree that ZKS took a risk by forming in a country that's more hostile to business, and has fewer constitutional safeguards, than the U.S. But to respond to Bob's point: I'm not sure the Wired article (http://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,38734,00.html) we ran on our site implies that anything has changed. If anything, it says that Canadian courts are following the U.S. lead in establishing procedures to "uncloak" email addresses at ISPs. That's a far cry from saying that businesses like ZKS without the apparent ability to "uncloak" email senders -- pardon the crass simplification -- will be necessarily affected. -Declan At 09:40 9/15/2000 -0700, Tim May wrote: It's what many of us predicted (in writing, here) when it was announced that ZKS would locate in Canada because of (or influenced by) Canada's supposedly freeer policies on encryption. I wrote at the time, as others did, that Canada's supposedly "free export policy" was likely temporary and was more of a "show of independence" against what they perceived to be U.S. control and influence. Fact is, as we wrote at the time, Canada lacks a solid constitution for protection of basic liberties. Sure, defenders will scurry to point out, Canada now _has_ a charter/constitution. But it has not been the bedrock that the U.S.C. has been, nor has it had a history of important tests. Canada is fundamentally an ad hocracy. As for the effect on ZKS, I haven't seen any actual uses of Freedom, or users of it, so I doubt there will be much effect at all.
Re: More Wired News CP Agitprop
Yes, that is not exactly the article I would have written. To my mind, a more interesting article is in how many areas the "child porn" horeseman has been trotted out: Crypto, wiretaps, "Know Your Customer" surveillance. There must be more I can't think of offhand. -Declan On Thu, Aug 24, 2000 at 09:21:09AM -0700, Eric Cordian wrote: Nonesense like this is one of the reasons I rarely read Wired News any more. Looks like they let "Lynn Burke" get too close to a logged on terminal again, to beat her little sex abuse agenda drum. http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,38393,00.html The Mainstreaming of Kiddie Porn The Internet helped create a huge network of child pornography distribution. Lately, it's been getting easier and easier to find. By Lynn Burke. What unmitigated crap. She claims that the word "twink" refers to young boys, instead of smooth-looking adult gay males, and uses this to try and twist the arrest of one individual into an allegation that egroups.com is openly running a publicly available child pornography ring with over 3,000 members. She claims that "babyrape" is a Usenet newsgroup. She quotes U.S. Customs, the head of the Vigilante group Cyber Angels, and various other law enforcement types. She does not quote a single civil libertarian, nor expert on child porn hype. One of her "experts" is an author who blames what he calls the "mainstreaming" of child porn on teen idols like Britney Spears. Gosh - why don't the editorial dweebs at Wired News just hire Dr. Laura or Andrea Dworkin to write this crap for them. It's certainly not news, and at least then they could claim they had someone famous working for them. The only thing that is being mainstreamed here is child porn hysteria and Wired's complete lack of anything resembling journalistic ethics. I'm amazed Declan continues to humble himself by being associated with such an outfit. -- Eric Michael Cordian 0+ O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division "Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law"
John Kenneth Galbraith to receive medal of freedom on Wednesday
John Kenneth Galbraith. Cambridge, Massachusetts One of the leading economists of the 20th century and the author of more than 30 books, Galbraith also held numerous positions during a distinguished government career. During World War II, he was largely responsible for the Office of Price Administration?s impressive record in controlling inflation. An advisor to Presidents Kennedy and Johnson, Galbraith also served as U.S. Ambassador to India during the Kennedy Administration. He also was chairman of Americans for Democratic Action from 1967-69 and taught economics at Harvard College for nearly 30 years.
Re: U.S. military poised to respond to attack on GOP convention
Nope, I wrote "confidential" since it was, um, confidential. Put another way: They weren't handing it out to reporters who asked. -Declan On Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 05:41:21AM -0600, Anonymous wrote: PHILADELPHIA -- The U.S. Army is prepared to respond to disruptions ranging from civil disobedience to nuclear explosions at the Republican National Convention, a confidential government document says. Confidential ? Is this the journalist's Newspeak ? Wired made you write that ? Back to the subject - the Good News is that they are scared. One can exhibit overwhelming force superiority only so far. One city, one convention. Could they cover 10 cities ? I think that 4-5 simultaneous events like this is their limit.
MojoNation file sharing system plans to beat Napster, Gnutella
http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,37892,00.html Get Your Music Mojo Working by Declan McCullagh ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) 5:45 p.m. Jul. 29, 2000 PDT LAS VEGAS -- A new file-sharing system could best rivals like Napster and Gnutella through more anonymous and efficient transfers. The service has an innovative feature that rewards users for uploading and distributing files: payment in a form of digital currency called "Mojo." "It's a cross between Napster and eBay," says Jim McCoy, the 30-year-old CEO of Autonomous Zone Industries, which created the open-source MojoNation software. McCoy's goal is nothing if not ambitious: to create the first file-sharing economy of agents, servers, and search engines in which senders and receivers can agree on prices for each transaction and use micropayments to get paid. The prospect of millions of users spending Mojo tokens on pirated movies and songs is sure to draw the wrath of the entertainment industry, which has sued to shut down Napster and erase a DVD-descrambling program from the Web. Another probable early use is pornography copied from other sites, and companies such as Penthouse's publisher also have shown they're willing to take legal action. Autonomous Zone says that since it -- unlike Napster -- does not keep a master index of files, its employees are simply unable to remove references to illegal files stored on MojoNation servers. "We are a bigger threat because we can survive most attacks," McCoy says. But the startup claims it wants to work with Hollywood through a voluntary-payment-for-downloads feature that the firm's programmers have dubbed "PayLars," a reference to Metallica drummer and Napster foe Lars Ulrich. "When the president of Sony comes to us, we'll say Gnutella's never going to do anything for you," says the Autonomous Zone programmer who goes by the name Zooko Journeyman. "Fight them or die -- or join us and prosper." In an attempt to spread MojoNation quickly through the hacker underground, Autonomous Zone plans to release the beta version at the DefCon convention this weekend in Las Vegas. Versions will be available on sourceforge.net for Windows and Linux machines. MojoNation's current stage of development is somewhere between a working prototype and a polished final product. It works, but a friendly interface is still being shaped, and as of Friday, company programmers were still unearthing some remaining bugs. At least when its development is complete, MojoNation should combine the ease of use and search capabilities of Napster and Gnutella with the kind of distributed server network that FreeNet uses. Files that are uploaded to a Freenet server remain online after a user disconnects, but Freenet does not support searching or micropayments. But will MojoNation be compelling enough to make other users switch? "It doesn't seem to buy anything over Gnutella," says Jon Lasser, author of Think Unix. "It's not clear to me who is served by this system." The libertarian-leaning cypherpunks -- only about seven so far -- who work at Autonomous Zone are pinning their hopes on creating an emergent network of electronic buyers, sellers, and service providers, all exchanging tokens that might represent as little as one-thousandth of a cent. Another addition: A limited form of reputation-tracking, so you can determine which service providers are the most reliable. The first time you log on, you generate a public and private key pair that the system uses to identify you. "It is an ant colony of sorts -- tons of agents, each with its own specialized goal," says McCoy, a former Yahoo engineer who founded Autonomous Zone last summer and is providing the seed capital. By pinning even an infinestimal value on all transactions, the company plans to discourage piggish folks who download more than they contribute in return. To earn Mojo tokens, users can sell their extra bandwidth or disk space and act as servers, or create their own service that others want to pay for. A successful system would also likely include money exchangers who buy and sell Mojo tokens in exchange for dollars. Before a MojoNation user uploads a file, the client software splits it into eight pieces using an algorithm akin to that used in RAID hard disk arrays: Only four pieces are necessary to reconstruct the entire file, and the sender can try to use the network to cloak his or her identity. ###
Re: FBI Requests File Removal
(resent) - Forwarded message from Declan McCullagh [EMAIL PROTECTED] - From: Declan McCullagh [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: FBI Requests File Removal To: "T. Bankson Roach" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 17:19:00 -0500 X-URL: http://www.mccullagh.org/ User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.2i The presumption should be toward publication, and only withhold info if absolutely necessary. There is no absolutely necessary reason to withhold their names. In fact, there are good reasons to publish. For example, it may make them easier to contact by journalists. You need to think this through. I included names in my wired.com article on this today. -Declan On Fri, Jul 21, 2000 at 08:12:37AM -0700, T. Bankson Roach wrote: Let's think about this for a moment. Assume Carnivore is the deadliest threat to American freedom since the Clintons arrived in Washington. First, we know about Carnivore, or think we do. What earthly good is it to put the agent's names in the public domain? Unless you planned to do something cruel, evil or harmful to people "doing their job" it would serve no useful purpose. Contrary to the nonsense propounded at Nuremberg in the flush of victory at the end of WW2, I do not think it wise to hold underlings responsible for policy decisions made by people way up the food chain. The concepts of freedom, privacy, etc. is now open to public debate, and to my utter amazement, unlike the British, we are mostly giving privacy the benefit of the doubt. There are far too many in policy making positions who are ready to cast all our personal freedoms to the wolves to catch a few "terrorists" or drug dealers. I think American freedoms are worth more than that. In any event one of the profound changes that seems to be happening is that the cost to saving our liberties may be to a large extent lifted off the backs to youth serving in our armed forces, and placed on our own lives. This will really give people reason to care about what is happening. Tom Roach - Original Message - From: John Young [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Steven Furlong [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2000 05:45 PM Subject: Re: FBI Requests File Removal Yes, it is contradictory that Cryptome will publish the PSIA names but not those of the FBI Special Agents. The senior Special Agent said at the end of the conversation that if his and the other agent's names were published "you are going to be in real trouble." Until that time both agents had been very polite. He then said he was going to take the matter up with the US Attorney and call again. So we're brooding on that threat, pondering the FBI names on this notepad, comparing this situation with that of the MI6 names and the MI5 names and the Iranian names and the PSIA names and the CIA names Cryptome has published. In none of the other instances was Cryptome threatened. And are wondering why the FBI carnivores deserve privacy we don't get from them and the world's surveillance agencies. More later on those names. Meanwhile, if curious send an inquiry to the FBI address on our e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or telephone: 212-384-3155. - End forwarded message -
Re: Tim May
For shame! Analog is much higher-quality. -Declan On Sat, Jul 15, 2000 at 05:06:11PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Perhaps investigative reporter Declan McCullagh will dig it up sometime, and post pictures taken with his Nikon 990. Those would be CoolPix.
Re: CDR: Re: Reno DoJ pressures journalist to nail hackers
(resent to list) - Forwarded message from Declan McCullagh [EMAIL PROTECTED] - From: Declan McCullagh [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: CDR: Re: Reno DoJ pressures journalist to nail hackers To: Steven Furlong [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 22:29:02 -0500 X-URL: http://www.mccullagh.org/ User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.2i Right. Letting the government decide who is "legitimate" or not is a dangerous precedent. Just FYI, journalist shield laws didn't help me when the Justice Department subpoenaed me last year totestify in the second cypherpunk trial. -Declan On Mon, Jul 17, 2000 at 06:53:58PM -0400, Steven Furlong wrote: In fact, I interpret the First to mean that government may _not_ decide who's a "legitimate reporter" and who's not, anymore than the First would allow government to decide which religions are "valid" and which are not. If Declan is covered by a shield law and cannot be compelled to reveal his sources, then Tim May and Alfred E. Newman are also reporters and are likewise protected. I agree, but it seems the courts do not. The IRS regularly decides who is a "real" pastor. The right to peaceably assemble is subject to permit fees which are at times set so high the organization can't pay them (see Rudy Guilliani's actions), or the only permitted location for a protest is so far from the action that it might as well not be held (an anti-internationalization protest, or something, in Albany NY a few months ago). -- Steve Furlong, Computer Condottiere Have GNU, will travel 518-374-4720 [EMAIL PROTECTED] - End forwarded message -
Re: An idea to limit the spam ... CPUNK
Here we go again. Sigh. You have no "right" to use another person's personal property -- their server -- as you see fit. If that mail server only approves messages with CP: in the Subject: line, or only with From: lines from left-handed lesbian Botswanans, that is the owner's choice. It certainly isn't censorship: If you don't like it, start your own list. In any case, it is not interfering with your "right" to use their machine as you see fit, since you have no such right to begin with. -Declan On Fri, Jul 14, 2000 at 06:26:29AM -0500, Jim Choate wrote: On Thu, 13 Jul 2000, Declan McCullagh wrote: Automated filtering is censorship. We don't want censorship. This is nonsense. Censorship is performed by government entities. Bullshit. Cencorship is performed by ANY entity which interfres with the expression of another right.
Re: tapping (was Re: 'Carnivore' Eats Your Privacy)
David, I didn't say ACLU and EPIC had no effect. You're right to say they do on some issues. Heck, I write about them frequently. But *primarily* (as I said below), the battles should be fought with technology. Besides, ACLU and EPIC are not free-market groups; ACLU supports the right to welfare and EPIC would love to create a federal privacy bureaucracy. So while they do good things, it's a mixed bag. -Declan On Fri, Jul 14, 2000 at 11:53:16AM -0400, David Honig wrote: At 12:26 AM 7/14/00 -0400, Declan McCullagh wrote: (resend) Michael: Have you forgotten what list you're on? Unlawful government eavesdropping should not primarily be fought in Washington. It should be fought with technology. The ACLU and EPIC are good for defensive battles only, and when it comes to restraining government surveillance, they lose more than they win. -Declan I realize you're being facetious but the law holds back that fraction of government that plays by the public laws. Ergo its not entirely futile. ACLU et al. battles are good publicity.
Re: Source of Kiddie Porn?
I've written about a few cases. Search the archives. The law covers images of "minors" or those who appear to be minors. Lascivious exhibition of the genitals is required, and a dirty mind helps. No exceptions, unless you're a fed on a sting operation. -Declan On Sun, Jul 09, 2000 at 11:23:17PM -0400, Anonymous Sender wrote: Perhaps one of the helpful lurking LEOs (Hi Jeff!) can answer a question or two: Is the age of a person relevant when deciding whether or not to string them up for possessing naughty pictures of young hard bodies? What about the source of said porn? Examples: - One of the numerous 13-yr-old girls on the list decides to document the growth of her pregnant high school friend's body with a Polaroid for a science fair project. - Junior G-Man likes the size of his manhood and snaps some pictures in front of his Barbie digital camera while whacking off. Is it illegal for a "child" to have self-generated porn? Can they trade their porn around among their minor friends? How about when they turn 18? Can a person publish their memoirs, complete with a 'Chapter 4 -- My Prepubescent Days' and not fear Federal agents burning down their house?
Re: ZKS: how EXACTLY does this protect privacy?
On Wed, Jul 12, 2000 at 07:12:12PM -0400, Robert Guerra wrote: That would be Lance M. Cottrell [EMAIL PROTECTED]. I had a chance to meet him and speak with him at CFP2000. Given the work and services his service provides I'd thought more people would know him... Lance is a swell guy, and a good photographic subject: http://www.mccullagh.org/image/4/lance-cottrell.html -Declan
UK immigration authorities take first action against HavenCo
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 00:42:39 -0400 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Declan McCullagh [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: UK immigration authorities take first action against HavenCo [Part of the allure of HavenCo is that it is based on Sealand, an ostensibly independent nation. But that concept is based on the thinnest of legal foundations: A 1968 court decision that said Sealand was outside of Britain's territorial waters: http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,36756,00.html Since then London has extended its territorial claim, which means Sealand -- recognized, I believe, by no country in the world -- is no more independent than a rowboat anchored 10 feet out in the Thames. --Declan] http://www.telegraph.co.uk:80/et?ac=002549632124328rtmo=wAMlAsebatmo=hMbepg=/et/00/6/22/ecnseal22.html Sealand runs foul of UK immigration By David Cohen HAVENCO, the controversial data haven based six miles off the coast of Essex, will host its first website next week, despite intervention by the government. Immigration officials at Heathrow turned away a HavenCo engineer, Andrew Marsh, who arrived from the United States last Friday, but the company insists that he will start work tomorrow morning. HavenCo said the company's schedule was not seriously affected by the setback. "Andrew will start work in Sealand on Friday morning, but I'd rather not discuss how he will get here," a spokesman said. Mr Marsh, a 25-year-old computer systems engineer employed by HavenCo, was stopped and questioned by immigration officers at the airport. He announced that he was going to work on Sealand, the offshore Second World War fortress, which claims to be independent of the UK. Mr Marsh assumed that he would not need a British work permit to go to Sealand, but a spokesman for the Home Office said: "We consider Sealand to be part of the UK and therefore anyone working there who is not a citizen of a European Union country would require a work permit." [...]
