Re: biological systems and cryptography
What's the latest news on Adelman's cryptological soup? Once his DNA crypto was touted as a substantial breakthrough for crypto, though since overshadowed by quantum crypto smoke-blowing. http://archives.neohapsis.com/archives/crypto/1999-q4/0257.html Isn't it a given that crypto is never free of smoke-blowing -- for unbreakability or weakness? Whether a system is trustworthy or dubious is a matter of blind faith, in the end, and cryptanalysts love that willful certainty more than the FUD which inspires trust in no system. Didn't David Kahn write that the only secure communication system is the one not used? On the Internet and the Intelnet and NSAnet there are no secure messages, only the illusion. For FBI smoke-blowing affidavit concerning Moussaoui's unrecoverable e-mails: http://cryptome.org/usa-v-zm-email.htm
Re: biological systems and cryptography
What's the latest news on Adelman's cryptological soup? Once his DNA crypto was touted as a substantial breakthrough for crypto, though since overshadowed by quantum crypto smoke-blowing. http://archives.neohapsis.com/archives/crypto/1999-q4/0257.html Isn't it a given that crypto is never free of smoke-blowing -- for unbreakability or weakness? Whether a system is trustworthy or dubious is a matter of blind faith, in the end, and cryptanalysts love that willful certainty more than the FUD which inspires trust in no system. Didn't David Kahn write that the only secure communication system is the one not used? On the Internet and the Intelnet and NSAnet there are no secure messages, only the illusion. For FBI smoke-blowing affidavit concerning Moussaoui's unrecoverable e-mails: http://cryptome.org/usa-v-zm-email.htm
Re: NSA Show Sexually Arouses Hanssen
At 11:07 PM 12/28/2002 -0800, Tim May wrote: This is silly. Rather than show that Hanssen had any particular erotic reaction to part of the NSA presentation, it is vastly more likely that it shows that anyone under constant surveillance will at some point do something, perhaps out of boredom, out of daydreaming, which surveillers will note with prurient interest. Yes, this is presumably why 20/20 included the item in the show, as well as the NSA buzzword. The young FBI snitch was bouncing with glee at being on national TV -- after leaving the FBI he's studying to be a media-eroticized lawyer. Better to highlight sexual proclivities of enemies of the state, domestic or global, than investigate and disclose why they succeed in violating piss-poor national security -- or so the 20/20s market. Sexual scandal trumps all, but isn't this the West Coast marketing image shallowness against East Coast faux Euro-depth. Euros and their faux deep thinkers love the western for its bountiful romantic escapism from subtlety. Horses, guns, right and wrong, winners and losers, the USA v. the World. Simple-minded erotic pleasures, silliness writ larger than the wee woeful penis. Hanssen is us, or at least those who harbor dreams of conquest.
NSA Show Sexually Arouses Hanssen
The 20/20 TV show on December 27, 2002 had a segment on Robert Hanssen, FBI spy, in which he is described as becoming sexually aroused by a National Security Agency PowerPoint presentation and stroked himself through his pants, according to Eric O'Neill, a young FBI agent who had been assigned to covertly report on Hanssens's activities. (The show transcript omits the stroking description and demonstration on camera by O'Neill.) Crypome invites information on which NSA presentation aroused Hanssen, and a copy of it for publication. Send to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 20/20 report: http://abcnews.go.com/sections/2020/DailyNews/2020_spykid021227.html
Re: TIA presentation
These remarks in the House on November 22, 2002: Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Speaker, today the United States Congress will send to the desk of the President of the United States for his signature, the Homeland Security bill. This bill will create the Department of Homeland Security, an agency charged with safeguarding Americans and the American way of life. When enacting this bill, we must be careful not stray into invading American's privacy when using the regulatory tools provided for in this bill. I refer specifically to the vague authorizations in this bill that would give this new Federal agency broad authority to push the privacy envelope. Section 201, paragraph 14, charges the Under Secretary for Information Analysis and Infrastructure with the responsibility of establishing a secure communications and information technology infrastructure that specifically authorizes the use of `Data-mining.'' Since ``Data-mining'' has no statutory definition, I am concerned that we have not adequately established that the Department of Homeland Security does not have the green light to adopt an all encompassing program that invades the privacy of every American without their permission or knowledge. We were recently notified that former Rear Admiral John Poindexter is developing a Total Information Awareness program to monitor the everyday transactions of Americans. We cannot allow this to happen. I do not believe that this statutory language is meant to allow the Federal Government to obtain whatever list, public, private, or commercial, to profile Americans. It is clear that the American public does reject this approach, as they soundly voiced their outrage for other privacy-eroding proposals such as the FBI's ``Carnivore'' system, and the Department of Justice ``TIPS'' program. It is vital that this body adopt standards to define such terms as ``data-mining,'' and to do so early in the 108th Congress. I thank the Speaker. Mr. ARMEY. Mr. Speaker, I am proud that the House is today sending H.R. 5005, the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to the President. It is an important step forward in the defense of the nation. I would like to take this opportunity to discuss a few items of interest in the bill as amended by the Senate. First, Mr. Speaker, I would like to address the privacy concerns that have been raised recently about provisions in the Homeland Security bill. Le me be clear. This bill does not in any way authorize the Department of Defense program knows as ``Total Information Awareness.'' It does not authorize, fund or move into the Department anything like it. In fact, this bill provides unique statutory protections that will ensure the Department of Homeland Security could never undertake such a program. Section 892 of our bill prohibits the sharing of any information that would undermine the statutory and constitutional protections of citizens. We also create a privacy officer, the first ever established by statute, whose sole mission will be to ensure that programs like TIA never get off the ground in this Department. Our bill contains provisions that discontinue two programs that raise the very concerns that TIA has raised. We stop Operation TIPS, and ensure that nobody will use this bill as an excuse to implement a National ID card. So the legislative intent of this bill is unmistakable. This department must protect the civil liberties that we all cherish. I would like to further make it clear that references in the bill to data-mining are intended solely to authorize the use of advanced techniques to sift through existing intelligence data, not to open a new method of intruding lawful, everyday transactions of American citizens. - House debate and version of the bill on November 22, 2002: http://cryptome.org/hr5005.txt Nothing in the debate precludes another bill authorizing what the HSA allegedly doesn't, either openly or secretly. See in particular the House report on 2003 funding authorization for intelligence: http://cryptome.org/hr107-789.txt
Re: TIA presentation
These remarks in the House on November 22, 2002: Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Speaker, today the United States Congress will send to the desk of the President of the United States for his signature, the Homeland Security bill. This bill will create the Department of Homeland Security, an agency charged with safeguarding Americans and the American way of life. When enacting this bill, we must be careful not stray into invading American's privacy when using the regulatory tools provided for in this bill. I refer specifically to the vague authorizations in this bill that would give this new Federal agency broad authority to push the privacy envelope. Section 201, paragraph 14, charges the Under Secretary for Information Analysis and Infrastructure with the responsibility of establishing a secure communications and information technology infrastructure that specifically authorizes the use of `Data-mining.'' Since ``Data-mining'' has no statutory definition, I am concerned that we have not adequately established that the Department of Homeland Security does not have the green light to adopt an all encompassing program that invades the privacy of every American without their permission or knowledge. We were recently notified that former Rear Admiral John Poindexter is developing a Total Information Awareness program to monitor the everyday transactions of Americans. We cannot allow this to happen. I do not believe that this statutory language is meant to allow the Federal Government to obtain whatever list, public, private, or commercial, to profile Americans. It is clear that the American public does reject this approach, as they soundly voiced their outrage for other privacy-eroding proposals such as the FBI's ``Carnivore'' system, and the Department of Justice ``TIPS'' program. It is vital that this body adopt standards to define such terms as ``data-mining,'' and to do so early in the 108th Congress. I thank the Speaker. Mr. ARMEY. Mr. Speaker, I am proud that the House is today sending H.R. 5005, the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to the President. It is an important step forward in the defense of the nation. I would like to take this opportunity to discuss a few items of interest in the bill as amended by the Senate. First, Mr. Speaker, I would like to address the privacy concerns that have been raised recently about provisions in the Homeland Security bill. Le me be clear. This bill does not in any way authorize the Department of Defense program knows as ``Total Information Awareness.'' It does not authorize, fund or move into the Department anything like it. In fact, this bill provides unique statutory protections that will ensure the Department of Homeland Security could never undertake such a program. Section 892 of our bill prohibits the sharing of any information that would undermine the statutory and constitutional protections of citizens. We also create a privacy officer, the first ever established by statute, whose sole mission will be to ensure that programs like TIA never get off the ground in this Department. Our bill contains provisions that discontinue two programs that raise the very concerns that TIA has raised. We stop Operation TIPS, and ensure that nobody will use this bill as an excuse to implement a National ID card. So the legislative intent of this bill is unmistakable. This department must protect the civil liberties that we all cherish. I would like to further make it clear that references in the bill to data-mining are intended solely to authorize the use of advanced techniques to sift through existing intelligence data, not to open a new method of intruding lawful, everyday transactions of American citizens. - House debate and version of the bill on November 22, 2002: http://cryptome.org/hr5005.txt Nothing in the debate precludes another bill authorizing what the HSA allegedly doesn't, either openly or secretly. See in particular the House report on 2003 funding authorization for intelligence: http://cryptome.org/hr107-789.txt
Re: [Htech] Lying With Pixels (fwd)
Not unexpected that CNN will be described as a reliable medium compared to the Internet when not so long ago it was described as the unreliable medium itself due to lack of thoughtful mediation by authoritarian Speak Truths. But TV was not so long ago seen as suspect compared to newspapers and newspapers suspect compared to government edicts and government edicts suspect compared to religious preachings and religious yarping nothing compared to acts of gods angry at copulating humanoids. So what if pixels lie, how is that different from any authority issuance from heads all too often quoted as believe you us who know? Shame on those pipsqueak authorities cited as being gravely concerned about lying pixels and the unmanageable Internet. Their self-promoting lies are showing hoary signs of thin-skinned unbelievability sensing doodoo die-out. National defense of any persuasion is a matter of suspended disbelief, not that you should not chaff your sorry ass when the drones come sniffing: US citizens in the US homeland are now fair game for the assassination squads eager to show the budget inceases were not in vain. Blonde hair and blue eyes with chic cammie clothing is now the best prophylactic against fat ethnics sitting with consoles programmed to blowdown off-coloreds. Nothing illegal about killing your own kind when sanctioned by secret presidential pixels.
Re: [Htech] Lying With Pixels (fwd)
Not unexpected that CNN will be described as a reliable medium compared to the Internet when not so long ago it was described as the unreliable medium itself due to lack of thoughtful mediation by authoritarian Speak Truths. But TV was not so long ago seen as suspect compared to newspapers and newspapers suspect compared to government edicts and government edicts suspect compared to religious preachings and religious yarping nothing compared to acts of gods angry at copulating humanoids. So what if pixels lie, how is that different from any authority issuance from heads all too often quoted as believe you us who know? Shame on those pipsqueak authorities cited as being gravely concerned about lying pixels and the unmanageable Internet. Their self-promoting lies are showing hoary signs of thin-skinned unbelievability sensing doodoo die-out. National defense of any persuasion is a matter of suspended disbelief, not that you should not chaff your sorry ass when the drones come sniffing: US citizens in the US homeland are now fair game for the assassination squads eager to show the budget inceases were not in vain. Blonde hair and blue eyes with chic cammie clothing is now the best prophylactic against fat ethnics sitting with consoles programmed to blowdown off-coloreds. Nothing illegal about killing your own kind when sanctioned by secret presidential pixels.
Re: Fwd: Asbestos ban again cited as the real cause of WTC collapse
Lack of asbestos fireproofing (FP) on structural steel could have played a role in the WTC collapse but the source of that argument, proponents of Junk Science and Herbert Levine, are on shaky ground. I've responded to their WTC asbestos-lack argument elsewhere, my main point being that asbestos is only one of several reliable, equally effective, FP materials available -- though asbestos is one of the oldest and the one with the most long-lived die-hards. (The asbestos industry for over a century promoted its material as a solution to a wide range of hazards, and battled in court repeatedly against those who disagreed -- the comparison with tobacco is apt. And like tobacco, an amazing number of its advocates died from exposure to the material so avidly promoted.) The problem all FP materials share is that of inept installation and poor maintenance, and none are effective if improperly installed and protected against deterioration as was the case with WTC -- not that WTC is unique in this. The installation and maintenance of FP materials in WTC has been documented as poor. Had the material been asbestos not much would have been different, and might have been worse. Installation of asbestos has been long known as poor, not least because the industry made it appear that even poor asbestos installation was superior to any other type. Not true. Independent testing laboratories set standards for FP and rate all materials by the same methodologies -- giving each system a fire-rating based on its resistance to fire and heat -- 1 hour, 2 hour and so on. Various parts of buildings are required by building codes to be fire-proofed for a set hourly resistance, e.g., 3-hours for floors and their supporing structure, 2-hours for interior walls acting as fire separations or mechanical system enclosures, 1-hour for hazardous materials storage. However, over time due to subsequent alterations, installations of mech/elec systems, and building movement, FP is often damaged and needs restoration to maintain its effectiveness. That does not happen. I see deficient FP in every building I inspect, my own work not excepted. You have to battle to get contractors to do it right. And owners to pay for quality work and maintenance rather than wait for vicitms and insurance companies to pay the tithe of negligence. The Port Authority is a negligent landlord and Silverstein is no better. But they are the norm for Junk Property Owners who promote attacks on Junk Science as a cover for their criminal venality. And in this they are kissing kin of the asbestos industry ghouls.
Re: Fwd: Asbestos ban again cited as the real cause of WTC collapse
Lack of asbestos fireproofing (FP) on structural steel could have played a role in the WTC collapse but the source of that argument, proponents of Junk Science and Herbert Levine, are on shaky ground. I've responded to their WTC asbestos-lack argument elsewhere, my main point being that asbestos is only one of several reliable, equally effective, FP materials available -- though asbestos is one of the oldest and the one with the most long-lived die-hards. (The asbestos industry for over a century promoted its material as a solution to a wide range of hazards, and battled in court repeatedly against those who disagreed -- the comparison with tobacco is apt. And like tobacco, an amazing number of its advocates died from exposure to the material so avidly promoted.) The problem all FP materials share is that of inept installation and poor maintenance, and none are effective if improperly installed and protected against deterioration as was the case with WTC -- not that WTC is unique in this. The installation and maintenance of FP materials in WTC has been documented as poor. Had the material been asbestos not much would have been different, and might have been worse. Installation of asbestos has been long known as poor, not least because the industry made it appear that even poor asbestos installation was superior to any other type. Not true. Independent testing laboratories set standards for FP and rate all materials by the same methodologies -- giving each system a fire-rating based on its resistance to fire and heat -- 1 hour, 2 hour and so on. Various parts of buildings are required by building codes to be fire-proofed for a set hourly resistance, e.g., 3-hours for floors and their supporing structure, 2-hours for interior walls acting as fire separations or mechanical system enclosures, 1-hour for hazardous materials storage. However, over time due to subsequent alterations, installations of mech/elec systems, and building movement, FP is often damaged and needs restoration to maintain its effectiveness. That does not happen. I see deficient FP in every building I inspect, my own work not excepted. You have to battle to get contractors to do it right. And owners to pay for quality work and maintenance rather than wait for vicitms and insurance companies to pay the tithe of negligence. The Port Authority is a negligent landlord and Silverstein is no better. But they are the norm for Junk Property Owners who promote attacks on Junk Science as a cover for their criminal venality. And in this they are kissing kin of the asbestos industry ghouls.
RE: JYA ping
JYA is temporarily dead online due to work load in the DC area, near the armageddon push button, which is located, in case you give a, out on Route 7 disguised as FAA Leesburg. We paid a surprise Sunday morning visit to the CIA back entrance, got surrounded by HMMVs and spiffy guards with hands on guns, interrogated by a swell looking Ms. Security who ran our Duncan Frissell ID card through the master file, idled for 1/2 hour observing gaps in the maginot line, and then received a heartfelt thanks for cooperating, Duncan, wink. Mrs. Frissell hissed bitch as we serpentined the Jersey barriers back out the way in.
