From: Donald Price Area: Public Key Encryption To: Shawn Mcmahon 23 Feb 95 05:43:00 Subject: Re: Howdy UpdReq -=> Shawn Mcmahon was overheard mumbling to Donald Price about Howdy <=- SM> It'll work better if you spell his name right, Don. :-) SM> "Frezberg" Whooooppppssss........... 8-) I guess I'd better put that in my spell checker!:) Donald ... ARRRRRGGGHHH!!!! ... Tension breaker, had to be done. ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Donald Rose Area: Public Key Encryption To: Scott Mills 20 Feb 95 21:00:00 Subject: Re: Inquiry UpdReq SM> A good way would be to take a small file then ZOO, SQZ, LBR, LZH, SM> PAK, ARC, and ZIP it. We used to put these digital boxes together to SM> send off to boards with irritating UL/DL ratios. I'm probably taking chances each time I unzip a file, because I have a small batfile that wildcards all unzip commands. If I were clever, and had more technical backround, I'd write a program that makes "false" PKUNZIP screens, so it appears that the file is unzipping normally. When it's simply multiplying a medium-sized program infinitly, eventually filling up the hard drive with hundreds of copies of the same file, each incremented by one in the filename. I don't want a classic virus, just a good prank to play on some people. ... Open mouth, insert foot, echo internationally. ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Richard Dale Area: Public Key Encryption To: Jim Bell 23 Feb 95 09:11:10 Subject: Pgp news UpdReq JB>*You are still attempting to misrepresent my posts as if they were JB>*calling for "threats." You were the one who called for us to write thousands of letters to his home -- a sort of "we know where you live". That's called intimidation. JB>And, of course, nothing stops us from writing NICE, yet UNSIGNED JB>letters. Oh, *that's* real brave: Dear Mr. Prosecutor, I know where you live! Neener, neener, neener! Signed Dr. Cracker * 1st 2.00b #567 * "Stupid bug! You go squish now!" -- Homer Simpson 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Bruce Bozarth Area: Public Key Encryption To: All 24 Feb 95 12:11:30 Subject: Re: EFF SUES TO OVERTURN CRYPTOGRAPHY RESTRICTIONSUpdReq * Original Message Posted via BBSLAW * Date: 22 Feb 95 08:37:34 * From: Bruce Bozarth @ 1:106/6073.27 * To: All * Forwarded by: Christopher Baker @ 1:374/14 * Message text was not edited! @MSGID: 1:106/6073.27 f4b95e23 @REPLYTO 1:106/6073.27 UUCP @REPLYADDR mech@eff.org @PID GIGO+ sn 258 at sherwd vsn 0.99 pl3 @Path: texsys!mondy!uuneo.neosoft.com!newsfeed.rice.edu!news.uh.edu!swrinde! pirates.cs.swt.edu!news.swt.edu!cs.utexas.edu!not-for-mail * Copied (from: EF_HOU) by Bruce Bozarth using timEd 1.01. From: mech@eff.org (Stanton McCandlish) Newsgroups: houston.efh.talk Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway EFF SUES TO OVERTURN CRYPTOGRAPHY RESTRICTIONS First Amendment Protects Information about Privacy Technologies February 21, 1995 San Mateo, California In a move aimed at expanding the growth and spread of privacy and security technologies, the Electronic Frontier Foundation is sponsoring a federal lawsuit filed today seeking to bar the government from restricting publication of cryptographic documents and software. EFF argues that the export-control laws, both on their face and as applied to users of cryptographic materials, are unconstitutional. Cryptography, defined as "the science and study of secret writing," concerns the ways in which communications and data can be encoded to prevent disclosure of their contents through eavesdropping or message interception. Although the science of cryptography is very old, the desktop-computer revolution has made it possible for cryptographic techniques to become widely used and accessible to nonexperts. EFF believes that cryptography is central to the preservation of privacy and security in an increasingly computerized and networked world. Many of the privacy and security violations alleged in the Kevin Mitnick case, such as the theft of credit card numbers, the reading of other peoples' electronic mail, and the hijacking of other peoples' computer accounts, could have been prevented by widespread deployment of this technology. The U.S. government has opposed such deployment, fearing that its citizens will be private and secure from the government as well as from other vandals. The plaintiff in the suit is a graduate student in Mathematics at the University of California at Berkeley named Dan Bernstein. Bernstein developed an encryption equation, or algorithm, and wishes to publish the algorithm, a mathematical paper that describes and explains the algorithm, and a computer program that runs the algorithm. Bernstein also wishes to discuss these items at mathematical conferences and other open, public meetings. The problem is that the government currently treats cryptographic software as if it were a physical weapon and highly regulates its dissemination. Any individual or company who wants to export such software -- or to publish on the Internet any "technical data" such as papers describing encryption software or algorithms -- must first obtain a license from the State Department. Under the terms of this license, each recipient of the licensed software or information must be tracked and reported to the government. Penalties can be pretty stiff -- ten years in jail, a million dollar criminal fine, plus civil fines. This legal scheme effectively prevents individuals from engaging in otherwise legal communications about encryption. The lawsuit challenges the export-control scheme as an ``impermissible prior restraint on speech, in violation of the First Amendment.'' Software and its associated documentation, the plaintiff contends, are published, not manufactured; they are Constitutionally protected works of human-to-human communication, like a movie, a book, or a telephone conversation. These communications cannot be suppressed by the government except under very narrow conditions -- conditions that are not met by the vague and overbroad export-control laws. In denying people the right to publish such information freely, these laws, regulations, and procedures unconstitutionally abridge the right to speak, to publish, to associate with others, and to engage in academic inquiry and study. They also have the effect of restricting the availability of a means for individuals to protect their privacy, which is also a Constitutionally protected interest. More specifically, the current export control process: * allows bureaucrats to restrict publication without ever going to court; * provides too few procedural safeguards for First Amendment rights; * requires publishers to register with the government, creating in effect a "licensed press"; * disallows general publication by requiring recipients to be individually identified; * is sufficiently vague that ordinary people cannot know what conduct is allowed and what conduct is prohibited; * is overbroad because it prohibits conduct that is clearly protected (such as speaking to foreigners within the United States); * is applied overbroadly, by prohibiting export of software that contains no cryptography, on the theory that cryptography could be added to it later; * egregiously violates the First Amendment by prohibiting private speech on cryptography because the government wishes its own opinions on cryptography to guide the public instead; and * exceeds the authority granted by Congress in the export control laws in many ways, as well as exceeding the authority granted by the Constitution. If this suit is successful in its challenge of the export-control laws, it will clear the way for cryptographic software to be treated like any other kind of software. This will allow companies such as Microsoft, Apple, IBM, and Sun to build high-quality security and privacy protection into their operating systems. It will also allow computer and network users, including those who use the Internet, much more freedom to build and exchange their own solutions to these problems, such as the freely available PGP encryption program. And it will enable the next generation of Internet protocols to come with built-in cryptographic security and privacy, replacing a sagging part of today's Internet infrastructure. Lead attorney on the case is Cindy Cohn, of McGlashan and Sarrail in San Mateo, CA, who is offering her services pro-bono. Major assistance has been provided by Shari Steele, EFF staff; John Gilmore, EFF Board; and Lee Tien, counsel to John Gilmore. EFF is organizing and supporting the case and paying the expenses. Civil Action No. C95-0582-MHP was filed today in Federal District Court for the Northern District of California. EFF anticipates that the case will take several years to win. If the past is any guide, the government will use every trick and every procedural delaying tactic available to avoid having a court look at the real issues. Nevertheless, EFF remains firmly committed to this long term project. We are confident that, once a court examines the issues on the merits, the government will be shown to be violating the Constitution, and that its attempts to restrict both freedom of speech and privacy will be shown to have no place in an open society. Full text of the lawsuit and other paperwork filed in the case is available from the EFF's online archives. The exhibits which contain cryptographic information are not available online, because making them publicly available on the Internet could be considered an illegal export until the law is struck down. We are still uploading some of the documents, including the main complaint, so please try again later if what you want isn't there yet. See: http://www.eff.org/pub/EFF/Policy/Crypto/ITAR_export/Bernstein_case/ ftp.eff.org, /pub/EFF/Policy/Crypto/ITAR_export/Bernstein_case/ gopher.eff.org, 1/EFF/Policy/Crypto/ITAR_export/Bernstein_case Press contact: Shari Steele, EFF: ssteele@eff.org, +1 202 861 7700. For further reading, we suggest: The Government's Classification of Private Ideas: Hearings Before a Subcomm. of the House Comm. on Government Operations, 96th Cong., 2d Sess. (1980) John Harmon, Assistant Attorney General, Office of Legal Counsel, Department of Justice, Memorandum to Dr. Frank Press, Science Advisor to the President, Re: Constitutionality Under the First Amendment of ITAR Restrictions on Public Cryptography (May 11, 1978). [Included in the above Hearings; also online as http://www.eff.org/pub/EFF/Policy/Crypto/ ITAR_export/ITAR_FOIA/itar_hr_govop_hearing.transcript]. Alexander, Preserving High-Tech Secrets: National Security Controls on University Research and Teaching, 15 Law & Policy in Int'l Business 173 (1983) Cheh, Government Control of Private Ideas-Striking a Balance Between Scientific Freedom and National Security, 23 Jurimetrics J. 1 (1982) Funk, National Security Controls on the Dissemination of Privately Generated Scientific Information, 30 U.C.L.A. L. Rev. 405 (1982) Pierce, Public Cryptography, Arms Export Controls, and the First Amendment: A Need for Legislation, 17 Cornell Int'l L. J. 197 (1984) Rindskopf and Brown, Jr., Scientific and Technological Information and the Exigencies of Our Period, 26 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 909 (1985) Ramirez, The Balance of Interests Between National Security Controls and First Amendment Interests in Academic Freedom, 13 J. Coll. & U. Law 179 (1986) Shinn, The First Amendment and the Export Laws: Free Speech on Scientific and Technical Matters, 58 Geo. W. L. Rev. 368 (1990) Neuborne and Shapiro, The Nylon Curtain: America's National Border and the Free Flow of Ideas, 26 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 719 (1985) Greenstein, National Security Controls on Scientific Information, 23 Jurimetrics J. 50 (1982) Sullivan and Bader, The Application of Export Control Laws to Scientific Research at Universities, 9 J. Coll. & U. Law 451 (1982) Wilson, National Security Control of Technological Information, 25 Jurimetrics J. 109 (1985) Kahn, The Codebreakers: The Story of Secret Writing. New York: Macmillan (1967) [Great background on cryptography and its history.] Relyea, Silencing Science: national security controls and scientific communication, Congressional Research Service. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corp. (1994) John Gilmore, Crypto Export Control Archives, online at http://www.cygnus.com/~gnu/export.html EFF Crypto Export Control Archives, online at ftp.eff.org, /pub/EFF/Policy/Crypto/ITAR_export/ gopher.eff.org, 1/EFF/Policy/Crypto/ITAR_export http://www.eff.org/pub/EFF/Policy/Crypto/ITAR_export/ -- Stanton McCandlish
mech@eff.org

Electronic Frontier Foundation

Online Services Mgr. @ Origin: Aardvark Park - Aardvarks to Zebras! (1:106/7799) @PATH: 106/7799 357 449 116 170/400 270/101 396/1 3615/50 374/1 @PATH: 374/98 14 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: tbyfield@panix.com Area: Public Key Encryption To: All 24 Feb 95 12:18:20 Subject: Re: Re: COS & S.314 UpdReq * Original Message Posted via CYPHERPUNKS * Date: 22 Feb 95 22:12:33 * From: tbyfield@panix.com @ 1:102/825.111 * To: All * Forwarded by: Christopher Baker @ 1:374/14 * Message text was not edited! @MSGID: 1:102/825.111 000583a9 @REPLYTO 1:102/825 UUCP @REPLYADDR tbyfield@panix.com @PID GIGO+ sn 154 at borderlin vsn 0.99.940127 @Sender: quake!toad.com!owner-cypherpunks @Received: from relay2.UU.NET by netcomsv.netcom.com with ESMTP (8.6.9/SMI-4.1) @ id IAA05843; Thu, 23 Feb 1995 08:56:54 -0800 @Received: from toad.com by relay2.UU.NET with SMTP @ id QQyeis19239; Thu, 23 Feb 1995 11:40:52 -0500 @Received: by toad.com id AA19232; Thu, 23 Feb 95 08:09:54 PST @Received: from [166.84.253.144] (tbyfield.dialup.access.net) by toad.com id AA19209; Thu, 23 Feb 95 08:08:33 PST @Received: from [166.84.253.144] by [166.84.253.144] @ with SMTP (MailShare 1.0b8); Thu, 23 Feb 1995 11:12:33 -0500 @Mime-Version: 1.0 @Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 23 Feb 1995 11:12:33 -0500 @To: cypherpunks@toad.com From: tbyfield@panix.com (Ted Byfield) @Subject: Re: COS & S.314 Message-Id: <1418584543-3355041@[166.84.253.144]> @Sender: owner-cypherpunks@toad.com @Precedence: bulk On Thu, 23 Feb 1995 00:36 tcmay@netcom.com wrote: >This has certainly been an interesting couple of weeks, eh? Definitely. On the flipside, though... *HR 830 Paperwork Reduction Act, esp. Sec.3581(f) was beaten back *the credit spam was busted in progress and C&S lost net access *the "Judges_List" was roundly assaulted It's looking like this is just the first small skirmishes with the clowns, clown.groupuscules, and clown.orgs who thought the net was waiting for their suave maneuvers like a willing maiden on a featherbed. Just wait, though-- alt.christnet, .bible, .christianlife, .ethics, .evangelical, ..hypocrisy, .philosophy, .prayer, .second-coming.real-soon-now, .sex, ..theology... Pretty soon you'll start getting junkmail binaries of aborted fetuses. Re Julf, attached is the text of http://www.otol.fi/kp/presse.html --not that it was signed or that I can vett it beyond the address. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Internet-community world-wide apalled on the Scientology-seizure Was the Child porn scandal just a cover? The good reputaion of Finland as a country that esteems freedom of expression, justice and human rights, has greatly suffered among the world-wide Internet community. So far Finland has received positive publicity as the home of the best-known anonymous server. The servers enable protected net-discussion of difficult issues, such as reporting ofences of human rights. Most apalling has been the ease with which the scientologists with the help of Finland's police force obtained the information they were after: identification on a person who published material on the Church of Scientology in the Usenet news. At the same time there have been speculations in the net on whether the recent child porn scandal (which was totally unfounded by evidence) might be connected to the Scientologists' interest on the anonymous server. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Anonymous servers enable anonymous discussion via electronic mail and newsgroups in the world-wide Internet network used by millions of people, and are vital supports for freedom of expression. These servers are used by people who are pressured or persecuted, people who report offenses of human rights or even discuss their personal problems and sufferings, from all over the world. One of the longest-lasting and probably the most famous anon server is anon.penet.fi, created by Finnish Internet-specialist Johan Helsingius in 1992. Every day more than 7000 messages are handled by the service, and users count up to over 200 000. The fame of the server lies in its trustworthiness, which is based partly on the common view of Helsingius as a trustworthy person with personal integrity and ethic ideals, as well as a well-grounded knowledge of the networks, and partly good reputation of Finland as a country where individual rights and freedom of expression are respected. This kind of reputation is important, since there are lots of people and organisations in the world that would rather see the anon servers being shut down. Governments that violate human rights, as well as other organizations banning public and open discussion of their activities, such as the Church of Scientology, are among these. The Church of Scientology has in fact approached the people offering anonymity services, threatening with lawsuits unless the anonymous discussion in scientology-related newsgroups stops. In fear of lawsuits many American servers have either stopped altogether or strongly limited their activities. The flow of events On Thursday, February 2, an American representative of the Church of Scientology (CoS) contacted Johan Helsingius, telling that some information residing in a private and closed scientologists' system had been made public via the anon.penet.fi server. In addition, they had already made a lawsuit to the police of Los Angeles, regarding a information break-in into their system, because they "knew" that the information could not have gotten out any other way. The representative of CoS asked Helsingius for identifying information on the anonymous poster of their secret information. After Helsingius replied that it is up to the Finnish police to request such information, the representative of CoS told that an official request of help was on its way via Interpol. The next day, February 3, the Finnish police contacted Helsingius, saying that if need be, they would get a warrant of search and seizure. The necessary documents for these actions were promised to be ready by Monday. On Monday, February 6, a Swedish newspaper Dagens Nyheter published an article based on the investigation of Mats Wiklund from University of Stockholm. The article stated that child porn was distributed to Internet from the Finnish anon.penet.fi -server. The Finnish media follows with TV, radio and all the newspapers participating with titles such as "Internet distributes child porn from an address in Helsinki" (Helsingin Sanomat) and "Internet floods with child porn" (Ilta-Sanomat). The first public reaction in Finland is mostly based only on the initial article in Dagens Nyheter. Meantime, the Internet-community begins to investigate the matter on its own. The child porn statements arouse confusion, since due to heavy traffic, the anon server has for a long time been forced to limit the maximum size of messages, and altogether ban postings to groups containing pictures. With closer look the Wiklund "research" is revealed to have been made sloppily and without expertise. The information needed to reveal the sender of the articles has been lost, and the famous pictures themselves are nowhere to be obtained for closer look. The only picture that is actually in Wiklund's report, seems to be taken on a nudist camp. Wiklund has investigated four newsgroups dealing with sexual pictures, checked 5651 postings and found 8 pictures of adolescent nude children, none of which are actually pornographic (according to Wiklund's report). After a closer look to the pictures in those groups, they are shown to actually come from United Kingdom, not Finland. Wiklund admits that he never thought of the possibility of the source of the pictures being forged. On Saturday, February 11, Johan Helsingius reveals the true nature of events and the Finnish quiets on the issue. In Internet, the motives of the Swedish researcher, the person who forged the source of the pictures, and the journalist of Dagens Nyheter are generally questioned. Some writers suspect a connection to the attempts by scientologists to quiet anon servers. Since the officials don't seem to beinvestigating the case, Helsingius himself makes a "tutkintapyynt|" on the case. The initial investigation seems to show that no crime has been made, at least inside the borders of Finland. In the meantime, on February 8 the Finnish police armed with a warrant of search and seizure, obtains form Helsingius the electronic mail address of the anonymous person that the scientologists are after. An hour after giving out the information, the Finnish lawyer of scientologists calls to the lawyer of Helsingius, telling that he received the information. On 14 February the criminal investigation on the scientologists case is ceased. Helsingius gets this information on February 17, and reveals the situation on some discussion groups and mailing lists of Internet. This announcement has caused a flood of electronic discussion. During the weekend, Helsingius received hundreds of comments wondering about and disapproving the actions of the Finnish officials. February 19 the maintainer of an anonymous service in Amsterdam tells Helsingius that the Church of Scientology has approached him again, threatening with court unless the anonymous participation into the discussion on scientology is stopped. This time the issue would be claims about illicit distribution of copies of copyrighted computer programs. 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Jim Gorges Area: Public Key Encryption To: All 24 Feb 95 08:02:34 Subject: PGPBlue UpdReq The BBS mentioned in the PGPBlue docs as a point of contact for the author is no longer in the Fidonet nodelist. Does anyone know whether there is another means of contacting the author via netmail or other email systems? Thanks, Jim Internet: Jim.Gorges@oubbs.telecom.uoknor.edu 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Armando Ortiz Area: Public Key Encryption To: Glen Todd 18 Feb 95 13:23:32 Subject: Unauthorized Entry UpdReq ->I'd have to agree here. This sounds exactly lie the kind of ->information (especially the demands for _home_ addresses and phone ->numbers) that government spies would find extremely useful in ->harassment campaigns and that nobody else would have any real use ->for. (My home address would be of no use for mail delivery, as I ->live in rural Colorado, in a region where mail delivery to individual ->residences is not provided. My mailing address is a P.O. box in ->town.) I would certainly refuse to answer this interrogation. ->I'm surprised that they didn't ask for SSAN. Wrong again! Armando Ortiz --- POW 1.2 0052 Me...a skeptic? I trust you have proof. VQWK 6.20 [Rev H - 04/04/94] 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Armando Ortiz Area: Public Key Encryption To: Shawn McMahon 18 Feb 95 13:23:34 Subject: Unauthorized Entry UpdReq -> -> ->Despite the stern warnings of the tribal elders, Bill Brown said this ->to Richard Dale: -> BB> And I would have to agree with you. I've used the same PO -> BB> Box for the past decade and a half, at least. There's no -> BB> software that will change that. Of course, the request for -> BB> my home phone number is also too fishy for my tastes. ->In fact, if you stick to your guns when queried, you'd be amazed at ->the places you can get away with using a PO box despite attempts to ->get a "real" address from you. ->I've given my PO box in places where it's illegal, simply because I ->stuck to my guns and refused to give a street address. Then you don't become a beta tester! Armando Ortiz --- POW 1.2 0052 Gun control is being able to hit your target! VQWK 6.20 [Rev H - 04/04/94] 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Armando Ortiz Area: Public Key Encryption To: Christopher Baker 18 Feb 95 13:23:36 Subject: Re: unauthorized info gat UpdReq ->SM> I get your point about this guy though. It sounds more like a ->scheme SM> to gather names for a junk mail list than a beta test. ->a conspiracy nut might say it was an obvious attempt by a government ->agent to identify pro-encryption folks. [grin] Be a skeptic, but if there is going to be any legallities involved here, it's the fact that I don't want to be suspect to any government laws for the export of the shell to other countries just because "spies" find it easy to use. Armando Ortiz --- POW 1.2 0052 The Borg assimilated my race,and all I got was a T-shirt. VQWK 6.20 [Rev H - 04/04/94] 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Armando Ortiz Area: Public Key Encryption To: Gordon Campbell 19 Feb 95 15:24:04 Subject: unauthorized info gatheri UpdReq -> ->-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- ->On (13 Feb 95) Christopher Baker wrote to Scott Mills... -> CB> a conspiracy nut might say it was an obvious attempt by a ->government CB> agent to identify pro-encryption folks. [grin] ->Who are you calling a nut? ;-) The only nut here is the one doing the accusing. I have made my requests. If people don't like them, too bad. Rules are rules in my eyes and I have no intention on making any exceptions. Armando Ortiz SDT --- POW 1.2 0052 C.L.I.N.T.O.N. - Confirmed Liar In Nation's Top Office Now. VQWK 6.20 [Rev H - 04/04/94] 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718