- cypherpunks-legacy@lists.ogf.org

(fwd) GIFs--Now it can be told
by tcmay＠netcom.com 06 Jul '93

06 Jul '93

Cypherpatriots, Here's a little experiment I've been conducting. A week ago I posted an ecrypted GIF to a bizarre new newsgroup that showed up on NETCOM, "alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.children." Quite a controversial group, pushing several buttons. My posting generated some real heat, though there was absolutely no evidence it was anything more than just a file. Apparently the mere fact of it existing was a kind of "thoughtcrime" in these politically correct times. Anyway, I let it brew for one week, then wrote this explanation and posted it. Several Cypherpunk list readers were slightly involved, some to criticize me, some to say "Not so fast." You know who you are. :-} All in all, a pleasant little experiment. Here's the posting I sent out: Newsgroups: alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.children,alt.config,netcom.netnews From: tcmay(a)netcom.com (Timothy C. May) Subject: GIFs--Now it can be told Message-ID: <tcmayC9L0zI.2C3(a)netcom.com> Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1993 09:28:29 GMT One week ago tonight a new group appeared at my site, "alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.children," a group certain to provoke controversy, to bring out the Net Cops, and to induce a certain kind of "Stockholm Syndrome," wherein some folks scramble to initiate censorship prior even to the Feds doing it. (Their battle cry is "Eeek! If we don't nip this in the bud, _right now_, think of what might happen!) My experience has been that these Net.Censors are usually too quick to claim something has clearly gone beyond the bounds of decency and acceptability. Thankfully, they usually fail in their efforts. Anyway, seeing this strange new group appear on my system, I decided to conduct an experiment. I posted an "encrypted GIF," not further identified, and waited for the reaction. The file was as follows (only part of it shown): -----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE----- Version: 2.2 b2cCrVJKUYUZf7UBA/i1tSSz66dOx4+cJKzNkm1JBhGigMdRvxM8Slm3TyC7kgWW L8J3w/On10thisi487rU/Gl7xOMajxCQedHrb6k0+wYDGjxmVcu9xwLWAWpkgq+5 fUiNKBnF/SUA/JisFrWvn63rt44n+DqROwx8CXuSvL1mUdqLRTS0t/timjHnhIwC VmLN1FTnSD8BBACFa38SqiwByarfcVhFg/fuKWc4AgKtYqSt5oWW6sYLckC3nEen ZcHV+DNFo36Exg7r0trapoBXpjoe9ENCsCbFJ7i/M7FwFYvK1QAcxQ6zGt+3HICM 9Hsxg1d5Goqp4+nmpW+9Y/UVY16+WVl9moY3c7Iv04Cp0ipu2B5qfIxPZoSMAlKv ..... Not to my surprise, about 20 people have (so far) requested the key to this file. (The whole encryption rationale is covered later.) I didn't reply to them...some of them asked for the key a second time! What surprised me is that nobody carefully looked at the file. Here it is again, with some places marked: -----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE----- Version: 2.2 b2cCrVJKUYUZf7UBA/i1tSSz66dOx4+cJKzNkm1JBhGigMdRvxM8Slm3TyC7kgWW L8J3w/On10thisi487rU/Gl7xOMajxCQedHrb6k0+wYDGjxmVcu9xwLWAWpkgq+5 ^^^^ fUiNKBnF/SUA/JisFrWvn63rt44n+DqROwx8CXuSvL1mUdqLRTS0t/timjHnhIwC ^^ VmLN1FTnSD8BBACFa38SqiwByarfcVhFg/fuKWc4AgKtYqSt5oWW6sYLckC3nEen ^ ZcHV+DNFo36Exg7r0trapoBXpjoe9ENCsCbFJ7i/M7FwFYvK1QAcxQ6zGt+3HICM ^^^^ 9Hsxg1d5Goqp4+nmpW+9Y/UVY16+WVl9moY3c7Iv04Cp0ipu2B5qfIxPZoSMAlKv ....... I put a couple of other "subliminal messages" in, which I suppose could provoke the Religious Right into squawking that "Satanic messages" are being hidden in computer files *that children could possibly read*. Gasp! Needless to say, such ASCII surgery performed on a PGP file (which, by the way, was just some random message someone had sent me a while back, utterly unreadable by anyone other than the two of us--and not even that after I mutated various characters) makes it completely unreadable. Even if someone had the other half of the PGP key pair--which never existed--the file would not even checksum as a legal PGP file! (Putting plaintext into the file was both a message I hoped astute readers would eventually notice--though it *is* pretty hard to see--and an ironclad proof that the file could not be a real PGP message, let alone a GIF, let alone kiddie porn.) There are some quasi-legitimate issues surrounding the area of child erotica. Was the child coerced? Was consent meaningful? Etc. But the posting of mere bits qua bits causing such anger and flamage indicates a serious overreaction. Are mere thoughts the crime? Orwell covered this, didn't he? * What if such images merely "look like" children (and just what is the age of consent? 18? 16? "Children" of 15 can get married in most countries of the world.)...are such "fakes" illegal? * What if they are computer-generated images, of children that never existed outside of a computer? Which children were exploited? We're back to thoughtcrime again. (Don't laugh, a leading interpretation is that even computer-generated child porn would be illegal, not because of crimes committed against children, but because of the "atmosphere" and "climate" it might produce. That is, thoughtcrime.) * What if the images were morphs? Not wholly computer-generated, but the morph of an adult image into that of a child? * What if one 15-year old child took photos of a another 15-year old child? What if one child "exploited" another? What if a child took pictures of herself, self-portraits? * What if the images, if they were ever to be posted, originated someplace where they are legal? Perhaps Amsterdam, someone suggested. If the U.S government tries to stop the Net (which is already a market anarchy, thankfully) from distributing this material, mightn't all the various countries that have different laws than ours do the same thing? There goes alt.fan.salman.rushdie. And there goes soc.motss and all the "normal" alt.binaries.pictures.* groups. Of course it won't likely happen, nor will alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.children go away,either. Get used to it. (Again, I don't care for it, but wailing and moaning won't make it go away.) * What if someone scanned-in images from the widely available books by David Hamilton, or Robert Mapplethorpe? Certainly many of these photos are of nude children...would the imminent death of Usenet finally happen if someone went down to B. Dalton Books, bought a David Hamilton collection, and posted some of the photos in a.b.p.e.c.? So, I would encourage folks to lighten up. In a week on the Net, not a single kiddie porn picture has been posted. And if it does happen, try to just ignore it. The kid whose picture was taken is probably grown up by now (I'm guessing that many such images are from old magazines, etc.). In any case, the occasional picture is hardly going to create a new slave trade in children. The issue of how the media may react is a more serious one. Part of the reason I'm explaining my little experiment now is to make sure my posting, at least, is not used by some nitwit reporter as the basis of a story. (If it's being used, then he'll soon have egg on his face.) That's the story. I hope you enjoyed the ride. P.S. I said I'd say something about why I used encryption. Aside from not being a real PGP-readable file, the idea was to make it look like one. This is the likeliest way for such material to get posted, along with anonymous remailers. The "look for the key in the 'usual places'" bit was to resonate with the "binary nerve gas" idea, where the dangerous pieces are stored separately and only combined at the last minute. I don't know if such techniques are already in use, but I expect them soon. The mutant condors that one reader (who claimed to be a Pope in the Church of the Subgenius, but who humorlessly missed the joke--but I forgive him, for he knew not what he saw) wanted to feed me to, can now stop circling my house. -Tim May -- .......................................................................... Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)netcom.com | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero 408-688-5409 | knowledge, reputations, information markets, W.A.S.T.E.: Aptos, CA | black markets, collapse of governments. Higher Power: 2^756839 | Public Key: PGP and MailSafe available. Note: I put time and money into writing this posting. I hope you enjoy it. --

2 1

Encrypted cypherpunks list
by hfinney＠shell.portal.com 06 Jul '93

06 Jul '93

As Eric Hughes suggested, I put together a little perl script to remail cypherpunks mail, PGP encrypted, to all names on a list. If you'd like to receive your cypherpunks messages encrypted, send me your address and your PGP key and I'll add you to the list. Then you can unsubscribe from the regular list. I'll upload the script once I test it a little more. Initial subscribers should consider themselves alpha testers and feel free to complain. Hal Finney hfinney(a)shell.portal.com

1 0

More on remail error reporting
by miron＠extropia.wimsey.com 06 Jul '93

06 Jul '93

I've created a digest list for error reporting. The digest list is errors-d(a)extropia.wimsey.com. Send a message to errors-d-request to subscribe. Following this is an example of a digest. Notice that the subjects (which include the ID of the messages in question) are the the top for quick browsing. Currently, the digest is transmitted every 12 hours. I'm also handling bounces now, not only remail errors. --- cut here --- Date: Mon, 5 Jul 1993 09:30:29 -0700 From: errors-d-request(a)extropia.wimsey.com Reply-To: errors(a)extropia.wimsey.com Subject: errors-d Digest V1993 #2 X-Loop: errors-d(a)extropia.wimsey.com Precedence: list To: errors-d(a)extropia.wimsey.com errors-d Digest Volume 1993 : Issue 2 Today's Topics: Remailing error, ID = (No subject supplied) Remailing bounce, ID = "Horror That Scares" ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1993 13:44:36 -0700 From: anonymous(a)extropia.wimsey.com To: errors(a)extropia.wimsey.com Subject: Remailing error, ID = (No subject supplied) Message-Id: <199307032044.AA26014@xtropia> No receipient could be ascertained. Note: No encrypted contents was found (encryption is required). No subject was included. Please supply a subject in the future for reporting. It will be stripped-off before remailing. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 5 Jul 1993 09:30:04 -0700 From: anonymous(a)extropia.wimsey.com To: errors(a)extropia.wimsey.com Subject: Remailing bounce, ID = "Horror That Scares" Message-Id: <199307051630.AA05344@xtropia> Bounced mail: > From: Mail Delivery Subsystem <MAILER-DAEMON(a)extropia.wimsey.com> Subject of 'Returned mail: User unknown'. ------------------------------ End of errors-d Digest V1993 Issue #2 *************************************

1 0

Non-cypherpunk question.
by Mark 05 Jul '93

05 Jul '93

>I just started reading this mailing list and I've run into a few problems >reading some of the messages because they include MIME information >which my copy of MH chokes on for some reason. It doesn't like the x-text >and text/x-pgp content-types. Would anybody on this list have a fix for >that so I can continue to read this list with MH? Any help would be appreciated. I use elm to read the list and it barfs on metamail messages as metamail hasnt been installed. What i did was to get cat.c and remove the arg checks so it didnt try to interpret the metamail switches elm piped to it and to not report missing files. Then it just catted it's arguements so /tmp/mail-aa0127 is catted and piped through less so i am able to read metamail (which are just nomal messages with a different Content-Type: line int he header anyway). Bit of a kludge but it works. Mark mark(a)coombs.anu.edu.au

1 0

[daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU : On-Line Congressional Hearing]
by marc＠Athena.MIT.EDU 05 Jul '93

05 Jul '93

------- Forwarded transaction [6484] daemon(a)ATHENA.MIT.EDU (hearing-info(a)trystero.malamud.com) Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet 07/05/93 14:27 (70 lines) Subject: On-Line Congressional Hearing Date: Mon, 5 Jul 93 14:28:25 -0400 To: com-priv(a)psi.com From: hearing-info(a)trystero.malamud.com Reply-To: hearing-info(a)trystero.malamud.com Station: Internet Multicasting Service Channel: Internet Town Hall Program: On-Line Congressional Hearing Release: July 5, 1993 Content: First Announcement/On-Line Congressional Hearing On July 26 at 9:30AM EDT, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and Finance of the U.S. House of Representatives will hold the first Congressional Hearing ever held over a computer network. The oversight hearing on "The Role of Government in Cyberspace" will take place in the Grand Ballroom of the National Press Club at 14th and F Streets, N.W., Washington, D.C. The hearing is open to the public. An open house will be held from 3-5PM on the same day in the same location and is also open to the public. Chairman Markey has asked that this historic occasion demonstrate the potential and diversity of the global Internet. Thirty Sparcstations will be in the hearing room, allowing members of Congress, staff, and their guests to read e-mail, use Gopher menus, read testimony in WAIS databases, browse the World Wide Web, and otherwise use the resources of the global Internet as part of the hearing. Some witnesses for the hearing will testify remotely, sending audio and video over the Internet. Audio and video of the hearing will also be multicast over the Multicast Backbone (MBONE). We are hoping that C-SPAN and other traditional media will also carry the event. *MORE DETAILS ON MBONE AND OTHER WAYS TO WATCH THE HEARINGS REMOTELY WILL BE FORTHCOMING SHORTLY.* One of the primary points that we are hoping to demonstrate is the diversity and size of the Internet. We have therefore established an electronic mail address by which people on the Internet can communicate with the Subcommittee before and during the hearing: congress(a)town.hall.org We encourage you to send your comments on what the role of government should be in the information age to this address. Your comments to this address will be made part of the public record of the hearing. Feel free to carry on a dialogue with others on a mailing list, cc'ing the e-mail address. Your cards and letters to congress(a)town.hall.org will help demonstrate that there are people who use the Internet as part of their personal and professional lives. We encourage you to send comments on the role of government in cyberspace, on what role cyberspace should play in government (e.g., whether government data be made available on the Internet), on how the Internet should be built and financed, on how you use the Internet, and on any other topic you feel is appropriate. This is your chance to show the U.S. Congress that there is a constituency that cares about this global infrastructure. If you would like to communicate with a human being about the hearing, you may send your comments and questions to: hearing-info(a)town.hall.org Support for the Internet Town Hall is provided by Sun Microsystems and O'Reilly & Associates. Additional support for the July 26 on-line congressional hearing is being provided by ARPA, BBN Communications, the National Press Club, Xerox PARC, and many other organizations. Network connectivity for the Internet Town Hall is provided by UUNET Technologies. --[6484]-- ------- End forwarded transaction

1 0

Non-cypherpunk question.
by Chris Parrinello 05 Jul '93

05 Jul '93

Hi, I just started reading this mailing list and I've run into a few problems reading some of the messages because they include MIME information which my copy of MH chokes on for some reason. It doesn't like the x-text and text/x-pgp content-types. Would anybody on this list have a fix for that so I can continue to read this list with MH? Any help would be appreciated. Thanks in advance! Chris

1 0

"Wired" has more than one cover--why?
by tcmay＠netcom.com 04 Jul '93

04 Jul '93

I noticed that some copies of the latest "Wired" have Peter Gabriel on the cover and others have Mitch Kapor on the cover. What gives? Some sort of experiment? A novel way to gauge reader reaction to the covers? A lawsuit that forced a change in the covers? Esthetics? (My issue, with Peter Gabriel on the cover, is much artier, though harder to figure out, than the relatively mundane image of Kapor.) (Peter Gabriel, being a musician, may be said to be doing "a cover of a piece by Mitch Kapor.") Is Crunch on another set of covers? Did the issue with some of us Cypherpunks on the cover merely represent one of _several_ versions of the cover? (I envision the "Crypto Rebels" covers going to the Bay Area, the "Dish-Wallahs" covers going overseas, and the "Brenda Laurel" covers going directly to "Mondo 2000" headquarters in Berkeley.) -Tim May P.S. The issue of "Wired" is superb, as always. -- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)netcom.com | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero 408-688-5409 | knowledge, reputations, information markets, W.A.S.T.E.: Aptos, CA | black markets, collapse of governments. Higher Power: 2^756839 | Public Key: by arrangement Note: I put time and money into writing this posting. I hope you enjoy it.

3 2

Re: Ad Hominum attacks (was Re: PC Week Clipper article
by tcmay＠netcom.com 04 Jul '93

04 Jul '93

I largely agree with Pat Farrell's comments about the vicious attacks on various crypto folks. I was the one who jokingly used the term "wicked witch of the East" in reference to D.D., though I am almost 100% certain it was only to this mailing list, and not to sci.crypt in general. Perhaps I let my enthusiasm for my wit take precedence over judgment. And in other places, such as sci.crypt, I have in fact defended Denning against ignorant comments along the lines of "Who is this Dorothy Denning person? I can't find her name anywhere in "The Codebreakers." She must not know anything about crypto." Whatever we may think of her position on Clipper, criticizing her personally and imputing motives to her that cannot possibly be known to outsiders, is foolish. What really bothers me is the type of criticism, which I also tend to call "ad hominem" (but which rhetoriticians may have a special name for), in which people impute _motives_ to others. Thus, we see seemingly endless comments about the motives of Denning, of Bidzos, of Sternlight, and of others. (When I posted on the topic of possible cooperation with Bidzos and RSA, I was hit with a barrage of highly critical rebuttals. The substantive ones were fine, and expected, but the ones speculating on my motives and imputing evilness to me were uncalled for. I wrote them off as typical Net zeal, and am still on good terms even with those who foamed at the mouth the most.) "Demonizing" our opponents, or making them look like dunces (as with the many "I've never heard of Dorothy Denning before" posts), does not help our cause. In fact, it probably weakens our cause, for two reasons. First, it cuts off dialog with those we disagree with. Second, we tend to underestimate people we have written off as stooges or dunces. While I think Dorothy Denning is, for various reasons, hopelessly in the camp of the NSA and FBI, I see nothing to be gained by demonizing her. Or imputing evil qua evil motives. Personally, I think being close to the FBI, Justice Dept., NIST, NSA, etc., and socializing with them, having lunch with them, doing contract work for them (nothing evil about that, per se...it's how academic departments fund their research), and generally being in "the Washington scene" has polarized her somewhat, just as we Cypherpunks are polarized by the support we get from our peer group, from the "cognitive dissonance" of seeing mostly the evidence that supports our existing point of view. When you spend your time in a milieu, work with people on their problems, you begin to adopt their world view. Understand, of course, that I am not addressing the underlying issues of who is right and who is wrong...I've already made my beliefs on this clear. I'm just agreeing with Pat Farrell that we all need to be careful not to demonize folks like Denning, Bidzos, or even Sternlight. We don't have to be solicitous (overly polite) toward them, and we can knock down their arguments, but we ought not to use cheap shots and cheap rhetorical tricks (one I hate especially is the "sound effect" jab, the "<snicker, snicker>" sort of comment inserted into postings, sometimes even into the direct quotes of those being attacked!). Pat writes: >Even more annoying are the attacks on Jim Bidzos. He is trying to make a >buck, which was legal last time I looked. And on many issues, he is far more >in our camp than against us. He at least likes strong cryptography, and his >disputable patents expire in a relatively short time. He has agreed to allow >a PGP-compatible program to use RSA without cost, providing the legal >version that many U.S. users would like to see. I agree, though of course he and RSADSI did not fight as hard as they might have, in my opinion, on the subject of the cross-licensing with the DSS and Clipper/Skipjack products. I don't pretend to understand all of the issues involved, though I certainly can imagine he felt a lot more pressure (legal, export, classification) from the Feds than he felt from a loose organization of crypto privacy advocates. We're not where the money is, at least not yet. (In fact, Cypherpunks are generally not even customers of RSADSI, so why should Bidzos really care about our views? The industry security group that has denounced Clipper is undoubtedly much more influential.) Meanwhile, I have no real interest, personally, in the whole RSA v. PGP issue...let those directly involved work it all out. I will applaud loudly if Phil Z. and the other PGP folks do in fact reach an agreement with RSADSI, if only because it will remove one possible avenue of attack on private encryption. -Tim May -- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)netcom.com | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero 408-688-5409 | knowledge, reputations, information markets, W.A.S.T.E.: Aptos, CA | black markets, collapse of governments. Higher Power: 2^756839 | Public Key: by arrangement Note: I put time and money into writing this posting. I hope you enjoy it.

3 2

Re: "Wired" has more than one cover--why? (fwd)
by mkapor＠kei.com 04 Jul '93

04 Jul '93

They decided that West Coast covers should feature Peter Gabriel and the East Coast covers Mitch Kapor. Something about rock and roll playing better on newsstands than policy everywhere but the Northeasteast corridor. All subscribers got the Gabriel cover. As the Wired editor told me this split cover was a last minute decision and a first-time experiment. The Cypherpunks were on the cover all of copies of issue #2. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mitchell Kapor, Electronic Frontier Foundation Note permanent new email address for all correspondence as of 6/1/93 mkapor(a)kei.com

1 0

Reply to Michael's criticism of Tim
by wet!naga 04 Jul '93

04 Jul '93

I think Michael's reaction to Tim's experiment re alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.children deserves comment. >Date: Sat, 3 Jul 93 06:55:56 -0700 >From: Michael Ross <mross(a)antigone.com> >Subject: Re: (fwd) GIFs--Now it can be told > >Tim, > >That was very manipulative, and did not achieve much. Who was manipulated? Those who reacted did so freely. As Tim said, it was an experiment, not an attempt to achieve anything. The point was to see what would happen. >It has also very little to do with the subject of this mailing list. This mailing list is about encryption and other matters. The use of PGP to distribute erotica is thus a relevant topic. >If anything, you discouraged at least one person I know who became >genuinely interested in encryption and PGP as a result of your post. Tough. >As it turns out, you hid behind a pretty lame scheme, the only object >of which seems to have been to make a fool out of as many people as >possible. I think Michael has missed the point. >This is not how you accomplish constructive change, Tim. >People resent being made to feel stupid, and they certainly will >_not_ listen to what you have to say if you are belittling them. I don't recall Tim's belittling anyone - except perhaps the Net.Censors - who certainy deserve it. I don't think we need be too concerned about hurting their feelings. After all, they plan on doing worse to us. >I happen to agree with those points you deigned to make in a >straightforward manner. But you hid them so well behind trickery that >they will go unnoticed. On the contrary, were it not for the trickery some folks wouldn't bother reading Tim's comments on this subject. >Learn to deal with people, and you'll see >they are willing to listen to reasonable arguments. Ha! Chortle! Where you been all your life, Michael? People listen to reasonable arguments only when it suits them to. >If your parents didn't give you enough attention as a child, don't >take it out on the world by trying to get some here... Learn to work >_with_ people, not _against_ people, lest within ten years ... Garbage. If we are to go into spurious psychoanalysis then I think Michael's post reveals that he is still fixated on pleasing his parents by being a good little boy and not giving anyone any trouble. Fact is, there are people in the world who want to restrict our freedom and make us behave in ways they think best. Fuck 'em all!

1 0