- cypherpunks-legacy@lists.ogf.org

Re: (fwd) White House Public Encryption Management Fact Sheet
by peb＠PROCASE.COM 17 Apr '93

17 Apr '93

>From: Peter Wayner <pcw(a)access.digex.com> >2) The system is vulnerable to simple phone swapping attacks Yes, that's when the it becomes necessary to register your phone and phone license with the government every year. Remember, "using a telephone is a privilage, not a right!" 8^) Nice way to charge license fees too! >From: gnu(a)toad.com (John Gilmore) >Subject: EFF crypto statement and press release > Does disclosure of keys to a third party waive an individual's Fifth Amendment > rights in subsequent criminal inquiries? This is a very important question and it gets to the heart of the matter. Paul E. Baclace peb(a)procase.com

1 0

The New Mykotronix phones...
by Peter Wayner 17 Apr '93

17 Apr '93

Okay, let's suppose that the NSA/NIST/Mykotronix Registered Key system becomes standard and I'm able to buy such a system from my local radio shack. Every phone comes with a built in chip and the government has the key to every phone call. I go and buy a phone and dutifully register the key. What's to prevent me from swapping phones with a friend or buying a used phone at a garage sale? Whooa. The secret registered keys just became unsynchronized. When the government comes to listen in, they only receive gobbledly-gook because the secret key registered under my name isn't the right one. That leads me to conjecture that: 1) The system isn't that secure. There are just two master keys that work for all the phones in the country. The part about registering your keys is just bogus. or 2) The system is vulnerable to simple phone swapping attacks like this. Criminals will quickly figure this out and go to town. In either case, I think we need to look at this a bit deeper. -Peter Wayner

3 2

Re: (fwd) White House Public Encryption Management Fact Sheet
by George A. Gleason 17 Apr '93

17 Apr '93

Re Big Brother proposal. The "asset forfeiture" mention isn't quite so ominous as suggested: what it seems to say is that the Atty General will procure (i.e. buy) encryption devices for use by law enforcement in their own secure communications (i.e. police radio and computer links), and "the funding to effect this purchase" will come from the "superfund" of money derived from existing asset forfeitures. In other words, smoke a joint, lose your house, and Uncle Sam sells the house to get money to buy more crypto gear for cops. I don't see an implication that crypto gear makers will be facing forfeiture for failing to comply with the "request" to incorporate key escrow. It appears that this is directed at first to establish the use of key escrow in government-related communications: "federal communications systems that process sensitive but unclassified information." So for instance, Ollie North's memos would be recoverable, and so on. But the real risk is that it will spread out to encompass any facility receiving government funding or contracts, i.e. the universities; and from there, widen so as to restrict other types of crypto from being used at those sites. So far it doesn't seem to restrict crypto on private microcomputers, though a widely accepted standard could eventually be written into law. The proposal specifically says it will allow other manufacturers to develop other approaches to key escrow systems. I think what the long-term plan might be, is to win acceptance for the idea of key escrow, and then require it. This isn't exactly a backdoor into your hardware; what it would allow would be for instance NSA to get your key and then read your communications as they occur. So your local hardware isn't storing anything in a different way or being remotely accessed or triggered, but your key is available elsewhere, at some approved facility. Now I'm guessing here, but what I think the way the crypto part of this has to work, is with a "device-specific" key and a "session"-type of key; where the first is what is escrowed, and the second is user-variable. Both are required to decrypt messages, and recovery of the second key would be relatively straightforward. Now you buy a modem or whatever, and it has a crypto chip in it, with a device-specific key that is registered along with the serial number of the device. So your purchase record has that serial number on it, and that's used to track the device key, which of course has been escrowed by the manufacturer before shipping the modem out. This would suggest that device keys would be relatively hard to crack, and therefore that some improvement in privacy would be possible by simply swapping the key chip in the device; and this would be easy enough with a black market in key escrow chips. In the mean time, from our end of it, someone oughta start working on steganography FAST. Spread spectrum designs are feasible. Slow is okay; the goal being to do anything that will render key escrow obsolete by making it impossible to tell when ciphertext (or for that matter any kind of data) is being sent. -gg

1 0

ietf-telnet-encryption.01.txt
by rclark＠nyx.cs.du.edu 17 Apr '93

17 Apr '93

Does anyone know why this Internet draft was deleted? I've sent a quick message to Internet-drafts(a)nri.reston.va.us to determine the reason. Will report. It sounds a little suspicious to me, though. Snag those copies of PGP while you can. Expect trouble in coming months. ---- Robert W. Clark rclark(a)nyx.cs.du.edu PGP signature available by mail or finger

2 1

[fwd] Initial EFF analysis of Clinton Privacy and Security Proposal
by Joseph Truitt 17 Apr '93

17 Apr '93

I don't recall having posted to this list before, but I am a truly supportive lurker as it were, doing my bit to sow seeds of crypto-anarchy at the layperson level to many friends. Anyway, in light of today's foreboding announcement from the White House, I thought you might be interested in this blurb from the EFF. ------- Forwarded Message Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1993 15:17:02 -0400 From: Cliff Figallo <fig(a)eff.org> Subject: EFFector Online 5.06 To: eff-news(a)eff.org (eff-news mailing list) ****************************************************************** ////////////// ////////////// ////////////// /// /// /// /////// /////// /////// /// /// /// ////////////// /// /// ****************************************************************** EFFector Online Volume 5 No. 6 4/16/1993 editors(a)eff.org A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation ISSN 1062-9424 ... April 16, 1993 INITIAL EFF ANALYSIS OF CLINTON PRIVACY AND SECURITY PROPOSAL The Clinton Administration today made a major announcement on cryptography policy which will effect the privacy and security of millions of Americans. The first part of the plan is to begin a comprehensive inquiry into major communications privacy issues such as export controls which have effectively denied most people easy access to robust encryption as well as law enforcement issues posed by new technology. However, EFF is very concerned that the Administration has already reached a conclusion on one critical part of the inquiry, before any public comment or discussion has been allowed. Apparently, the Administration is going to use its leverage to get all telephone equipment vendors to adopt a voice encryption standard developed by the National Security Agency. The so-called "Clipper Chip" is an 80-bit, split key escrowed encryption scheme which will be built into chips manufactured by a military contractor. Two separate escrow agents would store users' keys, and be required to turn them over law enforcement upon presentation of a valid warrant. The encryption scheme used is to be classified, but they chips will be available to any manufacturer for incorporation into their communications products. This proposal raises a number of serious concerns . First, the Administration appears to be adopting a solution before conducting an inquiry. The NSA-developed Clipper chip may not be the most secure product. Other vendors or developers may have better schemes. Furthermore, we should not rely on the government as the sole source for Clipper or any other chips. Rather, independent chip manufacturers should be able to produce chipsets based on open standards. Second, an algorithm can not be trusted unless it can be tested. Yet the Administration proposes to keep the chip algorithm classified. EFF believes that any standard adopted ought to be public and open. The public will only have confidence in the security of a standard that is open to independent, expert scrutiny. Third, while the use of the split-key, dual-escrowed system may prove to be a reasonable balance between privacy and law enforcement needs, the details of this scheme must be explored publicly before it is adopted. What will give people confidence in the safety of their keys? Does disclosure of keys to a third party waive individual's fifth amendment rights in subsequent criminal inquiries? In sum, the Administration has shown great sensitivity to the importance of these issues by planning a comprehensive inquiry into digital privacy and security. However, the "Clipper chip" solution ought to be considered as part of the inquiry, not be adopted before the discussion even begins. DETAILS OF THE PROPOSAL: ESCROW The 80-bit key will be divided between two escrow agents, each of whom hold 40 bits of each key. Upon presentation of a valid warrant, the two escrow agents would have to turn the key parts over to law enforcement agents. Most likely the Attorney General will be asked to identify appropriate escrow agents. Some in the Administration have suggested one non-law enforcement federal agency, perhaps the Federal Reserve, and one non-governmental organization. But, there is no agreement on the identity of the agents yet. Key registration would be done by the manufacturer of the communications device. A key is tied to the device, not to the person using it. CLASSIFIED ALGORITHM AND THE POSSIBILITY OF BACK DOORS The Administration claims that there are no back door means by which the government or others could break the code without securing keys from the escrow agents and that the President will be told there are no back doors to this classified algorithm. In order to prove this, Administration sources are interested in arranging for an all-star crypto cracker team to come in, under a security arrangement, and examine the algorithm for trap doors. The results of the investigation would then be made public. GOVERNMENT AS MARKET DRIVER In order to get a market moving, and to show that the government believes in the security of this system, the feds will be the first big customers for this product. Users will include the FBI, Secret Service, VP Al Gore, and maybe even the President. FROM MORE INFORMATION CONTACT: Jerry Berman, Executive Director Daniel J. Weitzner, Senior Staff Counsel ... ============================================================= EFFector Online is published by The Electronic Frontier Foundation 666 Pennsylvania Ave., Washington, DC 20003 Phone: +1 202 544-9237 FAX: +1 202 547 5481 Internet Address: eff(a)eff.org Coordination, production and shipping by Cliff Figallo, EFF Online Communications Coordinator (fig(a)eff.org) Reproduction of this publication in electronic media is encouraged. Signed articles do not necessarily represent the view of the EFF. To reproduce signed articles individually, please contact the authors for their express permission. *This newsletter is printed on 100% recycled electrons* ------- End of Forwarded Message -- Joseph Truitt * BioCAD Corporation * joseph(a)biocad.com * voice 415/903-3923 fax 415/961-0584 * "The hardest thing in the world to understand is the income tax." --Albert Einstein

1 0

"Big Brother" Proposal
by Perry E. Metzger 16 Apr '93

16 Apr '93

It has been suggested that we start refering to the latest Encryption Initiative by the feds as the "Big Brother" proposal. I think this is an excellent idea. If we can get the media to adopt the term, it means that every time someone refers to the proposal they have already given our propaganda slant to it. Perry

1 0

(fwd) White House Public Encryption Management Fact Sheet
by tcmay＠netcom.com 16 Apr '93

16 Apr '93

Message from Tim: The following forwarded message (below, after these introductory comments) explains in more detail the NIST/NSA proposal and adds a few disturbing wrinkles: 1. Quote: "INSTALLATION OF GOVERNMENT-DEVELOPED MICROCIRCUITS The Attorney General of the United States, or her representative, shall request manufacturers of communications hardware which incorporates encryption to install the U.S. government-developed key-escrow microcircuits in their products." This suggests more than just voice communications will be affected by the policy. "Communications hardware" suggests a broad scope. Modem makers may be told to (somehow) incorporate this system into their products...not clear what this means for old equipment, incompatible equipment, etc. 2. The "shall request manufacturers..." bit does not sound voluntary. (The whole line about "Clipper" being so attractive that manufacturers will gladly design it in....total B.S.) 3. At the end of this document is mention of using the civil forfeiture laws to enforce the new system. Not state, but implicit (I believe) is that the threat of civil forfeiture will be used to scare users into compliance. Very disturbing. Read it and weep! Then start planning. -Tim May, who hopes the Cypherpunks will adopt my suggestion that we use the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists-style "clock"...I call it 10 minutes before midnight ***Begin forwarded message from sci.crypt and other groups*** From: clipper(a)csrc.ncsl.nist.gov (Clipper Chip Announcement) Subject: White House Public Encryption Management Fact Sheet Organization: National Institute of Standards & Technology Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1993 20:44:58 GMT Note: The following was released by the White House today in conjunction with the announcement of the Clipper Chip encryption technology. FACT SHEET PUBLIC ENCRYPTION MANAGEMENT The President has approved a directive on "Public Encryption Management." The directive provides for the following: Advanced telecommunications and commercially available encryption are part of a wave of new computer and communications technology. Encryption products scramble information to protect the privacy of communications and data by preventing unauthorized access. Advanced telecommunications systems use digital technology to rapidly and precisely handle a high volume of communications. These advanced telecommunications systems are integral to the infrastructure needed to ensure economic competitiveness in the information age. Despite its benefits, new communications technology can also frustrate lawful government electronic surveillance. Sophisticated encryption can have this effect in the United States. When exported abroad, it can be used to thwart foreign intelligence activities critical to our national interests. In the past, it has been possible to preserve a government capability to conduct electronic surveillance in furtherance of legitimate law enforcement and national security interests, while at the same time protecting the privacy and civil liberties of all citizens. As encryption technology improves, doing so will require new, innovative approaches. In the area of communications encryption, the U. S. Government has developed a microcircuit that not only provides privacy through encryption that is substantially more robust than the current government standard, but also permits escrowing of the keys needed to unlock the encryption. The system for the escrowing of keys will allow the government to gain access to encrypted information only with appropriate legal authorization. To assist law enforcement and other government agencies to collect and decrypt, under legal authority, electronically transmitted information, I hereby direct the following action to be taken: INSTALLATION OF GOVERNMENT-DEVELOPED MICROCIRCUITS The Attorney General of the United States, or her representative, shall request manufacturers of communications hardware which incorporates encryption to install the U.S. government-developed key-escrow microcircuits in their products. The fact of law enforcement access to the escrowed keys will not be concealed from the American public. All appropriate steps shall be taken to ensure that any existing or future versions of the key-escrow microcircuit are made widely available to U.S. communications hardware manufacturers, consistent with the need to ensure the security of the key-escrow system. In making this decision, I do not intend to prevent the private sector from developing, or the government from approving, other microcircuits or algorithms that are equally effective in assuring both privacy and a secure key- escrow system. KEY-ESCROW The Attorney General shall make all arrangements with appropriate entities to hold the keys for the key-escrow microcircuits installed in communications equipment. In each case, the key holder must agree to strict security procedures to prevent unauthorized release of the keys. The keys shall be released only to government agencies that have established their authority to acquire the content of those communications that have been encrypted by devices containing the microcircuits. The Attorney General shall review for legal sufficiency the procedures by which an agency establishes its authority to acquire the content of such communications. PROCUREMENT AND USE OF ENCRYPTION DEVICES The Secretary of Commerce, in consultation with other appropriate U.S. agencies, shall initiate a process to write standards to facilitate the procurement and use of encryption devices fitted with key-escrow microcircuits in federal communications systems that process sensitive but unclassified information. I expect this process to proceed on a schedule that will permit promulgation of a final standard within six months of this directive. The Attorney General will procure and utilize encryption devices to the extent needed to preserve the government's ability to conduct lawful electronic surveillance and to fulfill the need for secure law enforcement communications. Further, the Attorney General shall utilize funds from the Department of Justice Asset Forfeiture Super Surplus Fund to effect this purchase. --

1 0

Key Registration and Big Brother--Time to Fight!
by tcmay＠netcom.com 16 Apr '93

16 Apr '93

(Perry Metzger forwarded my message this morning to the Cypherpunks list on the latest White House proposal....I should've also sent it to the Extropians list myself, my vacation from the list notwithstanding. Some things are just too important!) The latest White House proposal to authorize a certain form of encryption, called "Clipper Chip," (a bizarre name, which also conflicts with the "Clipper" processor made by Intergraph), represents the reification of all the "key registration" themes discussed for many months on sci.crypt and elsewhere. I urge those on the Extropians list who are interested in preserving their dwindling freedoms in these Beknighted States of America to: 1. Follow the debate on sci.crypt and elsewhere. Hal Finney just mentioned the various places the White House announcement was posted. 2. Subscribe to the Cypherpunks list by sending a message to "cypherpunks-request(a)toad.com". The latest "Wired," which I have not yet seen myself, apparently has some good stuff on our group. (I reviewed Levy's article for him, but haven't seen the mag on the newsstands yet.) 3. Get your PGP and MacPGP before "the other shoe drops." The "other shoe" may be legal moves by RSA Data Security and others (Commerce? Justice?) to crack down on PGP...rumblings of this have been heard for months now, and were discussed at the last physical Cypherpunks meeting. (And the steganographic aspects--the hiding of the mere _existence_ of an encrypted message--will probably assume a greater importance than before.) 4. The Boston area just had its first physical Cypherpunks meeting, with Julf intending to attend (J. Helsingius, operator of the Finnish anonymous remailer)....I haven't heard the outcome. The U.K has had one for several months, and of course the Bay Area has had one since before there was even a mailing list. The Southern California area has several leading Cypherpunks (Hal Finney, Phil Karn, Eli Brandt, others) and wants to host a meeting of "the Cypherpunks." Instead, and in light of the serious danger that encryption will soon have limits placed on it, I would urge them to *just begin their own meeting* ASAP! (Sorry to sound so urgent, but they need to start meeting long before we can arrange a meeting in San Diego or LA.) (One thing we talked about at the 4-10-93 meeting in Mountain View, CA, was a conference call linking up some of the "satellite Cypherpunks." Not secure, of course, but then neither is this list nor our physical meetings...anybody can attend, can get added to the list, etc.) 5. Prof. Denning has more to say about key escrow and registration in the latest (or very recent) "Communications of the ACM," which should be available in large university libraries. Now that the proposal has become real, it takes on more meaning. 6. It is clear that the "trial balloon" I cited in my message many months back to sci.crypt is nauseatingly real. Under the guise of stopping "drug dealers, terrorists, and child pornographers," we will see limits placed on our ability to communicate privately. I have few hopes that this proposal will be overturned by the courts, including the Supreme Court. A "garrison state" like the U.S. is turning itself into, what with the War on (Some) Drugs, the no-knock raids on suspects, the civil forfeiture laws, and the attacks on "whacko Waco religious cults," has need of Nazi-like police powers. It seems ironic, and appropriate, that this White House announcement came on the 50th anniversary of the discovery of LSD...April 16th, 1943. As I said six months ago, "Be afraid, be very afraid." As Phil Karn put it, the battle is joined. -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: MailSafe and PGP available.

1 0

EFF crypto statement and press release
by gnu 16 Apr '93

16 Apr '93

April 16, 1993 INITIAL EFF ANALYSIS OF CLINTON PRIVACY AND SECURITY PROPOSAL The Clinton Administration today made a major announcement on cryptography policy which will effect the privacy and security of millions of Americans. The first part of the plan is to begin a comprehensive inquiry into major communications privacy issues such as export controls which have effectively denied most people easy access to robust encryption, and law enforcement issues posed by new technology. However, EFF is very concerned that the Administration has already reached a conclusion on one critical part of the inquiry, before any public comment or discussion has been allowed. Apparently, the Administration is going to use its leverage to get all telephone equipment vendors to adopt a voice encryption standard developed by the National Security Agency. The so-called "Clipper Chip" is an 80-bit, split key escrowed encryption scheme which will be built into chips manufactured by a military contractor. Two separate escrow agents would store users' keys, and be required to turn them over law enforcement upon presentation of a valid warrant. The encryption scheme used is to be classified, but the chips will be available to any manufacturer for incorporation into its communications products. This proposal raises a number of serious concerns . First, the Administration has adopted a solution before conducting an inquiry. The NSA-developed Clipper Chip may not be the most secure product. Other vendors or developers may have better schemes. Furthermore, we should not rely on the government as the sole source for the Clipper or any other chips. Rather, independent chip manufacturers should be able to produce chipsets based on open standards. Second, an algorithm cannot be trusted unless it can be tested. Yet, the Administration proposes to keep the chip algorithm classified. EFF believes that any standard adopted ought to be public and open. The public will only have confidence in the security of a standard that is open to independent, expert scrutiny. Third, while the use of the use of a split-key, dual escrowed system may prove to be a reasonable balance between privacy and law enforcement needs, the details of this scheme must be explored publicly before it is adopted. What will give people confidence in the safety of their keys? Does disclosure of keys to a third party waive an individual's Fifth Amendment rights in subsequent criminal inquiries? These are but a few of the many questions the Administrations proposal raised but fails to answer. In sum, the Administration has shown great sensitivity to the importance of these issues by planning a comprehensive inquiry into digital privacy and security. However, the "Clipper Chip" solution ought to be considered as part of the inquiry, and not be adopted before the discussion even begins. DETAILS OF THE PROPOSAL: ESCROW The 80-bit key will be divided between two escrow agents, each of whom hold 40-bits of each key. The manufacturer of the communications device would be required to register all keys with the two independent escrow agents. A key is tied to the device, however, not the person using it. Upon presentation of a valid court order, the two escrow agents would have to turn the key parts over to law enforcement agents. According to the Presidential Directive just issued, the Attorney General will be asked to identify appropriate escrow agents. Some in the Administration have suggested that one non-law enforcement federal agency (perhaps the Federal Reserve), and one non-governmental organization could be chosen, but there is no agreement on the identity of the agents yet. CLASSIFIED ALGORITHM AND THE POSSIBILITY OF BACK DOORS The Administration claims that there are no back doors -- means by which the government or others could break the code without securing keys from the escrow agents -- and that the President will be told there are no back doors to this classified algorithm. In order to prove this, Administration sources are interested in arranging for an all-star crypto cracker team to come in, under a security arrangement, and examine the algorithm for trap doors. The results of the investigation would then be made public. The Clipper Chipset was designed and is being produced and a sole-source, secret contract between the National Security Agency and two private firms: VLSI and Mycotronx. NSA work on this plan has been underway for about four years. The manufacturing contract was let 14 months ago. GOVERNMENT AS MARKET DRIVER In order to get a market moving, and to show that the government believes in the security of this system, the feds will be the first big customers for this product. Users will include the FBI, Secret Service, VP Al Gore, and maybe even the President. At today's Commerce Department press briefing, a number of people asked this question, though: why would any private organization or individual adopt a classified standard that had no independent guaranty of security or freedom from trap doors? COMPREHENSIVE POLICY INQUIRY The Administration has also announced that it is about to commence an inquiry into all policy issues related to privacy protection, encryption, and law enforcement. The items to be considered include: export controls on encryption technology and the FBI's Digital Telephony Proposal. It appears that the this inquiry will be conducted by the National Security Council. Unfortunately, however, the Presidential Directive describing the inquiry is classified. Some public involvement in the process has been promised, but they terms have yet to be specified. FROM MORE INFORMATION CONTACT: Jerry Berman, Executive Director (jberman(a)eff.org) Daniel J. Weitzner, Senior Staff Counsel (djw(a)eff.org) Full text of the Press releases and Fact Sheets issued by the Administration will be available on EFF's ftp site. =================== PRESS RELEASE FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: April 16, 1993 Electronic Frontier Foundation responds to Clinton Administration Digital Privacy and Security proposals. EFF Chairman Mitchell Kapor praises process but questions need for secret standard. The Clinton Administration today made a major announcement on privacy and security for electronic communications including regular and cellular phones. Mitchell Kapor, EFF Chairman of the Board, praised Administration efforts to study comprehensive solutions to privacy problems, but questioned the specific solution which the government is seeking to impose. "The Administration is to be commended for launching a broad inquiry into these critical problems," said Kapor, "but they should not attempt to impose a solution before the process has begun." "A system based on classified, secret technology will not and should not gain the confidence of the American public," continued Kapor, commenting on the proposed use of the NSA-developed "Clipper Chip." The Clipper chip is to be sold to private corporations for incorporation in communications products, but will be based on a classified coding system. Kapor explained that "in the past, government-designed standards have suffered under the suspicion that a hidden 'trap door' would allow unauthorized governmental or private intrusion. The only way to avoid this mistake is to publish open standards and subject them to expert, independent scrutiny." The Clipper proposal would also require users to deposit their code "keys" with "trusted" escrow agents in order to allow law enforcement to conduct court-authorized wiretaps. Jerry Berman, EFF's Executive Director, said that "the escrow system is an intriguing proposal, but the details of this scheme must be explored publicly before it is adopted. What will give people confidence in the safety of their keys? Does disclosure of keys to a third party waive an individual's Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination? The administration will need to answer questions such as these before it proceeds with this, or any other, proposal." Contact: Jerry Berman, Executive Director Daniel J. Weitzner, Senior Staff Counsel tel: 202-544-3077 or 202-544-9237 eff(a)eff.org

1 0

Mailing list name
by pmetzger＠lehman.com 16 Apr '93

16 Apr '93

In the light of recent developments concerning government cryptography initiatives, we might soon find ourselves innundated by working press. Given this, I think that the name "cypherpunks" produces the wrong connotations -- it makes us sound like criminals when we are in fact people who are interested in expanding personal privacy with technology. Often, little things like this end up being of tremendous importance in the long haul. I would propose changing the name of the mailing list to "cryptoprivacy" or something similar. It denotes what we are about in a way that mundane people understand better, and it portrays us in the proper light -- as people struggling to improve the prospects for personal freedom, not a bunch of "punks". Perry

2 1