- cypherpunks-legacy@lists.ogf.org

White house letter
by crunch＠netcom.com 05 Feb '93

05 Feb '93

>4. Fiber optics will be penetrating into a lot of homes over the next >few years. What about adding the issue of government grants for R&D on new technology in Data Networking, Virtual reality, and other new technologies. Or at least generious tax breaks to encourage R&D. JD

1 0

White House letter
by ld231782＠longs.lance.colostate.edu 05 Feb '93

05 Feb '93

Hello, I think the official cyberpunk White House (Pres. Bill Clinton) letter would be a great idea, although my experience is that the more you want to say, the more people will say "that's not for cypherpunks to say" or "I don't agree with that as a cypherpunk" and that it will be hard to build consensus. But, on the other hand, a lot of cypherpunks are kind of extremists that may even say some things don't go far enough. Anyway, here are some possible topics, as bland as I can make them (but are all actually highly controverial): 1. Off the tip of the mailing list's tongue, phone encryption particularly in cellular and hand-held phones. The recent article from the Sunday Times posted here stated that > Despite the changes, it will be still >virtually impossible for any amateur eavesdropper to intercept calls made >on the digital mobile phones. Hm, that's pretty questionable. Maybe we shouldn't make it a black and white issue, but codes seem to me to be either broken or unbroken, and the former is insecure and unusable whereas the latter is not. There are already examples of situations where lack of encryption led to outrageous breaches of privacy--both Princess Diana and her previous husband can attest to that! Clinton could put pressure on intelligence agencies in the U.S. to allow strong encryption for cellular phones, pass laws, or whatever, and eventually commit to security in phone calls. What do you think, cypherpunks? Should the government be allowed to wiretap "at all"? Is it a "right" of the government? (prepare for the flames) Should we insist on completely unlimited use of cryptography? Is any other scenario practical? Is anything but this inevitable? (uh oh, some opinion creeping in there) Introduction of strong cryptography in hand-held phones could be *the* stepping stone for widespread introduction of cryptography, if the battle is won and becomes publicized enough. I think if this was painted in the right way, we could really get a lot of public support for ideas like "I should be able to know when someone is listening to my calls" or "I should be able to protect from that" or "I know when somebody opens my mail, why not my phone calls?" or "that's not something I want my government to be doing anyway". 2. The new national network NREN supported by the NSF will have massive data communications capabilities, many times the bandwidth of the current internet. There are plenty of "guidelines" that could be established on its use. For example, how about commercial traffic? Are there restrictions on traffic? I think the "new world highways" analogy works here. While we can get and go on a highway whenever we want, and carry loads up to certain reasonable restrictions, we have to get licensed. Also, commercial companies rely on them heavily and our economy is immensely dependent on them (they benefit it immensely). Should we oppose all taxes and licensing? Limitations on total traffic permitted? Believe it or not, these will become *hot* issues soon. Bigger than the time the FCC was thinking of taxing modem use. Keep in mind, we might be able to make arguments that the ideas like "volume" are somewhat obsolete in terms of networks, in which in many cases sending very large amounts of data is as costly (or even less so, because of overhead) than sending smaller amounts. Even if someone was charged based on quantity of use, the actual money involved would have to be something like $.0001/meg (I hope). 3. There are lot of restrictions and regulations on networks right now. For example, there are rules that prevent telephone companies from providing "information services" over telephone lines, apparently originating by rather bold but successful cable company lobbyists. Should these be removed? 4. Fiber optics will be penetrating into a lot of homes over the next few years. This will be related to the network expansion mentioned above. Should these be maintained and installed by private companies? Should there be limitations on the size of the companies running the networks? 5. In the letter, we should look at trying to explain our interests and backgrounds. Who ARE we to ask these things? A bunch of teenage computer geeks and hackers? Computer professionals with a serious interest in privacy, with important tax-paying jobs? I don't really know the answer to this one! I'd be willing to hammer up some rough drafts, if no one objects, but we need to hash this out, and decide about some kind of voting procedure, I would say (majority passing? line-item veto?) I suppose the one really major consensus of the cypherpunks is the commitment to cryptography and the believe that it should be unregulated and freely used. So, if all this sounds too involved, we could go the simple route and just fix up Eric Hugh's group charter to send to Pres. Clinton. ltr. P.S. Here's a product that would *really* bring the issue of cryptography to the forefront, making the public aware of it and partial to it, and is just waiting to be invented by somebody with a flair for electronics, packaging, and marketing. Encryption technology is becoming pretty inexpensive, and even some simple techniques are better than nothing and not trivial to get around for the big bureacracies that do wiretapping. Imagine a single little plastic cup that could be placed over a phone reciever with all the cheap encryption electronics built in (maybe even analog based). Market it in every drugstore and discount store in existence in real flashy ways. Protect your calls! Just slip it on your phone! Use it to talk to your friends! etc. introducing the CRYPTOCUP only $9.99. The thing could be adaptive, like pick one of 10 or 100 preprogrammed codes when it finds another of the same at the other end of the line. Or, maybe some one-time PADs could be used by the users using touch-tones. You could even market it as a child's toy: imagine that the kid could slip it over his mouth and yell through it. Another kid with a receiving speaker could decrypt this into earphones or something. Now, to other kids on the playground, all they hear is goofyspeak that sounds like pig latin from the pair, but the two kids are able to talk about throwing snowballs at Suzy or whatever (endless laughs and hilarity). You could have all kinds of spiffy TV commercials with little kids pretending to be spies, with the costumes and everything. Wow! You could sell a LOT of these if it was done right. This would be like the 20th century equivalent of the cups-and-string thing. (Just make sure I get plenty of royalties :) Or how about this? For us cypherpunks, the "kids toy" thing could be little cover for the use that it was *designed* for: use over phones. The "kid toy" thing would just be a way to get it to be widespread so that everybody had one and knew what it did. Then, the rumors would start. Wow! They fit on phones! Drug dealer's use em! People having affairs use 'em! Businessmen use 'em! EVERYBODY uses em! Coach to team player: did you remember your CUP? Yes Sir! Coach starts yelling plays at quarterback. Girlfriends would ask their boyfriends to slip 'em on before they started (do you have the PROTECTION with you?). Then, we take over the world. HAHAHAHA <- evil laugh If this was cheap enough, people might buy it just for the novelty of it. Especially if you don't have to choose the code, just slip it on and it works (maybe with the better versions, you could pick the code). The point is, infiltrate the economy to the point where any kind of silly regulation of "cryptography" would be perceived as completely ridiculous by the general population. "What are we going to do?" They'd say, "register every kid's CRYPTOCUP? HAHAHAHAHA!" <- side splitting laugh at the sheer stupidity of government. (Yeah, we have a great one---once they even tried to regulate CRYPTOCUPS! HAHAHAHA! <- now sides starting to hurt) OK (regaining my composure and sanity), so if we're really boring, I suppose we could go the route of just pressing for encryption in cellular phones. Or maybe just the middleaged employed people on the group could go that route, and all the teenage hackers work on the toy. P.S. how big is cypherpunks now anyway? I'm interested in embarrassing myself in front of as many people as possible. :)

1 0

Group note
by crunch＠netcom.com 04 Feb '93

04 Feb '93

> Excellent Idea! What better way to secure our position on cryptography >and privacy then to write a little note to Bill. go for it.. and we can all >read it, make suggestions, and add bits.. incidentally, I've already sent my >PGP key down to the White House.. |-] >TTFN! I didn't go that far, but if we decide to send a letter to the White House this way, we all should collaborate on what to say, in relation to our concerns, etc. Then each of us can "Sign" the letter using our PGP Signatures. I also thought about sending my PGP key, but still deciding on what I want to say relating to my personal concerns. JD

1 0

Re: A Group Note From CypherPunks
by DrZaphod 04 Feb '93

04 Feb '93

>>> From: The White House <75300.3115(a)compuserve.com> From deltorto(a)aol.com >Ladies & Gents, I think a group letter would be appropriate from all of us. >What an opportunity. I love this country sometimes, y'know? Excellent Idea! What better way to secure our position on cryptography and privacy then to write a little note to Bill. go for it.. and we can all read it, make suggestions, and add bits.. incidentally, I've already sent my PGP key down to the White House.. |-] TTFN! DrZaphod [AC/DC] / [DnA][HP] [drzaphod(a)ncselxsi.uucp] Technicolorized

1 0

White Mail
by deltorto＠aol.com 04 Feb '93

04 Feb '93

Guys & Gals, Here's a tidbit I thought you'd all like to know about: (from Network World, 1 Feb. 1993, p. 37) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- E-MAIL RULING MAY HAMPER CLINTON ADMINISTRATION Washington, D.C. - A recent federal court ruling requiring the preserva tion of the Bush administration's electronic mail tapes has left many considering the ramifications for E-mail utilization in the Clinton White House and the private sector. Federal Judge Charles Richey ruled that President Bush's E-mail falls under the 50-year-old Federal Records Act and cannot be destroyed until it has been reviewed under stringent guidelines for its preservation. This ruling, which is aimed at uncovering information concerning the Iran-Contra scandal, is the first time electronic communications has fallen under the auspices of the act. Although the ruling is currently being appealed and it is unclear whether the Bush administration will comply with the order, it has several implications for the new White House staff. "It will provide a real problem for the Clinton administration," said Michael Cavanagh, executive director of the Electronic Mail Association here. The ruling applies to all White House E-mail, Cavanagh said, even the most casual conversations. "It will be difficult for them to do their job as efficiently as they could if they were allowed to use E-mail freely," he said. -- Combing Through Trash Cavanagh likened the ruling to requiring that the contents of every White House wastebasket be saved forever. "That enters the realm of ridiculousness, but maybe that's what's happened with electronic mail in this decision." Others were not so sure. "It's one of those issues that has a balance on both sides." said Ronald Plesser, a partner in the Washington law firm of Piper and Marbury and the former telecommunications team leader for the Clinton transition. "From a freedom of information perspective, it's a good decision. >From an E-mail decision, we're concerned about it, but I don't think it's overpowering." Plesser said the ruling would encourage the White House staff to treat sending E-mail as if they were writing a memo, rather than using it in an informal manner. "I understand the concern that E-mail will now be a record and it may discourage some informal discussions," he said. "On the other hand, I think the issues in the case are broader than E-mail and relate to all records of public policy that should not be destroyed, and I'm in favor of that." He did caution that the ruling will not automatically make all White House E-mail public information because President Clinton will still have the option of using his executive privilege to prevent information from being subpoenaed. -- Private Sector Implications Beyond the White House, however, the implications for the private sector are minimal. "This doesn't have any direct ramifications for the business sector," Cavanagh said. "There certainly is not going to be a law requiring every private company to keep everything on their computer disks forever; you'd have to carve out something the size of the state of Wyoming to store those computer disks." Both Cavanagh and Plesser were in favor of having some kid of E-mail retention policy, as do most businesses in the private sector. Once a specified period has elapsed during which the information may be needed to reconstruct certain events, for example, it can be destroyed. "Increasingly, businesses institute retention policies for electronic mail tapes and other computer tapes [in addition to paper records]," Cavanagh said. "Generally, that's the correct route to go." -----------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Elaborating on BART pigs
by crunch＠netcom.com 04 Feb '93

04 Feb '93

Dan says: >John indicated >that information was stored in encrypted form, and that >the authorities were unable to read it. >Since John is on this list, perhaps he can elaborate. Yes, I can... Certainly. I was using a Mac with a HyperDrive, and kept all me personal Email and job bids encrypted using the "Security" program provided for the HyperDrive users. I don't know how many files I had encrypted, but if the police had somehow managed to decrypt it, they would be very dissapointed, as I'm sure they would find much use if any of it as evidance that I was involved in any kind of conspiracy or something. I was just a neat program, easy to use, and after I archived the programs, I encrypted it, and used a secret key "Pigs suck" at the time. Oh, one other thing, the new OOP version of the MacPGP Shell is coming along quite nicely, Blair has been very responsive to provide me with a good solid design, thus requiring little interaction, and those little GUI's are coming along just fine, than you... More later.. JD

1 0

5th Amendment and Encryption
by mcdchg!marcal!apres!system 04 Feb '93

04 Feb '93

For what it's worth, at H0H0 Con in December John Draper related a story about a run-in with the BART police, and the confiscation of "hundreds" of floppy disks. John indicated that information was stored in encrypted form, and that the authorities were unable to read it. Since John is on this list, perhaps he can elaborate. Dan -- system(a)apres.UUCP (System Operator) Applied Research (cryptography & security BBS) 1 708 639 8853

1 0

Re: [markets!uunet!starr.com!alta: How to e-mail the White House]
by ghabrech＠ultrix.ramapo.edu 04 Feb '93

04 Feb '93

I would like to welcome the whitehouse to the net. It's nice to give the public an easy way to make suggestions to somebody who would otherwise be inaccessible (sp?, sorry no spell check). I hope that the users of the net make use of this great opportunity. Thanx, George A. Habrecht ghabrech(a)ultrix.ramapo.edu

1 0

[markets!uunet!starr.com!alta: How to e-mail the White House]
by tribble＠xanadu.com 04 Feb '93

04 Feb '93

Hi Folks, The following is NOT a joke. It is a real service being provided by President Clinton. If you feel you have something to say, send them a letter. I heard they will reply to most messages. From: The White House <75300.3115(a)compuserve.com> As you know, this is the first time in history that the White House has been connected to the public through electronic mail. We welcome your comments and suggestions for ways to improve your Public Access E-mail program. Jock Gill Electronic Publishing Public Access E-mail The White House Washington, D.C. 75300.3115(a)Compuserve.com CLINTON PZ on America Online ------- End of Forwarded Message

1 0

CFP '93 roommates?
by fnerd＠smds.com 03 Feb '93

03 Feb '93

Fellow Extropians, Cypherpunks, and Computer Freedom and Privacy seekers-- Is anyone else hoping to share a room at the SF Airport Marriot for CFP '93? The rates are $99 per room, single or multiple occupancy, for conference attendees, with a limited block of rooms available, offer expires Feb 9. Please respond to sw(a)smds.com NOT to fnerd. Thanks. (My fnerd mail goes through a two-day-long pipeline.) --Steve Witham sw(a)smds.com

1 0