896 lines
41 KiB
Plaintext
896 lines
41 KiB
Plaintext
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Computer underground Digest Wed Sep 29 1993 Volume 5 : Issue 76
|
|||
|
ISSN 1004-042X
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Editors: Jim Thomas and Gordon Meyer (TK0JUT2@NIU.BITNET)
|
|||
|
Archivist: Brendan Kehoe
|
|||
|
Shadow-Archivists: Dan Carosone / Paul Southworth
|
|||
|
Ralph Sims / Jyrki Kuoppala
|
|||
|
Ian Dickinson
|
|||
|
Copie Editor: Etaoin Shrdlu, III
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
CONTENTS, #5.76 (Sep 29 1993)
|
|||
|
File 1--Bruce Sterling on ABC/Australia's Attitude (excerpts)
|
|||
|
File 2--the Cyberspatial Copyright
|
|||
|
File 3--Forum for Research on Virtual Culture
|
|||
|
File 4--Computer-Mediated Comm Volume -- Call for Papers
|
|||
|
File 5--Question EFF yielding of crypto authority to NIST
|
|||
|
File 6--PGP/Zimmermann News Clippings Needed!
|
|||
|
File 7--EFF's Comments to NIST on Encryption/Escrow
|
|||
|
File 8--Three Cheers for Legal Action; Re: Mody Crypto
|
|||
|
File 9--PumpCon II
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Cu-Digest is a weekly electronic journal/newsletter. Subscriptions are
|
|||
|
available at no cost electronically from tk0jut2@mvs.cso.niu.edu. The
|
|||
|
editors may be contacted by voice (815-753-0303), fax (815-753-6302)
|
|||
|
or U.S. mail at: Jim Thomas, Department of Sociology, NIU, DeKalb, IL
|
|||
|
60115.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Issues of CuD can also be found in the Usenet comp.society.cu-digest
|
|||
|
news group; on CompuServe in DL0 and DL4 of the IBMBBS SIG, DL1 of
|
|||
|
LAWSIG, and DL1 of TELECOM; on GEnie in the PF*NPC RT
|
|||
|
libraries and in the VIRUS/SECURITY library; from America Online in
|
|||
|
the PC Telecom forum under "computing newsletters;"
|
|||
|
On Delphi in the General Discussion database of the Internet SIG;
|
|||
|
on the PC-EXEC BBS at (414) 789-4210; and on: Rune Stone BBS (IIRG
|
|||
|
WHQ) (203) 832-8441 NUP:Conspiracy; RIPCO BBS (312) 528-5020
|
|||
|
CuD is also available via Fidonet File Request from 1:11/70; unlisted
|
|||
|
nodes and points welcome.
|
|||
|
EUROPE: from the ComNet in LUXEMBOURG BBS (++352) 466893;
|
|||
|
In ITALY: Bits against the Empire BBS: +39-461-980493
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
ANONYMOUS FTP SITES:
|
|||
|
AUSTRALIA: ftp.ee.mu.oz.au (128.250.77.2) in /pub/text/CuD.
|
|||
|
EUROPE: nic.funet.fi in pub/doc/cud. (Finland)
|
|||
|
UNITED STATES:
|
|||
|
aql.gatech.edu (128.61.10.53) in /pub/eff/cud
|
|||
|
etext.archive.umich.edu (141.211.164.18) in /pub/CuD/cud
|
|||
|
ftp.eff.org (192.88.144.4) in /pub/cud
|
|||
|
halcyon.com( 202.135.191.2) in /pub/mirror/cud
|
|||
|
ftp.warwick.ac.uk in pub/cud (United Kingdom)
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
COMPUTER UNDERGROUND DIGEST is an open forum dedicated to sharing
|
|||
|
information among computerists and to the presentation and debate of
|
|||
|
diverse views. CuD material may be reprinted for non-profit as long
|
|||
|
as the source is cited. Authors hold a presumptive copyright, and
|
|||
|
they should be contacted for reprint permission. It is assumed that
|
|||
|
non-personal mail to the moderators may be reprinted unless otherwise
|
|||
|
specified. Readers are encouraged to submit reasoned articles
|
|||
|
relating to computer culture and communication. Articles are
|
|||
|
preferred to short responses. Please avoid quoting previous posts
|
|||
|
unless absolutely necessary.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
DISCLAIMER: The views represented herein do not necessarily represent
|
|||
|
the views of the moderators. Digest contributors assume all
|
|||
|
responsibility for ensuring that articles submitted do not
|
|||
|
violate copyright protections.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
----------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 1993 21:59:56 +0800 (WST)
|
|||
|
From: Stephen Hardman (Amiga files operator) <hardguy@GARION.IT.COM.AU>
|
|||
|
Subject: File 1--Bruce Sterling on ABC/Australia's Attitude (excerpts)
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
This transcript from Attitude, ABC/Australia September 8 includes the
|
|||
|
parts by Bruce Sterling and an Australian federal police officer.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Bruce Sterling (I think you all know who he is)
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
"Law enforcement officers tell me that if they break into a teenagers
|
|||
|
home and he's got a computer and a modem and a copy of William
|
|||
|
Gibsons, Neuromancer, they just know he's trouble.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
It uses a new set of topics to think about, I mean, rather than
|
|||
|
thinking about rocket ships and robots and so forth, the things of the
|
|||
|
'50s and '60s, it thinks about matters like electronic networking and
|
|||
|
the impact of high technology media and genetic engineering and that
|
|||
|
sort of thing.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
I'm enough of a anarcho-individualist in a funny kind of way to think
|
|||
|
that I probably ought to be able to make up my own mind about what I
|
|||
|
think is interesting and I really shouldn't have the government spoon
|
|||
|
feeding me the kind of information they think is healthy for me to
|
|||
|
know. There are legitimate security interests, but that's not the
|
|||
|
same thing as living under general censorship. You know, my feeling
|
|||
|
is... it's my business to find stuff out and think about things, it's
|
|||
|
my business to imagine things, it's not my business to control what
|
|||
|
other people think. And I resent it when people try to stop me from
|
|||
|
finding things out that I feel I need to know, for whatever reason.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
People are afraid of hackers because they are frightened of
|
|||
|
computers. I mean that's the real basis of the sort of gut-level
|
|||
|
superstitious fear. They're afraid of computers and they're afraid of
|
|||
|
the power of computers, that's kind of a legitimate fear, I mean,
|
|||
|
power without responsibility is a terrible thing, and, you know, there
|
|||
|
are reasons to be upset by people that are computer literate or very
|
|||
|
skilled with computers, if they have no sense of social
|
|||
|
responsibility, these people can in fact do quite a bit of harm, you
|
|||
|
know, subtle ways that are hard to detect and prosecute." [..]
|
|||
|
Detective Seargent Ken Day of the Australian Federal Police.:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
"We have the capacity if we have sufficient evidence, for example and
|
|||
|
we consider it a serious crime to arrest. We have, for example, the
|
|||
|
capacity to obtain a warrant to search someone's house. But we don't
|
|||
|
decide we can go out and do that, we must answer all our actions
|
|||
|
before a judicial body such as a court.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
It is not a game, it's a criminal act. The legislation is not
|
|||
|
enacted, not on whim, legislation isn't acted in this country after
|
|||
|
extensive and serious consultation and computer crimes were
|
|||
|
identified as being criminal activity. They are anti-social. They
|
|||
|
are morally, and they are now illegally, wrong. It is not a game.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
The infrastructure that we work in now that we live in is by and
|
|||
|
large controlled or monitored by computer technology and examples are
|
|||
|
traffic lights, telephone systems, bank. all these that we relly upon
|
|||
|
are controlled by computer networks. Remove those networks from the
|
|||
|
loop, you don't have those services. That's why we must protect it.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Some people might say, well, federal police don't know about me, I'm
|
|||
|
hacking away, they just don't know, they haven't busted my door down.
|
|||
|
Well the simple answer to that question is maybe we know about you but
|
|||
|
we're investigating more serious crimes."
|
|||
|
[..]
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
There are more comments made by the ex Australian army security man
|
|||
|
and talks to hackers <sigh/grin>.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
------------------------------
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 93 00:15:07 -0600
|
|||
|
From: "L. Detweiler" <ld231782@LONGS.LANCE.COLOSTATE.EDU>
|
|||
|
Subject: File 2--the Cyberspatial Copyright
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
((MODERATORS' NOTE: L. Detweiler is a frequent contributor to
|
|||
|
Cypherpunks mailing list, editor & writer of various FAQs, such as
|
|||
|
Identity, Privacy, and Anonymity on the Internet, and the Anonymity on
|
|||
|
the Internet FAQ Treatise. cryptography FAQ janitor. These can be
|
|||
|
obtained at rtfm.mit.edu:/pub/usenet/news.answers/net-privacy/ or
|
|||
|
net-anonymity/ or cryptography-faq/ respectively).
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
In CuD #5.75 File 3 ("Raising the Issue of Copyright on the Nets")
|
|||
|
gray@ANTAIRE.COM (Gray Watson), objecting to the inclusion of a
|
|||
|
copyrighted article, writes
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
>I don't think CUD should have allowed this. I send out a standard
|
|||
|
>message when I see such posts and it is applicable here:
|
|||
|
>
|
|||
|
> >For your information, including a significant amount of text
|
|||
|
> >from copyright publications in posts is a breach of
|
|||
|
> >copyright law. The publishing industry will *never* adopt
|
|||
|
> >digital distribution if the net does not honor the copyright
|
|||
|
> >laws.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
I have been tracking the `cyberspatial copyright issue' with a great
|
|||
|
deal of interest for some time, and Mr. Watson's complaint is pretty
|
|||
|
standard fare in the debate. Since it appears in a journal and my
|
|||
|
response might be posted, I'm taking the time to write this.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
I think Mr. Watson and everyone else who claims that digital
|
|||
|
publications will not arrive until the Net respects copyright law in
|
|||
|
its present form are fundamentally mistaken. First of all, what the
|
|||
|
heck *does* copyright law say about cyberspace? absolutely nothing
|
|||
|
specifically. There are many *interpretations* of copyright law that
|
|||
|
attempt to promote one view or another based on the current
|
|||
|
classifications of various forms and distributions, but they are all
|
|||
|
mostly nebulous. Is an FTP site a library or what? What constitutes
|
|||
|
`redistribution'?
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
It seems to me that the fundamental issues behind a copyright are one
|
|||
|
or more of the following: the author desires to (1) control the
|
|||
|
distribution of a work exclusively, (2) make money therefrom, (3)
|
|||
|
guarantee the writing is not `corrupted', i.e. it does not credit
|
|||
|
someone else and is not mixed with other people's material. In
|
|||
|
particular, if (1) can be guaranteed than (2) and (3) can be derived
|
|||
|
therefrom.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Now, suppose that future cyberspatial authors give up or sacrifice (1)
|
|||
|
if (2) and (3) are more closely adhered to. I believe most authors
|
|||
|
would prefer this system. I imagine the following scenario. An author
|
|||
|
creates the text for unlimited distribution, with an email address that
|
|||
|
indicates where `digital cash' can be sent to compensate him, including
|
|||
|
a suggested donation or whatever.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Under this scheme, the author gives up `exclusive distribution' to
|
|||
|
maximize actual dissemination and thereby exposure and potential
|
|||
|
personal profit. Under this system, the reader of the articles are
|
|||
|
required to (1) send digital cash when they have benefited from the
|
|||
|
article, where appropriate, and (2) not alter the text of an article
|
|||
|
when they redistribute it. Note that under this scheme we don't need
|
|||
|
the silly taboo that people are to be criticized for redistribution of
|
|||
|
articles -- to the contrary, they should be recognized for their
|
|||
|
selfless public service, whereby they are causing benefit to the author
|
|||
|
of the article by their efforts, with no personal profit therefrom.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
I imagine other interesting distributions systems that will arise with
|
|||
|
the advent of digital cash. For example, the email addresses of all
|
|||
|
intermediate distributors may be appended to the beginning of an
|
|||
|
article in reverse order. The original author would be free to specify
|
|||
|
the system: send me money and the distribution list that was the header
|
|||
|
of the article *you* received, and I will redistribute the money among
|
|||
|
the redistributors. We should always recognize that the ultimate author
|
|||
|
has the ultimate right to the digital cash, however, because otherwise
|
|||
|
the writing would not have existed.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
This is what might be called a `shareware copyright' for text, and I
|
|||
|
think it is an extremely workable system, and I believe it will evolve
|
|||
|
to become the norm. Certainly, some people will object to the system,
|
|||
|
but I suspect they are mostly `middlemen' in the current system that
|
|||
|
generally derive an undue profit from mere redistribution.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
However, there are systems where complete control of redistribution is
|
|||
|
desirable. For example, an author might wish to track directly every
|
|||
|
place in cyberspace his article has been received. Under this scenario,
|
|||
|
we can imagine a sort of `toll gopher' system, wherein the traversal of
|
|||
|
a hypertext link in a text system causes an automatic toll to be
|
|||
|
applied between receiver and provider. Again, digital cash forms a
|
|||
|
fundamental basis for this system. In this system, the `copyright'
|
|||
|
implies that anyone that passes on an article passes on the *address*
|
|||
|
of the hypertext location, so that the next person does not retrieve a
|
|||
|
`dissociated' article but instead accesses the `official' version.
|
|||
|
Again, people must agree not to alter digital cash addresses associated
|
|||
|
with articles. And in fact a taboo similar to that associated with
|
|||
|
redistribution in the current system will arise against `piracy' or
|
|||
|
`tampering' of the digital cash addresses.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Finally, I must note that under all these scenarios a vast, ubiquitous,
|
|||
|
and instantaneous cyberspatial infrastructure is intrinsic to the
|
|||
|
overall system. However, at the current pace, this should not be an
|
|||
|
overwhelming difficulty. It is the ultimate goal of everyone currently
|
|||
|
inhabiting Cyberspace anyway.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Under the above schemes, I imagine that future cyberspace will become
|
|||
|
extremely hospitable to all future writers and editors, who are freed
|
|||
|
to focus on the absolute essentials of their craft, unchained from
|
|||
|
burdensome and irrelevant constraints associated with costly,
|
|||
|
complicated, and imperfect distribution systems. In fact, we will find
|
|||
|
that in future cyberspace *everyone* will be seen as acting as writers
|
|||
|
and editors. It will become a fundamental aspect of cyberspatial
|
|||
|
living, recognized as natural and fundamental as word processing is
|
|||
|
today.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
------------------------------
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Date: Sun, 26 Sep 1993 22:00:32 CDT
|
|||
|
From: Ermel Stepp <M034050@MARSHALL.BITNET>
|
|||
|
Subject: File 3--Forum for Research on Virtual Culture
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
The Institute for Research on Virtual culture (IRVC) aims to foster,
|
|||
|
encourage, advance, and communicate research and scholarly inquiry on
|
|||
|
virtual culture. IRVC-L is a virtual forum of IRVC to conduct
|
|||
|
substantive discourse on research and scholarly inquiry to create and
|
|||
|
develop knowledge about virtual culture. Substantive discourse is
|
|||
|
encouraged on topics such as:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
1. Conceptualization of virtual culture (alternative
|
|||
|
philosophic, metatheoretical, and theoretical paradigms,
|
|||
|
principles, assumptions, propositions, and problems)
|
|||
|
2. Alternative futures orientation, change, transformation,
|
|||
|
reform, and restructuring: conservative, liberal, or
|
|||
|
radical
|
|||
|
3. Review and critique of literature, including articles in
|
|||
|
refereed scholarly journals
|
|||
|
4. Alternative designs and methodologies for research and
|
|||
|
scholarly inquiry on virtual culture
|
|||
|
5. Findings, conclusions and implications for education,
|
|||
|
6. Research in progress on virtual culture
|
|||
|
7. Collaborative research by subscribers
|
|||
|
8. Setting the research agenda on virtual culture
|
|||
|
9. Institute for Research on Virtual Culture
|
|||
|
10. Relevant announcements, events, and issues
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
<<< Subscription to IRVC-L >>>
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Subscription to IRVC-L is open, but the list is private and
|
|||
|
subscription is required to post messages to the forum and access
|
|||
|
listserv archives.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
To subscribe to IRVC-L send a message to
|
|||
|
listserv@byrd.mu.wvnet.edu with the line of text:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
subscribe IRVC-L Yourfirstname Yourlastname
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Example: subscribe IRVC-L Thomas Jefferson
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
<<< Sending a Message to IRVC-L >>>
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Messages sent to the forum will be automatically distributed to all
|
|||
|
subscribers. Such messages should be within the scope of the purposes
|
|||
|
of the forum: Substantive discourse of virtual culture, related
|
|||
|
research issues (e.g., design and/or methodology) relevant
|
|||
|
announcements, and other messages pertinent to the forum. To send a
|
|||
|
message to the forum, address the message to IRVC-L@byrd.mu.wvnet.edu.
|
|||
|
[Do not send a message intended for the forum to the listserv.]
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
<<< IRVC-L Archive >>>
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Messages are automatically archived in monthly digests with filenames
|
|||
|
IRVC-L.mmm.yy, where mmm is the first three letters of the month and
|
|||
|
yy last two numerals of the year. Other files will be archived as
|
|||
|
well. All messages sent to IRVC-L are archived at byrd.mu.wvnet.edu.
|
|||
|
To get an index of the archive of files and digests of messages send a
|
|||
|
message to listserv@byrd.mu.wvnet.edu with the line of text:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
index IRVC-L
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
<<< UNIX-listserver >>>
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
IRVC-L is on a unix listserver. To receive a list of commands that may
|
|||
|
be used on this listserver send a message to
|
|||
|
listserv@byrd.mu.wvnet.edu with the line of text:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
help
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Other commands may be included on separate lines in the message,
|
|||
|
such as:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
review IRVC-L (to get a list of unconcealed subscribers to IRVC-L)
|
|||
|
get IRVC-L irvc-l.aug.93 (to get the archived messages to IRVC-L
|
|||
|
for August 1993)
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
<<< Anonymous FTP Archive >>>
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
IRVC maintains archives, including research papers and
|
|||
|
reports, dissertations, conference proceedings, journals,
|
|||
|
and other information about IRVC and virtual culture.
|
|||
|
The archive may be accessed by anonymous FTP to
|
|||
|
byrd.mu.wvnet.edu in /pub/estepp/IRVC in various
|
|||
|
subdirectories. Research scholars and writers may submit
|
|||
|
documents to be archived. Retrieve file archive.submission
|
|||
|
from /pub/estepp/IRVC and follow the instructions in it.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
The _Electronic Journal on Virtual Culture_ (EJVC) is a
|
|||
|
refereed, scholarly journal published by Arachnet, with the
|
|||
|
cooperation of the Kent State University and the Institute for
|
|||
|
Research on Virtual Culture, Marshall University. The EJVC is
|
|||
|
archived at byrd.mu.wvnet.edu in /pub/ejvc, and it is retrievable
|
|||
|
via anonymous FTP. Get EJVC.ARCHIVES from the archives via FTP.
|
|||
|
Articles published in the EJVC will be discussed on IRVC-L.
|
|||
|
To subscribe to the EJVC, send email to listserv@KENTVM.BITNET
|
|||
|
or listserv@KENTVM.KENT.EDU with the sole line of text:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
subscribe EJVC Firstname Lastname
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
using your real name, of course.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
<<< Listowner >>>
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Questions about IRVC, IRVC-L, EJVC and related issues may be
|
|||
|
directed to the listowner:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Dr. Ermel Stepp
|
|||
|
Executive Director
|
|||
|
Institute for Research on Virtual Culture
|
|||
|
Marshall University
|
|||
|
Huntington WV 25755-2440
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Internet estepp@byrd.mu.wvnet.edu
|
|||
|
BITNET M034050@MARSHALL
|
|||
|
finger M034050@MARSHALL.MU.WVNET.EDU
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
------------------------------
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Date: Sun, 26 Sep 1993 14:15:38 CDT
|
|||
|
From: Susan Herring <sherring@WILEY.CSUSB.EDU>
|
|||
|
Subject: File 4--Computer-Mediated Comm Volume -- Call for Papers
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
CALL FOR CONTRIBUTORS:
|
|||
|
VOLUME ON COMPUTER-MEDIATED COMMUNICATION
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
As an outgrowth of a panel presented at the 4th International
|
|||
|
Pragmatics Conference in Kobe, Japan on "Cultural and Linguistic
|
|||
|
Aspects of Computer-Mediated Communication", a volume is being
|
|||
|
prepared for publication in the _Pragmatics goal of the volume is to
|
|||
|
bring together the best in current research on CMC as a social,
|
|||
|
cultural and linguistic phenomenon. Contributions should be
|
|||
|
empirically-oriented (that is, based on observation of actual CMC) and
|
|||
|
focused primarily on language and communication (rather than on
|
|||
|
technological aspects or secondary applications of the medium). A
|
|||
|
partial list of suggested topics is included below:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
- the linguistic description of CMC -- spoken-like?
|
|||
|
graphic representation, discourse, register, style
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
- CMC genres -- e-mail, bulletin boards (BBS), discussion
|
|||
|
lists, interactive relay chat (IRC), 'talk' modes,
|
|||
|
multi-user dungeons (MUDs), etc.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
- CMC and social interaction -- dynamics of on-line
|
|||
|
communities, politeness/rudeness, humor, harassment,
|
|||
|
computer sex
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
- CMC use by dominant and non-dominant groups -- gender,
|
|||
|
ethnicity, status, special interests
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
- CMC in countries outside the U.S.; cross-cultural CMC
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
- CMC in institutional settings -- business, government,
|
|||
|
education
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
- children's CMC
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Papers surveying a topic or reporting on a large-scale ongoing
|
|||
|
project are also welcome.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
|
|||
|
To be considered for inclusion in the volume, prospective authors
|
|||
|
should submit to the volume editor the following:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
1) A 300-500 word abstract clearly outlining the problem, data,
|
|||
|
methodology, and conclusions of the research to be reported on in the
|
|||
|
paper, and
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
2) A short biographical statement (no longer than 300 words)
|
|||
|
indicating previous CMC research and/or relevant experience. (An
|
|||
|
abridged curriculum vita may be substituted for the biographical
|
|||
|
statement.)
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Submissions can be sent via e-mail, snail-mail or fax to the volume
|
|||
|
editor, Susan Herring, at the address below:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Susan Herring
|
|||
|
Program in Linguistics
|
|||
|
University of Texas
|
|||
|
Arlington, TX 76019 USA
|
|||
|
fax: (817) 273-2731
|
|||
|
e-mail: susan@utafll.uta.edu
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
The deadline for receipt of abstracts and biographical statements is
|
|||
|
November 1, 1993. However, earlier submissions are welcomed.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
After the abstracts have been reviewed, the author of each abstract
|
|||
|
selected will be issued an invitation to contribute a full-length
|
|||
|
article to the volume, along with a set of guidelines for its
|
|||
|
preparation. The tentative deadline for the receipt of completed
|
|||
|
camera-ready manuscripts will be February 1, 1994, with an anticipated
|
|||
|
publication date early in 1995.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Feel free to address any questions, comments, or suggestions to
|
|||
|
Susan Herring (susan@utafll.uta.edu).
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
------------------------------
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 93 23:53:38 PDT
|
|||
|
From: jkreznar@ININX.COM(John E. Kreznar)
|
|||
|
Subject: File 5--Question EFF yielding of crypto authority to NIST
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
> Below is the text of the comments that EFF filed with NIST today.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
> ...
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
> When the Clinton Administration announced the Clipper Chip, it
|
|||
|
> assured the public that this would be a purely voluntary system. We must
|
|||
|
> have legal guarantees that Clipper is not the first step toward prohibition
|
|||
|
> against un-escrowed encryption. Yet the Administration has not offered any
|
|||
|
> such guarantees, either in the form of proposed legislation or even agency
|
|||
|
> rules.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
> ...
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Actually, they have issued such legal guarantees. They're in the form
|
|||
|
of the administration's vow to uphold the US Constitution. That
|
|||
|
document's 9th and 10th amendments preclude US Government denial or
|
|||
|
disparagement of the people's right to use cryptography (and a whole
|
|||
|
lot of others). The fact that these legal guarantees are being
|
|||
|
ignored simply illustrates that their tyranny is unbridled.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
By engaging NIST on this subject, the EFF is implicitly yielding to
|
|||
|
them authority which is not theirs to begin with.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
------------------------------
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 1993 06:50:04 GMT
|
|||
|
From: hugh@GARGOYLE.UCHICAGO.EDU(Hugh Miller)
|
|||
|
Subject: File 6--PGP/Zimmermann News Clippings Needed!
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
((MODERATORS' NOTE: Hugh Miller's request for reprints of articles
|
|||
|
related to PGP/Phil Zimmermann is one way everybody can help. Peruse
|
|||
|
your local papers and if you find anything, you can send him the
|
|||
|
pointers and he can take it from there)).
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
I am interested in collecting all citations in newspapers,
|
|||
|
magazines, etc. of the subpoenas and investigation by Customs of Phil
|
|||
|
Zimmermann. To that end I'd like to ask readers of CUD to help me
|
|||
|
out. If you spot an article would you please take a moment to jot
|
|||
|
down the citation (author, title, publication, vol/issue, date, page
|
|||
|
numbers)? You don't need to type in the article, but blessings on
|
|||
|
your head if you do. I will conduct a weekly NEXIS scan anyway, but
|
|||
|
I'm sure I'll miss something. I will collect the stuff and pass it on
|
|||
|
to Phil and the legal defense team.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Thanks, folks. Send the info to ME, not to Phil, whose bank
|
|||
|
account is empty but whose e-mailbox is packed. You can mail to me
|
|||
|
here (Hugh@gargoyle.uchicago.edu) but it will just be automatically
|
|||
|
forwarded to my true address, hmiller@orion.it.luc.edu.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Thanks for your help. And give to Phil's legal defense fund.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
------------------------------
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1993 16:15:42 -0400
|
|||
|
From: ssimpson@EFF.ORG(Sarah L Simpson)
|
|||
|
Subject: File 7--EFF's Comments to NIST on Encryption/Escrow
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
I'm happy to say that there were 225 letters offering comments on the
|
|||
|
proposed key escrow system sent to the cryptnow@eff.org address. They
|
|||
|
were printed out and delivered today.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Many thanks to all who responded to the call for action. I've gotten
|
|||
|
really positive responses to the post and our electronic mail
|
|||
|
mechanism. If you think that this sort of notice helped you to be
|
|||
|
informed and participate in policy, please drop me a note at
|
|||
|
ssimpson@eff.org. Let me know if you think that this is an important
|
|||
|
service that EFF can provide for the online community.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Below is the text of the comments that EFF filed with NIST today.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
================================
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
September 27, 1993
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
National Institute for Standards and Technology
|
|||
|
ATTN: Proposed FIPS for Escrowed Encryption Standard
|
|||
|
Technology Building, Room B-154
|
|||
|
Gaithersburg, MD 20899
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
To The Director:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) writes in strong
|
|||
|
opposition to the Proposed Federal Information Processing Standard
|
|||
|
(FIPS) for an Escrowed Encryption Standard, docket # 930659-3159. We
|
|||
|
believe that NIST's guidance in setting technical standards for
|
|||
|
security and privacy protection is a critical part of the growth of
|
|||
|
the National Information Infrastructure, but any action on the
|
|||
|
proposed escrow technical standards must await the resolution of
|
|||
|
several fundamental policy issues. Thus, at this time, we oppose the
|
|||
|
proposed FIPS in all of its parts. Well over 200 EFF members are also
|
|||
|
critical of the Proposed FIPS. We believe this demonstrates the depth
|
|||
|
of public concern about the implementation of key escrow systems.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
EFF is a nonprofit, public interest organization whose public
|
|||
|
policy mission is to ensure that the new electronic highways emerging
|
|||
|
from the convergence of telephone, cable, broadcast, and other
|
|||
|
communications technologies enhance free speech and privacy rights and
|
|||
|
are open and accessible to all segments of society.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Introduction
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Widespread, affordable cryptography is vital for the
|
|||
|
protection of individual privacy in the Information Age. As more and
|
|||
|
more personal information flows around electronic networks, we all
|
|||
|
need strong encryption to safeguard information from unwanted
|
|||
|
intrusion. Personal information, such as health care records, private
|
|||
|
communications among friends and families, and personal financial
|
|||
|
transactions, will also travel over this information infrastructure.
|
|||
|
The business community can only make full use of the infrastructure if
|
|||
|
it is assured that the data it transmits is secure from unauthorized
|
|||
|
interception. In short, if communications in the new infrastructure
|
|||
|
are vulnerable, all of our lives and businesses would be subject to
|
|||
|
both damaging and costly privacy and security losses.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Resolve Policy Issues and Objectives Before Promulgating Technical Standards
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
EFF has been in ongoing dialogue with NIST, the White House,
|
|||
|
and Congress regarding the very complex public policy choices raised
|
|||
|
by cryptography policy. We are hopeful that this dialogue will result
|
|||
|
in a positive, comprehensive set of cryptography and privacy policies.
|
|||
|
But until these issues are resolved, we believe any approval of
|
|||
|
technical standards is premature. Among the public policy issues to
|
|||
|
be resolved are the following:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
1. Guaranteed Continued Legal Use of All Forms of Encryption
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
When the Clinton Administration announced the Clipper Chip, it
|
|||
|
assured the public that this would be a purely voluntary system. We
|
|||
|
must have legal guarantees that Clipper is not the first step toward
|
|||
|
prohibition against un-escrowed encryption. Yet the Administration
|
|||
|
has not offered any such guarantees, either in the form of proposed
|
|||
|
legislation or even agency rules.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
2. Identity of Escrow Agents
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
When Clipper was first proposed, some in the Administration
|
|||
|
suggested that one of the two escrow agents would be a government
|
|||
|
agency and the other a private, non-governmental organization. Now it
|
|||
|
appears that plans for a private escrow agent have been dropped in
|
|||
|
favor of NIST and the Department of Treasury, though there is still no
|
|||
|
final designation of agents. We are unable to comment on the security
|
|||
|
or reliability of escrow procedures proposed here when we do not know
|
|||
|
who will be administering the escrow databases. We also note that
|
|||
|
there is active consideration of having more than two escrow agents.
|
|||
|
This option should be explored from a policy perspective before a
|
|||
|
technical standard is adopted.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
3. Legal Rights of Escrow Users
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
If individuals do choose to deposit their keys with the
|
|||
|
government, or any other escrow agent, they must have some legal
|
|||
|
recourse in the event that those keys are improperly released.
|
|||
|
However, the most recent draft of escrow procedures specifically
|
|||
|
states:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
"These procedures do not create, and are not intended to create, any
|
|||
|
substantive rights for individuals intercepted through electronic
|
|||
|
surveillance, and noncompliance with these procedures shall not
|
|||
|
provide the basis for any motion to suppress or other objection to the
|
|||
|
introduction of electronic surveillance evidence lawfully acquired."
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Leaving users with no recourse will discourage use of the system and
|
|||
|
provides little disincentive against unscrupulous government behavior.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
In the Proposed FIPS, NIST also suggests an unusual and, we
|
|||
|
believe, incorrect notion of what an escrow agent is. The Proposed
|
|||
|
FIPS adopts the incomplete definition of an escrow system found in
|
|||
|
Webster's Dictionary. The Proposed FIPS states:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
To escrow something (e.g., a document, an encryption key) means that
|
|||
|
it is "delivered to a third person to be given to the grantee only
|
|||
|
upon the fulfillment of a condition." (Webster's Seventh New
|
|||
|
Collegiate Dictionary).
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
This definition omits the very basic notion that an escrow agent has
|
|||
|
responsibilities to those who deposit things of value in the escrow
|
|||
|
account. Black's Law Dictionary, which we believe may be a more
|
|||
|
appropriate source of information about escrow relationships, states
|
|||
|
that an escrow contract is an:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Agreement between buyer, seller, and escrow holder setting forth
|
|||
|
rights and responsibilities of each.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
It is the general legal rule that one who deposits value with an
|
|||
|
escrow agent is entitled to recover damages from the escrow agent in
|
|||
|
the event of a breach of the agent's duty of care:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Depositor is entitled to recover damages sustained because of escrow
|
|||
|
agent's unwarranted act, and where grantee participates in wrongful
|
|||
|
delivery he also may be liable, but recovery is limited to damages
|
|||
|
actually attributable to wrongful delivery. Collier v Smith (Mo App)
|
|||
|
308 SW2d 779. (See ANNOTATION: Who must bear loss resulting from
|
|||
|
defaults or peculations of escrow holder. 15 A.L.R.2d 870.)
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
The notion of an escrow agent who is insulated from all liability to
|
|||
|
the depositor is wholly alien to American law and custom. The
|
|||
|
government may, of course, seek to establish escrow agents free of
|
|||
|
legal liability, but this is fundamentally a policy choice, not a
|
|||
|
matter of technical standards.
|
|||
|
Until there is some agreement on the real responsibilities of the
|
|||
|
escrow agents, NIST is not in a position to set technical and
|
|||
|
operating standards.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
4. Open, Trusted Standards:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
A key goal of the Clipper Proposal is to promote widespread
|
|||
|
encryption in the marketplace. Yet people will not use encryption
|
|||
|
unless they trust it. Secret standards such as Clipper cannot be
|
|||
|
evaluated by independent experts and do not deserve the public trust.
|
|||
|
Other parties, including Whitfield Diffie of Sun Microsystems, have
|
|||
|
commented extensively on this issue. EFF fully subscribes to those
|
|||
|
remarks.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Insufficient Technical and Operating Information Available for
|
|||
|
Comments
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Even aside from the major policy issues left unanswered, the
|
|||
|
Proposed FIPS itself lacks the detail necessary to allow full public
|
|||
|
comment. First, the full operating procedures for the escrow agents
|
|||
|
has yet to be issued. Public comment must be sought on the complete
|
|||
|
procedures, not just the outline presented in the draft FIPS. Even
|
|||
|
the government-selected algorithm review group has declared that it
|
|||
|
needs more information on the escrow process. Second, asking for
|
|||
|
comments on an algorithm that is classified makes a mockery of citizen
|
|||
|
participation in government decision-making.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Action on the Proposed FIPS Must Be Delayed to Allow Completion of
|
|||
|
Public-Private Consultation Mandated by Presidential Decision
|
|||
|
Directive
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
President Clinton's announcement of the Clipper initiative
|
|||
|
made very clear that there should be "early and frequent consultations
|
|||
|
with affected industries, the Congress and groups that advocate the
|
|||
|
privacy rights of individuals as policy options are developed" (April
|
|||
|
16, 1993 Press Statement). EFF and other organizations have invested
|
|||
|
significant effort in dialogue and policy review with the
|
|||
|
Administration. We have made some progress, but many issues remain
|
|||
|
unresolved. EFF believes that for NIST to rush forward with a FIPS in
|
|||
|
advance of resolving the fundamental policy issues cited above would
|
|||
|
prematurely curtail the dialogue that the President ordered.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Finally, NIST will be involved in making many critical
|
|||
|
decisions regarding the National Information Infrastructure. The next
|
|||
|
time NIST solicits public comments, it should be ready to accept reply
|
|||
|
by electronic mail in addition to paper-based media. Over 200 of
|
|||
|
EFF's members e-mailed comments to our offices, which we then printed
|
|||
|
and hand-delivered to NIST. We hope that in the near future, NIST and
|
|||
|
other federal agencies will be prepared to accept comments directly
|
|||
|
via the Internet.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Respectfully Submitted,
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Jerry J. Berman
|
|||
|
Daniel J. Weitzner
|
|||
|
Executive Director
|
|||
|
Senior Staff Counsel
|
|||
|
******************************
|
|||
|
Sarah L. Simpson
|
|||
|
Membership Coordinator
|
|||
|
Electronic Frontier Foundation
|
|||
|
1001 G Street, NW
|
|||
|
Suite 950 East
|
|||
|
Washington, DC 20001
|
|||
|
202/347-5400 tel
|
|||
|
202/393-5509 fax
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
------------------------------
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 93 11:56:57 EDT
|
|||
|
From: Jerry Leichter <leichter@LRW.COM>
|
|||
|
Subject: File 8--Three Cheers for Legal Action; Re: Moby Crypto
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
In all the concern about the grand jury subpoenas to ViaCrypt and
|
|||
|
Austin CodeWorks, a very important point is being missed: This is the
|
|||
|
way the law is *supposed* to work! The law is not supposed to work by
|
|||
|
FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt), by poorly drafted regulations whose
|
|||
|
coverage no one can determine, by threats and insinuations from
|
|||
|
government spokesmen that some action is illegal (though no one's ever
|
|||
|
taken it to court so no one can really say yes or no). That's exactly
|
|||
|
what "casts a chill" over people's actions: When they can't determine
|
|||
|
what the law says or what its limits are, so that they are forced to
|
|||
|
stay away from entire areas of activity that may not be illegal and
|
|||
|
may even be Constitutionally protected.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Our system of law has many "inconvenient" little features to it.
|
|||
|
People who are clearly guilty avoid punishment every day because of
|
|||
|
errors by the prosecution or simply because the evidence against them
|
|||
|
as it is accepted by the courts is not quite at a high enough level.
|
|||
|
We accept that because "it's better that a hundred guilty men go free
|
|||
|
than that one innocent man be pun-ished." Conversely, the law is
|
|||
|
what's on the books until the courts say otherwise. The concurrence of
|
|||
|
every single law professor in the United States that some statute is
|
|||
|
unconstitutional means nothing until the Supreme Court rules. The
|
|||
|
ITAR regulations are presumptively valid until found otherwise by a
|
|||
|
competent court of law. Since they can only be examined by a court
|
|||
|
when the government actually tries to use them, they can remain on the
|
|||
|
books indefinitely as a looming threat - constitutional or not, a
|
|||
|
prosecution under these regulations is expensive to defend against, so
|
|||
|
expensive that most people and all large corporations will simply act
|
|||
|
as if they are valid. This may be as "inconvenient" in some cases as
|
|||
|
letting murderers go free, but it's just as essential a part of the
|
|||
|
legal system.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
While I don't envy Phil Zimmerman or ViaCrypt or Austin CodeWorks the
|
|||
|
position they find themselves in, or the legal bills they will be
|
|||
|
facing, they went into this with open eyes. (If they didn't, they are
|
|||
|
fools who won't get my sympathy.) The only way to challenge a law you
|
|||
|
think is unconstitutional is to violate it and let the government come
|
|||
|
to you. I wish them luck in their challenge. One way or another, we
|
|||
|
are likely to finally end the silly debates about secret decoder rings
|
|||
|
and decide what the law is.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
As for Grady Ward's call on everyone to secrete away and widely
|
|||
|
distribute copies of PGP and related software: All I can say is, he'd
|
|||
|
better hope that the courts don't decide that the ITAR regulations
|
|||
|
aren't constitutional as applied to PGP after all. Calling on people
|
|||
|
to break the law, especially cooperating with them to do it on a large
|
|||
|
scale, could open him up to much more severe penalties than Zimmerman,
|
|||
|
ViaCrypt, and Austin face. Those three are testing the law. Ward is
|
|||
|
deliberately flaunting it. Stupid, dangerous idea. Being a
|
|||
|
revolutionary, putting yourself in direct opposition to the power of
|
|||
|
the State, isn't fun and games. People get hurt that way.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
------------------------------
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Subject: File 9--PumpCon II
|
|||
|
From: pumpcon@PHANTOM.COM(PumpCon)
|
|||
|
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 93 13:41:15 EDT
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
You are hereby cordially invited to attend the Second Annual PumpCon II
|
|||
|
conference. Just mail your name/handle, group (if any), home state to:
|
|||
|
pumpcon@phantom.com
|
|||
|
It is necessary that you do mail this account so we know you are coming!
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
PumpCon FAQs (Frequently Asked Questions)
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
This file is being written in response to all of the questions that I
|
|||
|
have been bombarded with. Hopefully it will clear up any confusions
|
|||
|
that obviously must exist.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
1. When is PumpCon?
|
|||
|
PumpCon II will be held Halloween Weekend 1993, October 29, 30, 31.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
2. Where is PumpCon?
|
|||
|
PumpCon II will be at the Airport Comfort Inn, in Filadelfia,
|
|||
|
Pencilvania. Get the PumpCon information file for further details.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
3. Can I bring my computer?
|
|||
|
Of course you can bring your computer (Computers are not illegal!),
|
|||
|
until such time as owning/possessing a computer is illegal.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
4. How much are hotel rooms?
|
|||
|
Hotel rooms range from around $50/night to $100/night in the hotels
|
|||
|
that have been selected for this years PumpCon. The PumpCon
|
|||
|
information file gives further details about the hotels.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
5. Who is going?
|
|||
|
This is a question that really can't be answered until PumpCon.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
6. Who is going to speak?
|
|||
|
This is also going to remain sekret until the event for security reasons.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
7. Why go to PumpCon?
|
|||
|
I don't know, if you asked or even thought of that question, don't
|
|||
|
bother to show. You obviously can't add to the conference.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
8. What should I bring?
|
|||
|
Why/How should I know, again to ask such a question shows you
|
|||
|
obviously aren't needed.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
9. Is Law Enforcement going to be there?
|
|||
|
This answer is not known at this time, but they are welcome, with an
|
|||
|
admittance fee double that of civilian attendees.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
10. Is there going to be alcohol/drugs?
|
|||
|
These substances will not be provided by the conference or any of the
|
|||
|
organizers, does that answer your question?
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
PumpCon II
|
|||
|
-- The Woodstock of Computer Conferences --
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
WHO: Anyone interested in the Computer Underground except IIRG Members :OHW
|
|||
|
WHAT: A weekend of Telephony & Computer Seminars, and PARTYING! :TAHW
|
|||
|
WHEN: October 29, 30, and 31 (Fri, Sat, Sun) Halloween Weekend 1993 :NEHW
|
|||
|
WHY: To meet all of those people you have spoken to, but never met. :YHW
|
|||
|
WHERE: Airport Comfort Inn, Filadelfia, Pencilvania :EREHW
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
DESCRIPTION
|
|||
|
A gathering of computer enthusiasts for a weekend of FUN! Guest
|
|||
|
speakers will also be present to speak about the latest in computer
|
|||
|
security developments.
|
|||
|
Come join us for our second annual Halloween Party.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
COST Your $20.00 admission fee
|
|||
|
will cover all of the conference functions and a name badge with your
|
|||
|
Handle, Group Affiliation, and home state. This is a non-profit
|
|||
|
conference, any proceeds above the conference costs will be used to
|
|||
|
help the
|
|||
|
victims of last years conference.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
HOW TO GET THERE
|
|||
|
The convention will be located just 3 miles from the Philadelphia
|
|||
|
International Airport at the Airport Comfort Inn. Two other hotels
|
|||
|
are available within the
|
|||
|
same area.
|
|||
|
Knights Inn Red Roof Inn Comfort Inn
|
|||
|
43 Industrial Highway 49 Industrial Highway 53 Industrial Highway
|
|||
|
Essington, PA 19029 Essington, PA 19029 Essington, PA 19029
|
|||
|
Phone: (215) 521-6650 Phone: (215) 521-5090 Phone: (215) 521-9800
|
|||
|
Fax : (215) 521-8846 Fax : Ext. 444 Fax : (215) 521-4847
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
I-95 North or South
|
|||
|
The hotels are located off I-95 exit 9A on Route 291 (Industrial Highway).
|
|||
|
From north or south at the traffic signal turn right and continue for about
|
|||
|
500 yards, the hotels are on the right side of the road.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Airport
|
|||
|
There is a FREE shuttle available to all of the hotels.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
FOR MORE INFORMATION
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Mail:
|
|||
|
PumpCon II
|
|||
|
P.O. Box 617
|
|||
|
Plantsville, CT 06479
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
E-Mail:
|
|||
|
pumpcon@mindvox.phantom.com
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
------------------------------
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
End of Computer Underground Digest #5.76
|
|||
|
************************************
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|