Copyright 1997 Pearl Publishing
Subject: Freedom of Encryption: Is it SAFE?
From: "Michael Pierson" <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
There has been much discussion recently concerning how to fix
certain flaws, or block various amendments in encryption
legislation being shepherded through Congress. A far more
fundamental problem with these legislative efforts from the
beginning was that they involved an implicit concession to the
idea that a U.S. citizen's freedom to privately exchange
information in whatever coding scheme he or she might choose
required some kind of government affirmation or ratification as
validation. Once one seeks for the government's deigning to
"affirm the rights of United States persons to use and sell
encryption", it can (and does) then easily proceed to attach
conditions and caveats to these "affirmed" rights.
In the
process the surveillance hawks within the government have
managed, with hardly any struggle, to advance the appearance of
legitimacy for their claims of authority to regulate this form
of
expression.
Now comes an expectation that the nature of these "affirmed
rights" should be tailored to address "the concerns
of national
security and the federal law enforcement community." This
same
community has on occasion complained about how their efforts to
fight organized crime and terrorism are being thwarted by not
having the modern newspeak disguised equivalent of "Writs
of
Assistance" (and they are arguably making progress toward
acquiring just such powers IMO). Very few politicians are
willing to commit the heresy of clearly and staunchly asserting
that the information coding methods used by citizens are under
no obligation to pass any litmus test, or to be subject to any
kind of prior approval or restraint determined by criteria of
the law enforcement establishment or anyone else. If the Feds
lament that this will make their job harder, too bad. In the
words of Orson Welles: "Only in a police state is the job
of a
policeman easy."
When these various legislative efforts attempted to reach beyond
the issues of export restrictions to address those of domestic
use, they became a doubtful and dangerous fix to something that
wasn't broke in the first place. If the Government is intent
on
"abridging the freedom" to use strong encryption domestically,
a
legislative affirmation of these rights is feeble comfort at
best. If I'm seeking to protect my possessions, I don't ask a
thief to affirm my property rights.
Of course, even the export question is really about the aims of
the state's surveillance constituency to obstruct the wide
deployment of strong encryption domestically, and its
interoperability on the internet as a whole. Challenging the
derisible bogosity of the "preventing the Evil Ones from
acquiring this technology" rationale that is invoked to justify
these restrictions was not something legislation was likely to
do
with any great vigor. Legislation to "relax" these
restrictions
involves lending credence to the dubious assumption that these
restrictions had any constitutional validity to begin with.
Any bill that would have truly provided for the statutory
endorsement of the acceptably uncompromised use of strong
encryption never really had much more than a snowball's chance
in
hell of actually being signed into law given the current
political balance of power, did it? Far more likely, was that
it
could be corrupted and hijacked as a vehicle to further the very
type of restrictions it was purportedly intended to relieve.
A
collateral consequence is an increased arrogance and presumption
among lawmakers that it is their prerogative to act to define
for
us citizens, what freedoms for domestic use of encryption we
should be permitted. The growing gallery of GAK amendments and
competing legislative proposals now emerging appears to support
this sad scenario.
It's starting to look like the prospects for meaningfully
improving the situation with encryption legislation in the
current political environment were about as promising as the
prospects of a neophyte gambler coming out ahead at a crooked
casino. I expect any apparent winnings in the end will come with
a catch between the lines in the fine print, if they come at all.
In any case, whatever is legislatively affirmed can later be
legislatively denied. What a King presumes is his to grant, he
usually presumes is his to revoke as well.
In the end, what will have really been gained by this legislative
venture, and what will have been explicitly or implicitly
surrendered? As I see it, at this point the issue isn't about
counting wins, it's about cutting losses.
Freedom of encryption.... Is it SAFE? I don't think so.
-Michael
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: noconv
iQCVAwUBNDVks9GJlWF+GPx9AQGctwQAlE+SKB3/rqG7kz3qdcF2I5eBedz3/DDK
f5Vg0Zd8PbhowwT9gWAvyt+ysIZCqRJWMu3vPmWP2iN2ZghLaiGRVv8piXhyUQYl
rhv/rOz1Yc1raJbU5Wk+9Qr9zxQqxHZiAk1G0Irye4yDfi72ar8ndD5CqUegBnaF
QAoyFGtiJZ4=
=2zJO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Subject: DejaVu: Cypherpunks as Philosopher Kings
From: "Attila T. Hun" <[email protected]>
Reply-To: "Attila T. Hun" <[email protected]>
Organization: home for unpenitent hackers; no crackers!
To: "Timothy C. May" <[email protected]>, cypherpunks
<[email protected]>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
ten months ago: on or about 961218:1123
"Timothy C. May" <[email protected]> purported
to expostulate:
+_Direct action_ is what it's all about. Undermining the state
through
+the spread of espionage networks, through undermining faith in
the tax
+system, through even more direct applications of the right tools
at the
+right times.
+
+When Cypherpunks are called "terrorists," we will have
done our jobs.
[Tim] said this before Christmas last year as an erudite and
lengthy
addendum to my lengthy tome: "Cypherpunks as Philosophy
Kings"
that pretty well summed our generally mutually agreed "philosophy".
both were and still are worth reading; anybody who does not
have
copies, ask.
but cypherpunk terrorists are not violent; this is all about
making
information free and protecting privacy with technology.
despite the fact the Commerce Committee effectively killed
SAFE
(or we think they did until Oxley tries to tack his amendment
structure on an appropriations bill in a house-senate conference
or
"manager's mark" procedure (whatever that is)),
we can not drop the
due diligence, and the public must be aroused, called to battle.
even if there is no action, prepare for the next fire drill.
sow the
seeds of dissension.
seems to me we were sure the CDA was dead --except it slipped
in with
a manager's mark after the house voted almost unanimously
the other
way (402-12 or something like that). the capitol hill sleaze
took a grand slam NO and reported an even worse yes, making
it part
of a major bill that absolutely was going to pass --and they
have the gall to call that travesty democracy? Teddy Roosevelt:
"It is difficult to make our material condition better
by the
best law, but it is easy enough to ruin it by bad laws."
Tim's message for Christmas last was the prophetic call for
direct
action; legal action; empowerment action: Robert H. Jackson
(1892-1954), U.S. Judge:
"It is not the function of our Government to keep
the citizen
from falling into error; it is the function of the citizen
to
keep the Government from falling into error."
the sleazeball, who intends to make J Edgar look like a piker
at
surveillance, has the gleam of unabridged power in his eyes.
Louis
F[reeh,uck] is charming, even disarming, as he tells a Congressional
committee:
"We are potentially the most dangerous agency in
the
country if we are not scrutinized carefully." (Jun
'97)
meaning the FBI will be the most powerful [feared] federal
agency?
really? I thought it was already, although the DEA and BATF
have
worked hard for the title, too.
Supreme Justice Louis O. Brandeis said:
"The greatest danger to liberty lurks in insidious
encroachment
by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding."
and the [London] Electronic Telegraph, on Sunday's front page:
Mr. Freeh has won $370 million (ú230 million) of
funding for 2,000 new posts, boosted the number of
active agents to more than 11,000, and expanded
open-ended "domestic security operations" from
100 in
1995 to more than 800. Twenty-three new FBI offices
are opening abroad.
and more:
But none of this will contain the director's ambitions
or his power. He is now believed to be eyeing two
other "secret police" forces - the Drug Enforcement
Agency and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms
- with a long-term view to a takeover.
F[reeh,uck] holds the key to the Clinton's' ambitions; the
Clintons
cite the Roosevelts as their mentors; Hillary even communes
with the
long dead Eleanor. Bubba's stated goals included extending
FDR's
"chicken in every pot" --he's just appeasing the
crowd now.
Leopards do not change their spots, but Bubba has shifted
to the
right with public opinion; he is just like the leopard: playing
with
his food until sufficient presidential powers have been accumulated
by the default of Congress and the people.
But, the INFORMATION REVOLUTION now stands in way of the Clinton
plans; the Internet can destroy the media control now exercised
by
the acquiescence of the five Jewish media barons. In fact,
it is
destroying their monopoly.
Why does F[reeh,uck] hold the key? Because his job is to
sell the
Congress on strangling the information revolution before it
destroys
truthless governments F[reeh,uck]'s masters understand and
control.
Franklin D. Roosevelt was inaugurated on 4 Mar 33 stating:
"I am prepared under my constitutional duty to
recommend the measures that a stricken nation in the
midst of a stricken world may require. These
measures, or such other measures as the Congress may
build out of its experience and wisdom, I shall
seek, within my constitutional authority, to bring
to speedy adoption. But in the event that the
Congress shall fall to take one of these two
courses, and in the event that the national
emergency is still critical, I shall not evade the
clear course of duty that will then confront me. I
shall ask the Congress for the one remaining
instrument to meet the crisis broad Executive power
to wage a war against the emergency, as great as the
power that would be given to me if we were in fact
invaded by a foreign foe."
and, on 9 Mar 33, 5 days later, FDR extracted from an uniformed
and essentially special session of Congress:
"Be it enacted by the Senate and the House of Representatives
of
the United States of America in Congress assembled, That
the
Congress hereby declares that a serious emergency exists
and
that it is imperatively necessary speedily to put into
effect
remedies of uniform national application."
which was based on the War Powers Act (trading with the Enemy)
of
1917 which was hastily revised to include US Citizens which
had been
exempted. Next, FDR "franchised" the banks, "licensed"
agriculture
and so on. But, to render the citizens powerless and to confiscate
all assets so the national state was the ultimate owner, and
therefore able to pledge the people for credit to the international
bankers, the fundamental monetary system changed:
"Whenever in the judgment of the Secretary of the
Treasury, such action is necessary to protect the
currency system of the United States, the Secretary
of the Treasury, in his discretion, may require any
or all individuals, partnerships, associations and
corporations to pay and deliver to the Treasurer
of the United States any or all gold coin, gold
bullion, and gold certificates owned by such
individuals, partnerships, associations and
corporations."
which closed the loop and made every US citizen chattel as
FDR
pledged the good faith and credit of the United States to
the
international bankers --in return, an unbelievable flood of
credit
was available since the good faith and credit of the United
States
is "We the People...." but FDR sold us downstream
into a debt
financed economy from which there is no escape; we are still
there,
the debt service is destroying any permanent economy AND total
collapse under the debt load is bequeathed to our children.
Congress repealed FDR's rubber stamp for the "President"
in 1973,
but the War Powers Act remains, still modified to treat US
citizens as the enemy. and the power of the "President"
to make
those regulations, and the automatic approval are enshrined
for
current and future Presidents in Title 12 USC 95(b)
"The actions, regulations, rules, licenses, orders
and
proclamations heretofore or hereafter taken, promulgated,
made,
or issued by the President of the United States or the
Secretary
of the Treasury since March the 4th, 1933, pursuant to
the
authority conferred by subdivision (b) of Section 5 of
the Act
of October 6, 1917, as amended, are hereby approved and
confirmed."
The real issue is the President and the fat cat power brokers
can
get away with these shenanigans __as_long_as_the_people_let_them__.
We are still under the Rule of Necessity. We are still in
a declared
state of national emergency, a state of emergency which has
existed,
uninterrupted, since 1933.
FDR's licensing agencies were rather trivial in number; today
there
are thousands of them, many with their own administrative
courts.
FDR took away our common law when he bankrupted America, which
is a
national corporation under the Hague convention (courtesy
of Stanton
and Seward after the Civil War). Bankruptcy is a contract,
and
we are the bait, subject to that court, which is in effect
an
Admiralty court, and we are "licensed" to literally
exist by FDR's
Social Security Number schema. and every courtroom now flies
the
fringed Admiralty flag where habeas corpus is a privilege,
not a
right, if it exists at all.
This is the importance of Louis F[reeh,uck]. He, and Janet
Reno as
the DOJ rubber stamp, are holding the collar for your neck.
They
are selling it to you little by little, or even all at once.
Why Louis F[reeh,uck]? Madison Avenue style with credentials;
he
can sell the program. F[reeh,uck] is the front man, the schill.
Machiavelli, in his "Discourses of Livy," acknowledged
that great
power may have to be given to the Executive if the State is
to
survive, but warned of great dangers in doing so. He cautioned:
Nor is it sufficient if this power be conferred
upon good men; for men are frail, and easily
corrupted, and then in a short time, he that is
absolute may easily corrupt the people."
sleazeball's comments are scarfed by Congress, sleazeball's
candor
rocks their cradles, sleazeball shows them private morality
plays
about a populace running wild with crypto-anarchy, running
wild
to burn out the offices of central power... in other words:
is it not odd that the more the government tries to abridge
our free
speech rights, the more they want to confiscate our weapons?
free speech is a weapon of democracy!
privacy is a weapon of democracy!
cryptography is a weapon of democracy!
We are not fighting with guns and explosives this time, armed
insurrection against the power of the Federal government is
suicidal --we are fighting for our lives and the right to
live our
lives with words: the ability to hear those words _before_
government censors and spin doctors render them useless lies.
Bubba can not win a war of truth and information; we can/
The Marquis de Sade:
Are not laws dangerous which inhibit the passions?
Compare the centuries of anarchy with those of the
strongest legalism in any country you like and you will
see that it is only when the laws are silent that the
greatest actions appear.
however, anarchy is the key word that ignites even the ACLU
against
your cause; it even makes bedfellows of Pat Buchanann and
the
homosexual/priest/congressman from Massachusetts...
pure anarchy, by definition, does not work, anyway. forget
it. get
the concept out of your systems as it inflames everyone and
all
other reason is lost in the screaming and police batons.
Even Teddy Roosevelt called for the complete extermination
of
anarchists, to be hunted like vermin. give it up; or go to
your
private island and fly your rattlesnake flag. even Anguilla
will not
tolerate anarchists.
just give us our REAL constitutional rights as Franklin, Madison,
Jefferson, Adams, and friends intended; give us constitutionalists
on the Supreme Court, not bleeding hearts, statists, and central
power freaks. get the Feds out of cradle to grave big government
and
let the people determine their religion and morality.
give us freedom of speech, freedom to bear arms, freedom from
unreasonable searches, freedom not to incriminate ourselves,
and
repeal the 14th Amendment so we can have states' rights again.
if our Constitution were permitted to govern as it was intended,
and
the states obeyed the precepts endowed to not further limit
the
rights of the people, America would be the home of the free,
not big
government, not freeloaders and the welfare state; not the
leftovers
of a once great nation.
give us the rights Abraham Lincoln cherished lovingly:
"Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for
themselves."
let _them_, not me, live the downside.
George Washington, in his farewell address, warned:
"... change by usurpation; for through this,
in one instance, may be the instrument of good,
it is the customary weapon by which free
governments are destroyed."
cypherpunk philosopher kings: pick up your picks and shovels,
get
your hands dirty, and start digging in; it's going to be a
long and
difficult campaign and the tactics needed to expose F[reeh,uck]'s
true intentions as the schill for the Clintons who are schills
for the elitist leading the destruction of American democracy.
The Congressional compromise love match season isn't over
yet; the
schmoozers and lobbyists, like so many furry rats, still wander
the
dark halls and tunnels looking for the last, late in the season,
clandestine and obscene fuck. any whore will do.
lobbyists have long reputations for selling out the interests
of
their paymasters; the lobbyists are so much a part of the
Washington
culture that they have _no_ morality or moral position --it
is all
about who they can claim to have influenced --what difference
does
it make if it is contrary to the client --the art of the deal,
protect their own position and find newer, richer clients
--whores!
logrolling and porkbarrel voting --but never go home without
a deal;
used car salesmanship: get your man.
I can hear the lobbyists whining now as they are called on
the
carpet:
"aw, come on Mac, we got you a compromise from LEA
demands..."
never realizing that there is such an action as NO bill, they
sell
out half our rights blocking legislation which would never
happen.
they claim they got back half. what half? --some unknown half
that
we _never_ lost! that is why:
The 10 Commandments contain 297 words. The Bill of Rights
is
stated in 463 words. Lincoln's Gettysburg Address contains
266
words; and:
A recent federal directive to regulate the price of cabbage
contains 26,911 words. (The Atlanta Journal)
send the quisling Neville Chamberlains to the gas chambers!
the public needs to be educated, not in crypto, but in the
horrors of
an oligarchy which intends to destroy the fundamental freedoms
on
which we stand.
publish his credit records; publish his medical records --tell
his
neighbors about his visits from Child Protective Services...
then
Joe Coach Potato will figure out he needs something
AFTER he figures out there are fuckors and fuckees,
and he's on the short end of that stick. [pardon my French]
then, and only then, will the masses understand privacy --when
they
have lost it.
either we show the people before they lose everything to uncle,
or... just dump it on the table to show everyone just how
much
uncle knows about _you_.
Attila's thought for the day:
Now, with a black jack mule you wish to harness, you
walk up,
look him in the eye, and hit him with a 2X4 over the left
eye.
If he blinks, hit him over the right eye! He'll cooperate.
--so will politicians.
Louis F]reeh,uck], did you really state this hoping everyone
would
think you are joking?
"We are potentially the most dangerous agency in
the
country if we are not scrutinized carefully."
Louis F[reeh,uck], you obviously know that telling the truth,
before
the truth is really the truth, disarms your opposition since
they
can plainly see that it is not true.
there is a limit to what you can endure before you must stand
to
be counted --so I will loudly echo Tim's sentiment:
+
+When Cypherpunks are called "terrorists," we will
have done our jobs.
+
--
"Experience keeps a dear school, but fools will learn in
no other."
--Benjamin Franklin
______________________________________________________________________
"attila" 1024/C20B6905/23 D0 FA 7F 6A 8F 60 66 BC AF
AE 56 98 C0 D7 B0
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3i
Charset: latin1
Comment: No safety this side of the grave. Never was; never will
be
iQCVAwUBNDHgKr04kQrCC2kFAQHPpAQAj+ukWNVEXT+Zgf920g63wX9EZqT241dj
KFqLQ9lBPZLRQydg/PMDcm8T0oI/RneVh51dep5v17IdJcPQT7MN+0CmX91k6e8m
7Wsd+cNVovzDx6dRsC8ghMDB1QBZdBWW9553FzB89RMfilTikCyqmoP6Tub+23/V
QywxUxa3slA=
=U4tV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Copyright "Anonymous TruthMonger <[email protected]>"
"Do you feel 'Cypher'…Punk? Well…do you?"