Path: gmdzi!unido!mcsun!uunet!clyde.concordia.ca!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!
cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!ALDERAAN.SCRC.SYMBOLICS.COM!Ed
From: E...@ALDERAAN.SCRC.SYMBOLICS.COM (Ed Schwalenberg)
Newsgroups: rec.ham-radio
Subject: Interception of E-Mail by spies
Message-ID: <19900104143606.4.ED@PEREGRINE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
Date: 4 Jan 90 14:36:00 GMT
References: <1409@argus.UUCP>
Sender: dae...@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 8
Posted: Thu Jan 4 15:36:00 1990
Date: 22 Dec 89 22:36:01 GMT
From: galaxy.rutgers.edu!argus!k...@rutgers.edu (Kenneth Ng)
Use last year's output of INFO-VAX for a one time pad :-).
It is essential that the data used as a key be totally random in nature.
INFO-VAX is pseudo-random at best, which is not good enough.
Path: gmdzi!unido!mcsun!uunet!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!hoptoad!gnu
From: gnu@hoptoad.uucp (John Gilmore)
Newsgroups: sci.crypt,misc.legal,rec.ham-radio
Subject: Re: Interception of E-Mail by spies
Message-ID: <9523@hoptoad.uucp>
Date: 6 Jan 90 22:33:16 GMT
References: <7C`2N^@rpi.edu> <30036@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU>
<34958@grapevine.uucp> <1409@argus.UUCP>
Organization: Grasshopper Group in San Francisco
Lines: 45
Xref: gmdzi sci.crypt:2045 misc.legal:169 rec.ham-radio:8659
Posted: Sat Jan 6 23:33:16 1990
I believe that NSA is monitoring the Internet. They certainly have the
right (and duty) to monitor traffic on any part of the net that's run
by the Federal Government.
And I find it curious how the official policy of the Internet is "no
thru traffic for other nets" but the benevolent administrators kindly
turn their backs, spend the money, and bear major amounts of traffic.
Surely that couldn't be because in the process they legally get to
examine it?
Let's say you were head of NSA, responsible for communications security
for the Feds, and Congress called you in to ask how some college
student could bring the major Federal research network to its knees.
"Oh, we never look at that network. Though we tap all the telegraph
lines in and out of the country, and monitored private phone calls
between U.S. citizens in the U.S. and other U.S. citizens in Central
America under Nixon, we never bother with high speed, technically
advanced government research networks." More likely they are getting a
copy of every packet, but due to spook mentality they are not men
enough to admit it. The Internet administrators prattle about
"ethics", e.g. RFC 1087: "unethical and unacceptable any activity which
purposely...compromises the privacy of users" while secretly
compromising that privacy themselves.
It is probably a coincidence that the main uucp gateway for European
traffic, "seismo", was run by the Center for Seismic Studies, a
spook-funded organization that tracks nuclear explosions around the
world. (And you thought they were studying earthquakes!) Though
supposedly the costs of running the gateway were paid by subscriptions
among the Europeans, I'm sure that major costs were picked up by the
Center (administration, CPU time, disk space, ...).
It is probably also a coincidence that its replacement, "uunet", sat
on the same machine room floor (in "donated" space) for a year. But
while no other organizations were able to get Internet approval
to forward other nets' traffic to-and-from the Internet, uunet somehow
is "provisionally" authorized to do so!
I tried bringing this topic up on comp.protocols.tcp-ip but was censored
by the moderator, who claimed I had no proof. As if the rest of the
messages on tcp-ip were not full of conjectures!
--
John Gilmore {sun,pacbell,uunet,pyramid}!hoptoad!gnu g...@toad.com
Just say *yes* to drugs. Say "no" to undeclared wars on sovereign countries.
Path: gmdzi!unido!mcsun!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!newstop!
grapevine!kor...@panarthea.ebay.sun.com
From: kor...@panarthea.ebay.sun.com (Steven Grimm)
Newsgroups: sci.crypt,misc.legal,rec.ham-radio
Subject: Re: Interception of E-Mail by spies
Message-ID: <35067@grapevine.uucp>
Date: 6 Jan 90 23:48:00 GMT
References: <7C`2N^@rpi.edu> <30036@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU>
<34958@grapevine.uucp> <1409@argus.UUCP> <9523@hoptoad.uucp>
Sender: news@grapevine.uucp
Reply-To: kor...@panarthea.ebay.sun.com (Steven Grimm)
Organization: Sun Microsystems Federal, Milpitas, CA
Lines: 10
Xref: gmdzi sci.crypt:2044 misc.legal:166 rec.ham-radio:8637
Posted: Sun Jan 7 00:48:00 1990
In article <9523@hoptoad.uucp> gnu@hoptoad.uucp (John Gilmore) writes:
>I tried bringing this topic up on comp.protocols.tcp-ip but was censored
>by the moderator, who claimed I had no proof.
Quite a trick, considering that comp.protocols.tcp-ip isn't moderated.
---
" !" - Marcel Marceau
Steven Grimm Moderator, comp.{sources,binaries}.atari.st
kor...@ebay.sun.com ...!sun!ebay!koreth
Path: gmdzi!unido!mcsun!uunet!samsung!shadooby!mailrus!ncar!umigw!
mthvax.cs.miami.edu!aem
From: a...@mthvax.cs.miami.edu (a.e.mossberg)
Newsgroups: sci.crypt,misc.legal
Subject: Re: Interception of E-Mail by spies
Message-ID: <1431@umigw.MIAMI.EDU>
Date: 7 Jan 90 21:58:30 GMT
References: <7C`2N^@rpi.edu> <30036@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU>
<34958@grapevine.uucp> <1409@argus.UUCP> <9523@hoptoad.uucp>
<1428@umigw.MIAMI.EDU>
Sender: ne...@umigw.MIAMI.EDU
Reply-To: a...@Mthvax.CS.Miami.Edu
Lines: 16
Xref: gmdzi sci.crypt:2047 misc.legal:171
Posted: Sun Jan 7 22:58:30 1990
As for USENET, it's a *well known fact* (WKF) that uunet supplies tapes
of USENET postings to the FBI....
Now, as far as e-mail goes, most of the networks that make up the NSFNET
are monitored, for type of packets, which presumably could also look at
the contents of those packets.
I suspect the same is true of non-NSFNET parts of the Internet.
aem
--
a.e.mossberg / a...@mthvax.cs.miami.edu / aem@umiami.BITNET / Pahayokee Bioregion
If I loved a woman, the more I loved her, the more I wanted to hurt her.
- Diego Rivera
Path: gmdzi!unido!mcsun!uunet!seismo!sundc!newstop!sun-barr!
cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!hoptoad!gnu
From: gnu@hoptoad.uucp (John Gilmore)
Newsgroups: sci.crypt,misc.legal
Subject: Re: Interception of E-Mail by spies
Message-ID: <9559@hoptoad.uucp>
Date: 9 Jan 90 10:51:42 GMT
References: <7C`2N^@rpi.edu> <30036@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU>
<34958@grapevine.uucp> <35067@grapevine.uucp>
Organization: Grasshopper Group in San Francisco
Lines: 57
Xref: gmdzi sci.crypt:2055 misc.legal:178
Posted: Tue Jan 9 11:51:42 1990
In article <9523@hoptoad.uucp> gnu@hoptoad.uucp (John Gilmore) writes:
> I tried bringing this topic up on comp.protocols.tcp-ip but was censored
> by the moderator, who claimed I had no proof.
kor...@panarthea.ebay.sun.com (Steven Grimm) wrote:
> Quite a trick, considering that comp.protocols.tcp-ip isn't moderated.
You're right. It was comp.risks. My apologies.
I too believe Rick Adams is one of the "good guys". Note my message
said:
> It is probably a coincidence that the main uucp gateway . . .
> It is probably also a coincidence that its replacement, "uunet", . . .
Maybe I should've said "it IS probably a coincidence". But a
noteworthy coincidence.
NSA has responsibility for communications security for government
computers and networks. They don't have responsibility for security
for the Postal Service. The only Federal law I know of on email
privacy (the hated Electronic Communications Privacy Act) specifically
allows the owners/managers of a computer to examine email on it; thus
NSF (and, by implication, the rest of the gov't) can examine the
NSFnet. NSA *is* responsible for comsec on NSFnet, though not on the
(non Federally run) regional networks.
Besides which, you are only liable for breach of email privacy if you
promise it in the first place -- else Usenet and BBS's would have
collapsed in lawsuits just after the law took effect. AND, the same
law permits a middle level bureaucrat in the Dept. of Justice to
subpoena all your email and online files -- from a commercial email
company, and presumably from a noncommercial one such as uunet or the
NSFNet -- without notification to you. So if NSA wanted to examine
your email, even if they took seriously the rules against wiretapping,
they could just get DoJ to authorize their actions. (The same law made
the same bureaucrats authorized to allow wiretaps, by the way.
Convenient, eh? Why bother the courts with things like that?)
And yes, I have talked to folks from NSA. You can meet them at crypto
conferences. You can phone them up if you want; I did. You can't talk
to a specific person who works there by calling the main number, though
-- but if you insist on talking to *someone* they will switch you to
the Public Affairs office. And you thought *I* was paranoid!
The impression I get is that some NSA folks believe that good privacy
for US Citizens will mean good privacy for everybody in the world.
They don't like that idea but none of them are allowed to say why. So
I say fuck them -- this is still a free country and if they won't
explain, in detail, the need for suppression of the right to privacy of
US citizens,then I for one ain't gonna suppress privacy. In fact, to
counter their suppression I will do my best to *encourage* privacy.
Like by making people aware that they are eavesdropping, and suppressing
technologies for privacy enhancement.
--
John Gilmore {sun,pacbell,uunet,pyramid}!hoptoad!gnu g...@toad.com
Just say *yes* to drugs. Say "no" to undeclared wars on sovereign countries.
Path: gmdzi!unido!mcsun!uunet!mailrus!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!
apple!rutgers!bellcore!jupiter!karn
From: karn@jupiter..bellcore.com (Phil R. Karn)
Newsgroups: sci.crypt,misc.legal
Subject: Re: Interception of E-Mail by spies
Message-ID: <18841@bellcore.bellcore.com>
Date: 13 Jan 90 00:59:17 GMT
References: <7C`2N^@rpi.edu> <30036@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU>
<34958@grapevine.uucp> <35067@grapevine.uucp> <9559@hoptoad.uucp>
Sender: ne...@bellcore.bellcore.com
Reply-To: ka...@jupiter.bellcore.com (Phil R. Karn)
Organization: Bell Communications Research, Inc
Lines: 22
Xref: gmdzi sci.crypt:2061 misc.legal:184
Posted: Sat Jan 13 01:59:17 1990
In article <9559@hoptoad.uucp> gnu@hoptoad.uucp (John Gilmore) writes:
>The impression I get is that some NSA folks believe that good privacy
>for US Citizens will mean good privacy for everybody in the world.
>They don't like that idea but none of them are allowed to say why.
There is an interesting irony in all this. For many years, the US has
lambasted the USSR for basing its national security on the INsecurity of
its neighbors. People argue about whether this is still the case under
Gorbachev, but even I (a dove) must agree that it was largely true
before he came to power.
But the very same US government sees no contradiction in basing ITS own
national security on the communications insecurity of almost everyone
else in the world. Why else would we have such draconian restrictions on
the export of cryptographic equipment and software?
I'm with John Gilmore on this one. Computer technology has become so
powerful, available and widespread that US government attempts to
prevent its application to cryptography and personal privacy have become
utterly futile. I for one heartily welcome this development.
Phil
Path: gmdzi!unido!mcsun!uunet!rick
From: ri...@uunet.UU.NET (Rick Adams)
Newsgroups: sci.crypt,misc.legal
Subject: Re: Interception of E-Mail by spies
Summary: facts...
Message-ID: <76886@uunet.UU.NET>
Date: 14 Jan 90 22:43:10 GMT
References: <7C`2N^@rpi.edu> <30036@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU>
<34958@grapevine.uucp> <1431@umigw.MIAMI.EDU>
Followup-To: /dev/null
Organization: UUNET Communications Services, Falls Church, VA
Lines: 5
Xref: gmdzi sci.crypt:2069 misc.legal:186
Posted: Sun Jan 14 23:43:10 1990
In article <14...@umigw.MIAMI.EDU>,
a...@mthvax.cs.miami.edu (a.e.mossberg) writes:
> As for USENET, it's a *well known fact* (WKF) that uunet supplies tapes
> of USENET postings to the FBI....
Yet another well know fact that is wrong...