129 lines
6.4 KiB
Plaintext
129 lines
6.4 KiB
Plaintext
Reply-To: <cocot@osc.versant.com>
|
|
Message-ID: <surfpunk-0002@SURFPUNK.Technical.Journal>
|
|
Mime-Version: 1.0
|
|
Content-Type: text/plain
|
|
From: cocot@osc.versant.com (Doctor COCOT)
|
|
To: surfpunk@osc.versant.com (SURFPUNK Technical Journal)
|
|
Subject: [surfpunk-0002] CRYPT: John Gilmore sues the NSA
|
|
Keywords: surfpunk, Military Cryptanalysis, cryptography, NSA, FOIA
|
|
|
|
John Gilmore <gnu@toad.com> was the first software engineer
|
|
at Sun Microsystems. Or that's what I was once told.
|
|
|
|
This is in response to a question on the "pem-dev@TIS.COM"
|
|
mailing list, a list about privacy-enhanced mail standards,
|
|
which is supporting RSA public key encryption.
|
|
|
|
Those who claim to hold patents on the art of public key encryption
|
|
now allow free lisences for any academic, personal, or noncommercial
|
|
use of RSA. I'm thinking of using it in the SURFPUNK project
|
|
at some point, as we move into cyberspace.
|
|
-- Dr Cocot
|
|
________________________________________________________________________
|
|
________________________________________________________________________
|
|
|
|
From: gnu@toad.com
|
|
Subject: Re: John Gilmore vs. NSA
|
|
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 92 23:23:24 -0800
|
|
To: shirey@mitre.org
|
|
Cc: pem-dev@TIS.COM, saag@TIS.COM, gnu@toad.com
|
|
Sender: pem-dev-relay@TIS.COM
|
|
In-Reply-To: <9211271355.AA29657@smiley.mitre.org.sit>
|
|
Message-Id: <9211290723.AA13480@toad.com>
|
|
|
|
I'm still on PEM-DEV, just pretty busy and backed-up on email.
|
|
|
|
The FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) case that the newspapers have
|
|
been reporting revolves around three documents authored or co-authored
|
|
by William F. Friedman. Two have been declassified, probably because
|
|
we found copies of them in public libraries. They are:
|
|
|
|
Military Cryptanalysis, Volume 3
|
|
Military Cryptanalysis, Volume 4
|
|
|
|
The third remains classified at this time, but NSA has said that they
|
|
will do a line-by-line classification review of it, because parts of it are
|
|
known (and admitted by NSA) to duplicate existing declassified material:
|
|
|
|
Military Cryptanalytics, Volume 3
|
|
Lambros D. Callimahos and William F. Friedman
|
|
|
|
We are looking for a copy of this document (or any other cryptography
|
|
document that was lawfully obtained and which the government will not
|
|
release to the public). If you know of someone who might have a copy
|
|
of this document, please forward this message to them. Don't tell me
|
|
or my lawyer (Lee Tien, tien@toad.com) about it -- let the document
|
|
holder do that. I suspect that there are copies in existence, but
|
|
probably most of them were not obtained lawfully. If their existence
|
|
was made known to us, NSA might demand this information in court and
|
|
we might be compelled to provide it. This would then allow the NSA
|
|
and Justice Department to contact the holders and demand that the
|
|
copies be returned, with a 10-year "espionage" sentence as club. So,
|
|
please contact us if you have a copy that was *lawfully* obtained,
|
|
otherwise we'll muddle on through without putting you in jeopardy.
|
|
|
|
By lawful I mean that you got a copy without violating any law. If
|
|
you secretly copied it when you worked for the Army, you don't
|
|
qualify. If you saw it in a library and copied it, you qualify. If
|
|
your Dad left it to you when he died, you qualify if *he* got it
|
|
lawfully. If the Army explicitly let you keep a copy when you left,
|
|
without putting any constraints on what you did with it, you qualify.
|
|
But be prepared to prove it.
|
|
|
|
Even if we can't find public copies of this third document, we are
|
|
looking for expert witnesses in cryptography *and* national security.
|
|
Traditionally NSA provides its own "experts" who tell tales of woe
|
|
about how the sky will fall if the documents are released. They were
|
|
well along in that process when they declassified the first two,
|
|
giving them a somewhat egg-faced demeanor. If you have a SECRET
|
|
clearance and the right experience to convince a judge that you can
|
|
evaluate the damage to the US national security that would be caused
|
|
by releasing portions of this cryptography textbook, please get in
|
|
touch.
|
|
|
|
Two issues that arose in the FOIA case remain unresolved. The first
|
|
is whether NSA has a pattern and practice of violating the Freedom of
|
|
Information Act by not responding to requesters within the time limits
|
|
specified in the law. If I file my taxes one day late, I get penalized.
|
|
But if the law says NSA has 10 days to respond, and they take 10 months,
|
|
they shrug it off and say "so sue us". I'm doing just that.
|
|
|
|
The second issue is whether the espionage laws, which make it a
|
|
Federal crime to distribute a classified document, are
|
|
unconstitutional on their face, because they limit citizens' freedom
|
|
of the press. If the laws had been written to only apply to
|
|
government employees, or to people who obtained documents unlawfully,
|
|
they might have a leg to stand on. But the Supreme Court has long
|
|
held that limitations on the right to publish must satisfy very tight
|
|
constraints -- and this law is very vague and all-encompassing. It
|
|
certainly appeared to encompass me, who got the docs from a library,
|
|
and I did not redistribute them for fear of prosecution. Creating
|
|
such fear has been held a violation of the First Amendment in several
|
|
cases. My suspicion is that NSA declassified the documents *so that*
|
|
it would be harder for us to press this issue. (Courts like to decide
|
|
the smallest set of issues they can get away with; if the espionage
|
|
law is now "moot" in our case, they may claim that the court should
|
|
ignore the potentially unconstitutional law because they backed off.
|
|
But that would leave them free to unconstitutionally threaten the next
|
|
victim.) We'll see what the judge thinks.
|
|
|
|
John Gilmore
|
|
gnu@toad.com
|
|
+1 415 903 1418 voicemail
|
|
|
|
_______________________________________________________________________
|
|
________________________________________________________________________
|
|
|
|
The SURFPUNK Technical Journal is a dangerous multinational hacker zine
|
|
originating near BARRNET in the fashionable western arm of the northern
|
|
California matrix. Quantum Californians appear in one of two states,
|
|
spin surf or spin punk. Undetected, we are both, or might be neither.
|
|
________________________________________________________________________
|
|
|
|
Send postings to <surfpunk@osc.versant.com>, subscription requests
|
|
to <surfpunk-request@osc.versant.com>. MIME encouraged.
|
|
Xanalogical archive access soon. Confusion to our enemies.
|
|
________________________________________________________________________
|
|
________________________________________________________________________
|
|
|