mitnick-digest Thursday, November 12 1998 Volume 01 : Number 196 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 07:03:07 -0800 (PST) From: Douglas Thomas Subject: Re: [mitnick] Encrypted Material On Wed, 11 Nov 1998, Reeza! wrote: > Something I've been pondering,,,, > > The gov't says it will not use the encrypted material against KM at trial, > because they cannot break the encryption. No, that's not _exactly_ what they have said: MR. PAINTER: Your Honor, I can state with respect to that, we would use the headings of the files that we have decrypted that have material in them and they have specifically made, but we're not going to use -- (May 20th, 1998) > > Let me say that again... they say they cannot break the encryption. > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ They cannot break all of the encryption, but Painter's statement would suggest that some files have been compromised. > In light of the news reports that KM will be given access to a computer to > review the electronic evidence against him, and supposing he is granted > access to that encrypted material, how will he decrypt it? > > If it is pgp, he would need the pgp prog with his secret key- something not > likely to happen. It is PGP and it is likely that he will not be given the opportunity to decrypt information. But unless there have been recent changes, Kevin still hasn't had access to the evidence. We are approaching the 2 month mark (the trial is scheduled to start January 19th) and Kevin still hasn't seen the 10 Gigs of evidence to be used against him. I find that positively outrageous. Doug ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 11:11:08 -0500 From: gjones@raleigh.ibm.com Subject: [mitnick] Kevin still in Jail While listening to the past few Off The Hooks, it has dawned on me that Kevin is in deep trouble More so as the trial date approaches. Neither Kevin, not his Lawyer has had the opportunity to review the massive amounts of evidence against him, and with the trial date just around the corner, this poses a real threat to Kevin. The way it's going to break down is like this, Kevin comes to Trial and if does not accept a plea bargain by the Fed's then he goes back to Jail for God only knows how long. There is no way that Kevin's lawyer can win a case against his client unless he know what the strategy of the prosecution is. I don't care what any thinks this is a fact. Unless Kevin's lawyer somehow manages to get Kevin off on a technicality (which is unlikely) Kevin is in deep shit! I think that we should all keep this in mind, this poses a real threat to all of us Hackers, or otherwise. If the Gov. wins this case, this will will affect everyone! Please keep this in mind when you are posting off topic. Remember this mailing list is to find out ways to hel;p out Kevin, not to take personal vengence on one another. Pirho ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 11:22:15 EST From: EmpAllin@aol.com Subject: Re: [mitnick] Mitnick Digest In a message dated 98-11-08 18:26:02 EST, TelePhreak writes: > i must have deleted the post that said this, but what exactly is the > mitnick digest? understand by example http://members.tripod.com/~empallin/Free_Kevin_Mitnick/ and I'll be uploading the ones from this past week sometime in the next couple of days. sporadically, Allin ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 11:34:49 -0500 From: Dan Sissman Subject: Re: [mitnick] Encrypted Material Well, suppose Kevin was in contact with the person who actually hacked Shimomura's system. If the encrypted material contains e-mail from that person describing the attack, that would pretty solidly support the idea that Kevin didn't do it himself. If the prosecution found anything of this sort (exculpatory evidence) among the files they were able to decrypt, they would be legally obligated to provide that evidence to the defense. Granted, we know the government hasn't exactly played by the rules in this case, but they'd be running a serious risk if they withheld evidence of this type in order to improve their chances for a conviction. "Reeza!" wrote: > At 08:43 PM 11/10/98 -0800, Support Services wrote: > > > >PS - My mom puts more chocoloate chips in my cookies than yours. > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > Bwaahaahaahaahaa!!!! > > Err, oops. > > Support Services, you owe me a new keyboard. Coffee & keyboards don't > co-exist to well. > > ;) > > Now, can we let this thread die a quiet death? > > After doing some light research on the topic, I believe that KM did commit > some crimes, but not all the ones he has been indicted for- and he must be > extremely confident that access to the encrypted material will > substantially strengthen his case. > > What could it be??? > > Reeza! > > If you see a man approaching you with the obvious intention > of doing you good, you should run for your life. > -stolen from a cypherpunk sig - -- Dan Sissman, amateur triviaphile Free Kevin Mitnick! http://www.albany.net/~dsissman http://www.kevinmitnick.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1998 02:38:25 +1000 From: Reeza! Subject: Re: [mitnick] Encrypted Material At 07:03 AM 11/11/98 -0800, Douglas Thomas wrote: > >No, that's not _exactly_ what they have said: > >MR. PAINTER: Your Honor, I can state with respect >to that, we would use the headings of the files that we have >decrypted that have material in them and they have specifically >made, but we're not going to use -- (May 20th, 1998) I see,,,, Thanks for clarifying that. >> If it is pgp, he would need the pgp prog with his secret key- something not >> likely to happen. > >It is PGP and it is likely that he will not be given the opportunity to >decrypt information. But unless there have been recent changes, Kevin >still hasn't had access to the evidence. That comment of mine was made in light of this: http://www.kevinmitnick.com/slates.html check out the next-to-last paragraph. >We are approaching the 2 month mark (the trial is scheduled to start >January 19th) and Kevin still hasn't seen the 10 Gigs of evidence to be >used against him. I find that positively outrageous. I agree- it is a violation of long established precedent- simply because of the medium wherein the evidence is contained. Outrageous, with a capital "F". Reeza! If you see a man approaching you with the obvious intention of doing you good, you should run for your life. -stolen from a cypherpunk sig ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 08:55:58 -0800 From: "Caliban Tiresias Darklock" Subject: Re: [mitnick] Encrypted Material - -----Original Message----- From: Reeza! To: mitnick@2600.com Date: Wednesday, November 11, 1998 4:50 AM Subject: [mitnick] Encrypted Material >Something I've been pondering,,,, > >The gov't says it will not use the encrypted material against KM at trial, >because they cannot break the encryption. Hmm. It seems to me that this is another tool the government is adding to its arsenal; consider the following scenario. (This is a conspiracy theory, and as such is about as reliable a prediction of the future as you might get from Hasbro's Magic Eight Ball.) Kevin goes to trial and is found guilty of a few little things, given a sentence of (say) eight years, and then released on two years probation (considering time served at present and extrapolating that it would be two years before they actually wrap up the trial). They ensure that he is convicted of a felony, just to make sure he can't vote or hold any worthwhile security clearance either. One of the conditions of his probation is some hideous "no computers or wireless communication" clause that makes it impossible for him to function in the modern world, just to make it a big pain in the ass and virtually force him to violate his probation so they can put him back in jail. Sort of like the government betting he can't abide by the terms of his probation. But this is just a small part of the big picture the government is painting. When Kevin inevitably violates probation, the government comes down on him like a ton of bricks and effectively puts him away for the rest of his life. Kevin Mitnick, the world's most dangerous cyberterrorist, the terrifying and incorrigible menace to society, goes to prison and stays there. The government gambles that Kevin's probation violation will be suitably spectacular -- I mean, Kevin's not stupid, he's not going to violate his probation just to hack some web site -- that they can scare the public and the nontechnical government officials half to death with what he does. After scaring the hell out of the public and the rest of the government, they pull out Kevin's encrypted documents. They wave them in the air and say, if we could only have read these, this might never have happened. Encryption is keeping criminals free. Who needs encryption other than criminals? Why would you lock up your personal letters to Grandma in a safe if you weren't doing something illicit? They work the public into a frenzy over it. They frighten the rest of the government into drafting initiatives to outlaw encryption. In other words, the government is using the Mitnick case to support future efforts against encryption. In the process, Kevin will be sacrificed, but these things happen. Sometimes bad things have to happen to good people in order to serve the public trust. I would like to reiterate that the above is a conspiracy theory. Conspiracy theories in and of themselves are suspect, and this entire scenario is basically something I pulled out of my butt. >In light of the news reports that KM will be given access to a computer to >review the electronic evidence against him, and supposing he is granted >access to that encrypted material, how will he decrypt it? If the encryption method is something with which Kevin is intimately familiar, he may very well be able to rewrite the decryption software on the fly. Remember, the government has no clue what Kevin's capabilities are, and they're not really sure how they could prevent someone from programming on a computer. Even if they provide him with a default DOS 5.0 installation, would they remember to get rid of QBasic? You can write system software with that if you really try. What about debug.exe, the bare-bones DOS assembler? I've written device drivers with it. Can they reasonably forbid him to use 'copy con'? Someone with an intimate knowledge of 8088 machine language actually *could* write reasonably effective programs using control codes. (Not having that sort of intimate knowledge, I don't actually know that the programs would necessarily do what you *wanted*.) >If it is pgp, he would need the pgp prog with his secret key- something not >likely to happen. One of the encrypted documents may *be* his secret keyring, and the government may not find it hard to believe that Kevin could rewrite significant portions of PGP from memory. Hell, maybe Kevin is actually the author of PGP and Phil Zimmerman is a fraud. (I mean, we all seem to agree that the government has lost all contact with reality. The cheese fell off their crackers a long time ago.) Kevin isn't a man to these people anymore. He's some sort of supernatural creature who can do unbelievable things on a computer. They have heard expert after expert after expert say that some particular activity is impossible, and then watched hackers scoff and blandly proceed to demonstrate how you can do exactly that -- if you know the proper techniques. And Kevin is not a hacker. Kevin is THE hacker. The size of this list alone underscores that, even if we're not really here because Kevin is so great and should be President. Many people perceive the "Free Kevin" movement to be very much like terrorist groups saying "YOU WILL FREE AHMAD SALADIM AT ONCE," which doesn't exactly help our PR and dovetails far too easily with journalist descriptions of hacking as terrorism. I'm going to go off on a tangent now about this whole PR thing. (It's sort of my pet subject. Hackers have bad PR. We need a marketing and sales department or something.) This is part of why the "Fuck Kevin" movement started. Some of our own so-called supporters don't really give a damn about Kevin, and think the "Free Kevin" banner is like the badge of a true hacker or something. There are a lot of people in this movement just because it *is* a movement, and seems to stand for what they like (heheheh, no authority, heheh, anarchy is cool, hehehehe, hacking web sites rules) -- so they join up, not to help Kevin, but to help themselves. The guy who started the "Fuck Kevin" movement, as he stated in my correspondence with him, was protesting not our efforts but the vast number of people wandering around chanting "Free Kevin, Free Kevin" like some mantra of hackishness. His point was that he was sick of seeing the "Free Kevin" banner being displayed everywhere by people who don't even know who Kevin is or why he should be freed. I don't display the banner or the ribbon anymore. I don't have the JavaScript clock up. And I don't even mention Kevin's name. I try, instead, to get at the heart of the issue by asking whether it is right to hold an American citizen for four years without trial. People who are already informed will probably know just who I'm talking about. People who aren't will follow the "Tell Me More" link. And those are the people that we want to get onto the site. Something I've considered is that any sort of "sameness" in our support for Kevin seems to fly in the face of our own image. We're individuals, pioneers, we go our own ways and forge our own paths. We like that image. We cultivate that image. Why are we all uniting under one slogan, one banner, and one positively disgusting shade of orange-yellow? Shouldn't we all just put up a link to kevinmitnick.com with text and/or graphics of our *own* design? Sure, the graphics might be beyond some of our abilities, but text is fine. We can all write, can't we? And there's nothing wrong with sharing cool graphics among ourselves, nothing at all -- but why do we need to have an "official" banner? ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 10:15:47 PST From: "TelePhreak ." Subject: Re: [mitnick] Kevin still in Jail Yea, i know..... See to me the whole plan for the government was to let everything sit till the last minute then allow him to see everything. Then when kevin's side trys to say we didnt see any of the evidence, the gov. could say we showed it to you, wehn in reality there would be no way anyone could ever possibly read all the evidence in time. Then that would force kevin to accept the flea bargin. But think, you have been in jail for 3 and more then a half years now, and you could fight, or accept a flea bargin and make all the problems and bullshit stop, what would you do. Personally i would just take the flea bargin, when your in jail for that long all you think about is getting out, you know if you fight you'll just be in their for even longer.jail is a terrible place, no one should be put through it. - - - - - - - - ->Phone Rangers<- - - - - - - - - - - F -TelePhreak R Email: AcidHak@Hotmail.com E mIRC: TelePhrk E ICQ: 10886438 K Aol Instant Messanger: TelePhrk 0 E NPA: 908 (NJ) V http://phonerangers.home.ml.org/ I - - - - - - - - ->Phone Rangers<- - - - - - - - - - - N ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 13:40:03 -0500 From: gjones@raleigh.ibm.com Subject: Re: [mitnick] Kevin still in Jail Exactly, And Emmanuel made that point just a few weeks ago, they are expecting Kevin to accept a plea bargain. Like Bernie S said, the Fed's have a 97% conviction rate and out of that 95% are plea Bargains. acidhak@hotmail.com on 11-11-98 01:15:47 PM Please respond to mitnick@2600.com To: mitnick@2600.com cc: (bcc: Gregory Jones/NWSMEL) Subject: Re: [mitnick] Kevin still in Jail Yea, i know..... See to me the whole plan for the government was to let everything sit till the last minute then allow him to see everything. Then when kevin's side trys to say we didnt see any of the evidence, the gov. could say we showed it to you, wehn in reality there would be no way anyone could ever possibly read all the evidence in time. Then that would force kevin to accept the flea bargin. But think, you have been in jail for 3 and more then a half years now, and you could fight, or accept a flea bargin and make all the problems and bullshit stop, what would you do. Personally i would just take the flea bargin, when your in jail for that long all you think about is getting out, you know if you fight you'll just be in their for even longer.jail is a terrible place, no one should be put through it. - - - - - - - - ->Phone Rangers<- - - - - - - - - - - F -TelePhreak R Email: AcidHak@Hotmail.com E mIRC: TelePhrk E ICQ: 10886438 K Aol Instant Messanger: TelePhrk 0 E NPA: 908 (NJ) V http://phonerangers.home.ml.org/ I - - - - - - - - ->Phone Rangers<- - - - - - - - - - - N ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 16:16:49 -0500 (EST) From: Macki Subject: Re: [mitnick] Kevin still in Jail What I find interesting, is that the judge has already scolded the government for not sharing the evidence. She said that they can't use ANY evidence that they haven't already shown to the defence (a very basic and fundemental law) furthermore, she also has stated that once a month wouldn't be nearly enough time for him to review the evidence. So, even if the government trys to show that it was the defence's unwillingness to compromise or something that kept them from seeing the evidence, it still won't be admitted. Under these circumstances I can't wait to see how the judge avoids throwing the case out in the first week. And, once again this would all be good... IF Kevin wasn't stuck in jail in the meantime. --Macki On Wed, 11 Nov 1998 gjones@raleigh.ibm.com wrote: > Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 11:11:08 -0500 > From: gjones@raleigh.ibm.com > Reply-To: mitnick@2600.com > To: mitnick@2600.com > Subject: [mitnick] Kevin still in Jail > > While listening to the past few Off The Hooks, it has dawned on me that Kevin is in deep trouble More so as the trial > date approaches. Neither Kevin, not his Lawyer has had the opportunity to review the massive amounts of evidence > against him, and with the trial date just around the corner, this poses a real threat to Kevin. The way it's going to > break down is like this, Kevin comes to Trial and if does not accept a plea bargain by the Fed's then he goes back to > Jail for God only knows how long. There is no way that Kevin's lawyer can win a case against his client unless he know > what the strategy of the prosecution is. > > I don't care what any thinks this is a fact. Unless Kevin's lawyer somehow manages to get Kevin off on a technicality > (which is unlikely) Kevin is in deep shit! > I think that we should all keep this in mind, this poses a real threat to all of us Hackers, or otherwise. If the Gov. > wins this case, this will will affect everyone! Please keep this in mind when you are posting off topic. Remember this > mailing list is to find out ways to hel;p out Kevin, not to take personal vengence on one another. > > Pirho > > > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 16:52:02 -0700 From: "Speckz.com's Abuse" Subject: [mitnick] Good news? I was reading an article about Justin Peterson and how he seemed to of diapered. Take a look. http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2162751,00.html Pay attention to the last paragraph where it says that "However, some legal experts expected him back in court to testify at the upcoming Mitnick trial, which is scheduled to kick off in January." Now if they don't find him and or he does not show up by then. Could this be a good thing for Kevin? Peterson is a whiteness. So his testimony should be very important. No? ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 14:02:50 -0800 From: Internet for All Customer Service Subject: Re: [mitnick] Kevin still in Jail flea bargain? Are you sure you don't mean "plea bargain"? TelePhreak . wrote: > > Yea, i know..... See to me the whole plan for the government was to let > everything sit till the last minute then allow him to see everything. > Then when kevin's side trys to say we didnt see any of the evidence, the > gov. could say we showed it to you, wehn in reality there would be no > way anyone could ever possibly read all the evidence in time. Then that > would force kevin to accept the flea bargin. But think, you have been in > jail for 3 and more then a half years now, and you could fight, or > accept a flea bargin and make all the problems and bullshit stop, what > would you do. Personally i would just take the flea bargin, when your in > jail for that long all you think about is getting out, you know if you > fight you'll just be in their for even longer.jail is a terrible place, > no one should be put through it. > > - - - - - - - - ->Phone Rangers<- - - - - - - - - - - F > -TelePhreak R > Email: AcidHak@Hotmail.com E > mIRC: TelePhrk E > ICQ: 10886438 K > Aol Instant Messanger: TelePhrk 0 E > NPA: 908 (NJ) V > http://phonerangers.home.ml.org/ I > - - - - - - - - ->Phone Rangers<- - - - - - - - - - - N > > ______________________________________________________ > Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 14:32:28 -0800 (PST) From: Rich Burroughs Subject: Re: [mitnick] Good news? My understanding was that Kevin and his attorney were pretty excited about examining Petersen. I think his appearance on the stand could hardly happen without the government ending up looking bad. Rich On Wed, 11 Nov 1998, Speckz.com's Abuse wrote: > I was reading an article about Justin Peterson and how he seemed to of > diapered. Take a look. > http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2162751,00.html Pay attention > to the last paragraph where it says that "However, some legal experts > expected him back in court to testify at the upcoming Mitnick trial, which > is scheduled to kick off in January." Now if they don't find him and or he > does not show up by then. Could this be a good thing for Kevin? Peterson is > a whiteness. So his testimony should be very important. No? > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 17:30:44 -0500 From: Emmanuel Goldstein Subject: [mitnick] letter from steal here's the latest from steal himself. i've verified its authenticity. i'm not releasing the headers. emmanuel - -------------------------------------------------------------------------- A reliable source at MDC says that Mitnick is dancing in his cell since Petersen won't be around to testify against him, LOL. Yeah, I got tired of my Probation Officer's BS and simply failed to report or notify her of my whereabouts, fuck em. Supervised release is such a bunch of crap. You do your time then you get out and have to report and live life the way -they- expect you to for 3 years. But the real reason I blew it off is that I have a well paying job overseas working on a black ops CIA funded spook gig. ;-) My PO would not have let me leave the country. So if you can't beat em join em... sorta. If they find me it's 6-8 months back in the joint, it's simply a technical violation. Sorry kids I'm not hacking again. But after I do the time I would be done, no more paper, no more reporting. Frankly, I thought about just turning myself in and doing a few months, which I still may do just to get it over with. However, in reality this all about money. Eventually I may just pay off my restitution and the whole matter will be dropped. Or perhaps "The Company" will help me out. Heh, wouldn't that be ironic So in the mean time let the US Marshalls look for me. I have this theory that chasing me is actually fun for them, they get to hang out in night clubs, strip clubs, and surf the net, heh. But that could be a bit tricky since I'm no longer in the States. :-) And aside from that, I'm not really trying to hide. I just won't be using a cell phone and pissing off Shimomura, hahahahaha. I would not be surprised if this is really about having me around to testify against Mitnick. Frankly, I don't think it's in either sides best interset (prosecution or defense) to have me on the stand. Best let lying dogs sleep. Uh... don't call me... I'll call you. Steal "Unregarded respect for authority is the enemy of truth" ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 17:43:43 -0500 From: Mike Blaguszewski Subject: Re: [mitnick] Encrypted Material My question is, if the government wants to decrypt the documents so much, and they know that Kevin still has his private key (or why would the defense be requesting the documents themselves), why not just subpeona the key? Mike Blaguszewski ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 15:05:13 -0800 (PST) From: rice patty Subject: [mitnick] Twist and shout. A shout out goes to: 195.82.194.27 p109-27.ppp.get2net.dk Thanks for the tcp activity on port 53! _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 18:01:18 -0500 From: Dan Sissman Subject: Re: [mitnick] Kevin still in Jail Given that the judge hasn't even allowed a bail hearing, I seriously doubt she would "throw out" the case, and make Kevin a free man, no matter *what* the government does. Macki wrote: > What I find interesting, is that the judge has already scolded the > government for not sharing the evidence. She said that they can't use ANY > evidence that they haven't already shown to the defence (a very basic and > fundemental law) furthermore, she also has stated that once a month > wouldn't be nearly enough time for him to review the evidence. So, even if > the government trys to show that it was the defence's unwillingness to > compromise or something that kept them from seeing the evidence, it still > won't be admitted. > > Under these circumstances I can't wait to see how the judge avoids > throwing the case out in the first week. And, once again this would all be > good... IF Kevin wasn't stuck in jail in the meantime. > > --Macki > > On Wed, 11 Nov 1998 gjones@raleigh.ibm.com wrote: > > > Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 11:11:08 -0500 > > From: gjones@raleigh.ibm.com > > Reply-To: mitnick@2600.com > > To: mitnick@2600.com > > Subject: [mitnick] Kevin still in Jail > > > > While listening to the past few Off The Hooks, it has dawned on me that Kevin is in deep trouble More so as the trial > > date approaches. Neither Kevin, not his Lawyer has had the opportunity to review the massive amounts of evidence > > against him, and with the trial date just around the corner, this poses a real threat to Kevin. The way it's going to > > break down is like this, Kevin comes to Trial and if does not accept a plea bargain by the Fed's then he goes back to > > Jail for God only knows how long. There is no way that Kevin's lawyer can win a case against his client unless he know > > what the strategy of the prosecution is. > > > > I don't care what any thinks this is a fact. Unless Kevin's lawyer somehow manages to get Kevin off on a technicality > > (which is unlikely) Kevin is in deep shit! > > I think that we should all keep this in mind, this poses a real threat to all of us Hackers, or otherwise. If the Gov. > > wins this case, this will will affect everyone! Please keep this in mind when you are posting off topic. Remember this > > mailing list is to find out ways to hel;p out Kevin, not to take personal vengence on one another. > > > > Pirho > > > > > > - -- Dan Sissman, amateur triviaphile Free Kevin Mitnick! http://www.albany.net/~dsissman http://www.kevinmitnick.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 15:33:50 -0800 From: "Caliban Tiresias Darklock" Subject: Re: [mitnick] Encrypted Material - -----Original Message----- From: Mike Blaguszewski To: mitnick@2600.com Date: Wednesday, November 11, 1998 3:01 PM Subject: Re: [mitnick] Encrypted Material >My question is, if the government wants to decrypt the documents so much, and >they know that Kevin still has his private key (or why would the defense be >requesting the documents themselves), why not just subpeona the key? I think they might view this as a potential infringement of fifth amendment rights. A PGP key is not really a physical possession, but data -- and therefore information, and by extension testimony, so they may see a Constitutional basis for demanding the key to be an infringement of the defendant's rights. If they were to demand the key, it could potentially be used as evidence of probable governmental misconduct if the judge can be convinced that this is a wholly improper request. Then again, they may HAVE the keyring on the system but not be able to crack the password on it, and have the same problems with getting the password. Want the key? There it is. Password? Fifth amendment. I ain't telling, and you can't make me. So there. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 15:36:40 -0800 (PST) From: SpinTite Subject: [mitnick] Web page. I just received this url through e-mail and was told Kevins name appears on the page, (or in an article located on the page). I haven't checked it out for myself, yet. Caveat emptor. http://mprofaca.cro.net _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 18:43:50 -0500 From: "Aaron D. Ball" Subject: Re: [mitnick] Encrypted Material On Wed, Nov 11, 1998 at 05:43:43PM -0500, Mike Blaguszewski wrote: > My question is, if the government wants to decrypt the documents so much, and > they know that Kevin still has his private key (or why would the defense be > requesting the documents themselves), why not just subpeona the key? Hmm. Let's think about this. Suppose you're in jail, and the prosecution has a hard disk full of incriminating evidence, if only they could decrypt it. They demand your secret key, or the passphrase to your secret keyring. Do you (a) say, "Sure, here it is: asdFSJU#$%ITFDsjgs90u:@J$", and thereby give them the evidence with which to screw you over, or (b) say, "I forgot. Sorry." After all, solitary confinement is really hard on the head; you can't expect someone to remember a random string of ceiling(512/3) characters after that kind of treatment, can you? Perhaps you might offer to guess. "aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa? No? How about aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaab? No? How about ..." And then, of course, there's the bit about self-incrimination. Can they really require you to actually serve them up the evidence? Does any of the legal ex-spurts around here know of any precedents? If there isn't anything from the Age of Silicon, I imagine there was at some point a case where someone claimed to have forgotten the combination to his evidence-containing safe. (Of course, a *safe* can always be opened by brute force...) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 16:30:08 -0800 (PST) From: Support Services Subject: Re: [mitnick] Good news? On Wed, 11 Nov 1998 16:52:02 -0700, Speckz.com's Abuse wrote: > > I was reading an article about Justin Peterson and > how he seemed to of diapered. Justin was into heavy bondage stuff. If he was also into heavy-duty "backdoor" action, it might well be that he's diapered nowadays. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 18:18:05 -0800 (PST) From: rOTTEN Subject: Re: [mitnick] Good news? On Wed, 11 Nov 1998, Speckz.com's Abuse wrote: > I was reading an article about Justin Peterson and how he seemed to of > diapered. I've always felt that Petersen should be diapered. He's so full of shit it could go at any moment. <..rOTTEN..> nobody move, nobody get hurt error187(1) critical failure - - - - - - To do: 1) Update my "To do" list. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 19:07:09 -0800 From: Internet for All Customer Service Subject: Re: [mitnick] Twist and shout. yes, thank you, p109-27.ppp.get2net.dk, for providing yet another dns server. rice patty wrote: > > A shout out goes to: > > 195.82.194.27 p109-27.ppp.get2net.dk > > Thanks for the tcp activity on port 53! > > _________________________________________________________ > DO YOU YAHOO!? > Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 22:24:28 -0500 (EST) From: A Shadow In the Dark Subject: Re: [mitnick] Twist and shout. What's this about? On Wed, 11 Nov 1998, Internet for All Customer Service wrote: > yes, thank you, p109-27.ppp.get2net.dk, for providing yet another dns server. > > rice patty wrote: > > > > A shout out goes to: > > > > 195.82.194.27 p109-27.ppp.get2net.dk > > > > Thanks for the tcp activity on port 53! > > > > _________________________________________________________ > > DO YOU YAHOO!? > > Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com > ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1998 00:52:22 EST From: FallOut4E@aol.com Subject: Re: [mitnick] Encrypted Material Can someone explain to me how the gov. can take your property (the encrypted material), and not give it to you even though they don't plan on using it against him? I'm mean let's say that someone committed a crime wearing a pear of Nikes. The prosecution decided not to use the Nikes as evidence, would the defendant not get the shoes back? It is HIS property. In a message dated 11/11/98 11:36:13 AM Eastern Standard Time, dsissman@albany.net writes: > Well, suppose Kevin was in contact with the person who actually hacked > Shimomura's system. If the encrypted material contains e-mail from that > person describing the attack, that would pretty solidly support the idea > that > Kevin didn't do it himself. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 22:18:31 -0800 From: Caliban Tiresias Darklock Subject: Re: [mitnick] Encrypted Material On 12:52 AM 11/12/98 -0500, I personally witnessed FallOut4E@aol.com jumping up to say: > >Can someone explain to me how the gov. can take your property (the encrypted >material), and not give it to you even though they don't plan on using it >against him? I'm mean let's say that someone committed a crime wearing a pear >of Nikes. The prosecution decided not to use the Nikes as evidence, would the >defendant not get the shoes back? It is HIS property. Let's say that someone stabbed his mother with a survival knife, you know the kind, with the screw-off compass and the fishing line and the crappy wire saw and some matches in the handle. Should the prosecution turn over the contents of the handle because it wasn't used in the crime? How about the whetstone in the little pouch on the front of the sheath? I doubt the prosecution will use it as evidence. - -------------------------------------------------------------------------- As the fire burneth a wood, and the flame setteth the mountains on fire; So persecute them with thy tempest, and make them afraid with thy storm. - ---------------------------[ Psalms, 83:14-15 ]--------------------------- Caliban Tiresias Darklock | "Hell, you don't Darklock Communications | know me." FREE KEVIN MITNICK! | - Charles Manson - -------------------------------------------------------------------------- And remember, if you don't kiss Hank's ass he'll kick the shit out of you. - -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 22:44:01 -0800 (PST) From: rOTTEN Subject: Re: [mitnick] Encrypted Material On Thu, 12 Nov 1998 FallOut4E@aol.com wrote: > Can someone explain to me how the gov. can take your property (the encrypted > material), and not give it to you even though they don't plan on using it > against him? I'm mean let's say that someone committed a crime wearing a pear > of Nikes. The prosecution decided not to use the Nikes as evidence, would the > defendant not get the shoes back? It is HIS property. You're dealing with a bureaucracy, m'man. If you think that a bureacracy works smoothly like a set of well oiled gears, you're operating on an idealistic assumption. <..rOTTEN..> nobody move, nobody get hurt error187(1) critical failure - - - - - - To do: 1) Update my "To do" list. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1998 01:46:51 EST From: Antboy23@aol.com Subject: Re: [mitnick] Encrypted Material In a message dated 11/11/98 11:10:36 PM US Mountain Standard Time, FallOut4E@aol.com writes: > Can someone explain to me how the gov. can take your property (the encrypted > material), and not give it to you even though they don't plan on using it > against him? check out www.twistedlogic.com/info and read the section on "Asset Forfeiture Laws" apparently the government can do anything it wants. this may have no bearing on kevins case, but i wouldn't be suprised if they invoke it to seize all his personal files. ANTBOY ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1998 03:29:49 EST From: FallOut4E@aol.com Subject: Re: [mitnick] Encrypted Material Your example is very unreasonable. My point is that besides what Kevin obviously wants the encrypted data for (possible defense evidence), there might be very important things in there, and why shouldn't they get returned? What gives them the right to say what property they are going to withhold? For the record, yes, I think that person should get the whetstone back. In a message dated 11/12/98 1:23:25 AM Eastern Standard Time, caliban@darklock.com writes: > Let's say that someone stabbed his mother with a survival knife, you know > the kind, with the screw-off compass and the fishing line and the crappy > wire saw and some matches in the handle. Should the prosecution turn over > the contents of the handle because it wasn't used in the crime? How about > the whetstone in the little pouch on the front of the sheath? I doubt the > prosecution will use it as evidence. ------------------------------ End of mitnick-digest V1 #196 *****************************