diff --git a/01-Introduction/01-Introduction.md b/01-Introduction/01-Introduction.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..3410a17 --- /dev/null +++ b/01-Introduction/01-Introduction.md @@ -0,0 +1,348 @@ +1. Introduction + + 1.1. copyright + THE CYPHERNOMICON: Cypherpunks FAQ and More, Version 0.666, + 1994-09-10, Copyright Timothy C. May. All rights reserved. + See the detailed disclaimer. Use short sections under "fair + use" provisions, with appropriate credit, but don't put your + name on my words. + + 1.2. Foreword + - The Cypherpunks have existed since September, 1992. In that + time, a vast amount has been written on cryptography, key + escrow, Clipper, the Net, the Information Superhighway, cyber + terrorists, and crypto anarchy. We have found ourselves (or + _placed_ ourselves) at the center of the storm. + - This FAQ may help to fill in some gaps about what we're + about, what motivates us, and where we're going. And maybe + some useful knowledge on crypto, remailers, anonymity, + digital cash, and other interesting things. + + The Basic Issues + + Great Divide: privacy vs. compliance with laws + + free speech and privacy, even if means some criminals + cannot be caught (a stand the U.S. Constitution was + strongly in favor of, at one time) + - a man's home is his castle...the essence of the Magna + Carta systems...rights of the individual to be secure + from random searches + + or invasive tactics to catch criminals, regulate + behavior, and control the population + - the legitimate needs to enforce laws, to respond to + situations + + this parallels the issue of self-protection vs. + protection by law and police + - as seen in the gun debate + - crypto = guns in the sense of being an individual's + preemptive protection + - past the point of no return + - Strong crypto as building material for a new age + + Transnationalism and Increased Degrees of Freedom + - governments can't hope to control movements and + communications of citizens; borders are transparent + + Not all list members share all views + - This is not "the Official Cypherpunks FAQ." No such thing + can exist. This is the FAQ I wanted written. Views + expressed are my own, with as much input from others, as + much consensus, as I can manage. If you want a radically + different FAQ, write it yourself. If you don't like this + FAQ, don't read it. And tell your friends not to read it. + But don't bog down my mailbox, or the 500 others on the + list, with messages about how you would have worded Section + 12.4.7.2 slightly differently, or how Section 6.9.12 does + not fully reflect your views. For obvious reasons. + - All FAQs are the products of a primary author, sometimes of + a committee. For this FAQ, I am the sole author. At least + of the version you are reading now. Future versions may + have more input from others, though this makes me nervous + (I favor new authors writing their own stuff, or using + hypertext links, rather than taking my basic writing and + attaching their name to it--it is true that I include the + quotes of many folks here, but I do so by explicitly + quoting them in the chunk they wrote....it will be tough + for later authors to clearly mark what Tim May wrote + without excessively cluttering the text. The revisionist's + dilemma. + - The list has a lot of radical libertarians, some anarcho- + capitalists, and even a few socialists + - Mostly computer-related folks, as might be expected. (There + are some political scientists, classical scholars, etc. + Even a few current or ex-lawyers.) + + Do I Speak for Others? + - As I said, no. But sometimes I make claims about what + "most" list members believe, what "many" believe, or what + "some" believe. + - "Most" is my best judgment of what the majority believe, + at least the vocal majority in Cypherpunks discussions + (at the physical meetings, parties, etc.) and on the + List. "Many" means fewer, and "some" fewer still. "A few" + will mean a distinct minority. Note that this is from the + last 18 months of activity (so don't send in + clarifications now to try to "sway the vote"). + - In particular, some members may be quite uncomfortable + being described as anarchists, crypto anarchists, money + launderers, etc. + + My comments won't please everyone + - on nearly every point ever presented, some have disagreed + - feuds, battles, flames, idee fixes + - on issues ranging from gun control to Dolphin Encrypt to + various pet theories held dearly + - Someone once made a mundane joke about pseudonyms being + like multiple personality disorder--and a flame came back + saying: "That's not funny. I am MPD and my SO is MPD. + Please stop immediately!" + - can't be helped....can't present all sides to all arguments + + Focus of this FAQ is U.S.-centric, for various reasons + - most on list are in U.S., and I am in U.S. + - NSA and crypto community is largely centered in the U.S., + with some strong European activities + - U.S. law is likely to influence overseas law + + We are at a fork in the road, a Great Divide + - Surveillance vs. Freedom + - nothing in the middle...either strong crypto and privacy is + strongly limited, or the things I describe here will be + done by some people....hence the "tipping factor" applies + (point of no return, horses out of the barn) + + I make no claim to speaking "for the group." If you're + offended, write your own FAQ. My focus on things loosely + called "crypto anarchy" is just that: my _focus_. This focus + naturally percolates over into something like this FAQ, just + as someone primarily interested in the mechanics of PGP would + devote more space to PGP issues than I have. + - Gary Jeffers, for example, devotes most of his "CEB" to + issues surrounding PGP. + + Will leave out some of the highly detailed items... + - Clipper, LEAF, escrow, Denning, etc. + - a myriad of encryption programs, bulk ciphers, variants on + PGP, etc. Some of these I've listed...others I've had to + throw my hands over and just ignore. (Keeping track of + zillions of versions for dozens of platforms...) + - easy to get lost in the details, buried in the bullshit + + 1.3. Motivations + 1.3.1. With so much material available, why another FAQ? + 1.3.2. No convenient access to archives of the list....and who could + read 50 MB of stuff anyway? + 1.3.3. Why not Web? (Mosaic, Http, URL, etc.) + - Why not a navigable Web document? + - This is becoming trendy. Lots of URLs are included here, in + fact. But making all documents into Web documents has + downsides. + + Reasons why not: + - No easy access for me. + - Many others also lack access. Text still rules. + - Not at all clear that a collection of hundreds of + fragments is useful + - I like the structured editors available on my Mac + (specifically, MORE, an outline editor) + - + 1.3.4. What the Essential Points Are + - It's easy to lose track of what the core issues are, what + the really important points are. In a FAQ like this, a vast + amount of "cruft" is presented, that is, a vast amount of + miscellaneous, tangential, and epiphenomenal material. + Names of PGP versions, variants on steganograhy, and other + such stuff, all of which will change over the next few + months and years. + + And yet that's partly what a FAQ is for. The key is just + not to lose track of the key ideas. I've mentioned what I + think are the important ideas many times. To wit: + - that many approaches to crypto exist + - that governments essentially cannot stop most of these + approaches, short of establishing a police state (and + probably not even then) + - core issues of identity, authentication, pseudonyms, + reputations, etc. + + 1.4. Who Should Read This + 1.4.1. "Should I read this?" + - Yes, reading this will point you toward other sources of + information, will answer the most commonly asked questions, + and will (hopefully) head off the reappearance of the same + tired themes every few months. + - Use a search tool if you have one. Grep for the things that + interest you, etc. The granularity of this FAQ does not + lend itself to Web conversion, at least not with present + tools. + + What _Won't_ Be Covered Here + + basic cryptography + + many good texts, FAQs, etc., written by full-time + cryptologists and educators + - in particular, some of the ideas are not simple, and + take several pages of well-written text to get the + point across + - not the focus of this FAQ + - basic political rants + + 1.5. Comments on Style and Thoroughness + 1.5.1. "Why is this FAQ not in Mosaic form?" + - because the author (tcmay, as of 7/94) does not have Mosaic + access, and even if did, would not necessarily.... + - linear text is still fine for some things...can be read on + all platforms, can be printed out, and can be searched with + standard grep and similar tools + 1.5.2. "Why the mix of styles?" + + There are three main types of styles here: + - Standard prose sections, explaining some point or listing + things. Mini-essays, like most posts to Cypherpunks. + + Short, outline-style comments + - that I didn't have time or willpower to expand into + prose format + - that work best in outline format anyway + - like this + + Quotes from others + - Cypherpunks are a bright group. A lot of clever things + have been said in the 600 days x 40 posts/day = 24,000 + posts, and I am trying to use what I can. + + Sadly, only a tiny fraction can be used + - because I simply cannot _read_ even a fraction of + these posts over again (though I've only saved + several thousand of the posts) + - and because including too many of these posts would + simply make the FAQ too long (it's still too long, I + suppose) + - I hope you can handle the changes in tone of voice, in + styles, and even in formats. It'll just too much time to + make it all read uniformly. + 1.5.3. Despite the length of this thing, a vast amount of stuff is + missing. There have been hundreds of incisive analyses by + Cypherpunks, dozens of survey articles on Clipper, and + thousands of clever remarks. Alas, only a few of them here. + - And with 25 or more books on the Internet, hundreds of FAQs + and URLs, it's clear that we're all drowning in a sea of + information about the Net. + - Ironically, good old-fashioned books have a lot more + relevant and timeless information. + 1.5.4. Caveats on the completeness or accuracy of this FAQ + + not all points are fully fleshed out...the outline nature + means that nearly all points could be further added-to, + subdivided, taxonomized, and generally fleshed-out with + more points, counterpoints, examples + - like a giant tree...branches, leaves, tangled hierarchies + + It is inevitable that conflicting points will be made in a + document of this size + - views change, but don't get corrected in all places + - different contexts lead to different viewpoints + - simple failure by me to be fully consistent + - and many points raised here would, if put into an essay + for the Cypherpunks list, generate comments, rebuttals, + debate, and even acrimony....I cannot expect to have all + sides represented fully, especially as the issues are + often murky, unresolved, in dispute, and generally + controversial + - inconsistencies in the points here in this FAQ + + 1.6. Corrections and Elaborations + + "How to handle corrections or clarifications?" + - While I have done my best to ensure accuracy, errors will + no doubt exist. And as anyone can see from reading the + Cypherpunks list, nearly *any* statement made about any + subject can produce a flurry of rebuttals, caveats, + expansions, and whatnot. Some subjects, such as the nature + of money, the role of Cypherpunks, and the role of + reputations, produce dozens of differing opinions every + time they come up! + - So, it is not likely that my points here will be any + different. Fortunately, the sheer number of points here + means that not every one of them will be disagreed with. + But the math is pretty clear: if every reader finds even + one thing to disagree with and then posts his rebuttal or + elaboration....disaster! (Especially if some people can't + trim quotes properly and end up including a big chunk of + text.) + + Recommendations + - Send corrections of _fact_ to me + - If you disagree with my opinion, and you think you can + change my mind, or cause me to include your opinion as an + elaboration or as a dissenting view, then send it. If + your point requires long debate or is a deep + disagreement, then I doubt I have the time or energy to + debate. If you want your views heard, write your own FAQ! + - Ultimately, send what you want. But I of course will + evaluate comments and apply a reputation-based filter to + the traffic. Those who send me concise, well-reasoned + corrections or clarifications are likelier to be listened + to than those who barrage me with minor clarifications + and elaborations. + - In short, this is not a group project. The "stone soup + FAQ" is not what this is. + + More information + - Please don't send me e-mail asking for more information + on a particular topic--I just can't handle custom + research. This FAQ is long enough, and the Glossary at + the end contains additional information, so that I cannot + expand upon these topics (unless there is a general + debate on the list). In other words, don't assume this + FAQ is an entry point into a larger data base I will + generate. I hate to sound so blunt, but I've seen the + requests that come in every time I write a fairly long + article. + + Tips on feedback + - Comments about writing style, of the form "I would have + written it _this_ way," are especially unwelcome. + + Credit issues + - inevitable that omissions or collisions will occur + - ideas have many fathers + - some ideas have been "in the air" for many years + + slogans are especially problematic + - "They can have my...."...I credit Barlow with this, but + I've heard others use it independently (I think; at least + I used it before hearing Barlow used it) + - "If crypto is outlawed, only outlaws will have crypto" + - "Big Brother Inside" + - if something really bothers you, send me a note + + 1.7. Acknowledgements + 1.7.1. Acknowledgements + - My chief thanks go to the several hundred active + Cypherpunks posters, past and present. + - All rights reserved. Copyright Timothy C. May. Don't try to + sell this or incorporate it into anything that is sold. + Quoting brief sections is "fair use"...quoting long + sections is not. + + 1.8. Ideas and Notes (not to be printed) + 1.8.1. Graphics for cover + - two blocks...plaintext to cryptotext + - Cypherpunks FAQ + - compiled by Timothy C. May, tcmay@netcom.com + - with help from many Cypherpunks + - with material from other sources + - + 1.8.2. "So don't ask" + + 1.9. Things are moving quickly in crypto and crypto policy + 1.9.1. hard to keep this FAQ current, as info changes + 1.9.2. PGP in state of flux + 1.9.3. new versions of tools coming constantly + 1.9.4. And the whole Clipper thing has been turned on its head + recently by the Administration's backing off...lots of points + already made here are now rendered moot and are primarily of + historical interest only. + - Gore's letter to Cantwell + - Whit Diffie described a conference on key escrow systems in + Karlsruhe, Germany, which seemed to contain new ideas + - TIS? (can't use this info?) + + 1.10. Notes: The Cyphernomicon: the CypherFAQ and More + 1.10.1. 2.3.1. "The Book of Encyphered Names" + - Ibn al-Taz Khallikak, the Pine Barrens Horror. + - Liber Grimoiris....Cifur??? + - spreading from the Sumerian sands, through the gate of + Ishtar, to the back alleys of Damascus, tempered with the + blood of Westerners + - Keys of Solomon, Kool John Dee and the Rapping Cryps Gone + to Croatan + - Peter Krypotkin, the Russian crypto anarchist + - Twenty-nine Primes, California + 1.10.2. 2.3.2. THE CYPHERNOMICON: a Cypherpunk FAQ and More--- + Version 0.666 + 1.10.3. 1994-09-01, Copyright Timothy C. May, tcmay@netcom.com + 1.10.4. + - Written and compiled by Tim May, except as noted by + credits. (Influenced by years of good posts on the + Cypherpunks list.) Permission is granted to post and + distribute this document in an unaltered and complete + state, for non-profit and educational purposes only. + Reasonable quoting under "fair use" provisions is + permitted. See the detailed disclaimer of responsibilities + and liabilities in the Introduction chapter.