home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
Text File | 1993-11-24 | 57.1 KB | 1,305 lines |
-
- ยท Subject: Privacy & Anonymity on the Internet FAQ
-
- Archive-name: net-privacy
- Last-modified: 1993/2/3
- Version: 1.0
-
-
-
- IDENTITY, PRIVACY, AND ANONYMITY on the INTERNET
- ================================================
-
- (c) 1993 L. Detweiler. Not for commercial use except by permission
- from author, otherwise may be freely copied. Not to be altered.
- Please credit if quoted.
-
- SUMMARY
- =======
-
- Information on email and account privacy, anonymous mailing and
- posting, file encryption, and other privacy issues associated with
- use of the Internet and global networks in general.
-
-
- QUESTIONS
- =========
-
- (Search for <#.#>.)
-
- IDENTITY
- --------
-
- <1.1> What is `identity' on the internet?
- <1.2> Why is identity (un)important on the internet?
- <1.3> How does my email address identify me and my background?
- <1.4> How can I find out more about somebody from their email address?
- <1.5> Why is identification unstable on the internet?
- <1.6> What is the future of identification on the internet?
-
- PRIVACY
- -------
-
- <2.1> What is `privacy' on the internet?
- <2.2> Why is privacy (un)important on the internet?
- <2.3> How private/secure is my account?
- <2.4> How private/secure is my email?
- <2.5> How do I provide more/less information to others on my identity?
- <2.6> Who is my sysadmin? What does s/he know about me?
- <2.7> Why is privacy unstable and nonexistent on the internet?
- <2.8> What is the future of privacy on the internet?
-
- ANONYMITY
- ---------
-
- <3.1> What is `anonymity' on the internet?
- <3.2> Why is `anonymity' (un)important on the internet?
- <3.3> How can anonymity be protected on the internet?
- <3.4> How do I send anonymous mail?
- <3.5> How do I post anonymously?
- <3.6> Why is anonymity unstable and nonexistent on the internet?
- <3.7> What is the future of anonymity on the internet?
-
- MISCELLANEOUS
- -------------
-
- <4.1> What is ``digital cash''?
- <4.2> What is a ``hacker'' or ``cracker''?
- <4.3> What is a ``cypherpunk''?
- <4.4> What new standards are needed to guard electronic privacy?
-
- RESOURCES
- ---------
-
- <5.1> How can I run an anonymous remailer?
- <5.2> What is the cypherpunks mailing list?
- <5.3> What are some privacy-related newsgroups? FAQs?
- <5.4> What is the MIT ``CROSSLINK'' anonymous message TV program?
- <5.5> What are the standards for internet Privacy Enhanced Mail (PEM)?
- <5.6> What UNIX utilities are related to privacy?
- <5.7> How cam I learn about or use cryptography?
-
- FOOTNOTES
- ---------
-
- <6.1> Most Wanted list
- <6.2> Change history
-
- * * *
-
-
- IDENTITY
- ========
-
- _____
- <1.1> What is `identity' on the internet?
-
- Generally, today people's `identity' on the internet is primarily
- determined by their email address in the sense that this is their
- most unchanging 'face' in the electronic realm. This is your
- login name qualified by the complete address domain information,
- for example ``ld231782@longs.lance.colostate.edu''. People see
- this address when receiving mail or reading USENET posts from you
- and in other situations where programs record usage. Some obsolete
- forms of addresses (such as BITNET) still persist.
-
- In email messages, additional information on the path that a message
- takes is prepended to the message received by the recipient. This
- information identifies the chain of hosts involved in the
- transmission and is a very accurate trace of its origination. This
- type of identify-and-forward protocol is also used in the USENET
- protocol to a lesser extent. Forging these fields requires
- corrupted mailing software at sites involved in the forwarding and
- is very uncommon. Not so uncommon is forging the chain at the
- origination point, so that all initial sites in the list are faked
- at the time the message is created. Tracing these messages can be
- difficult or impossible when the initial faked fields are names of
- real machines and represent real transfer routes.
-
-
- _____
- <1.2> Why is identity (un)important on the internet?
-
- The concept of identity is closely intertwined with communication,
- privacy, and security, which in turn are all critical aspects of
- computer networks. For example, the convenience of communication
- afforded by email would be impossible without conventions for
- identification. But there are many potential abuses of identity
- possible that can have very severe consequences, with massive
- computer networks at the forefront of the issue, which can
- potentially either exacerbate or solve these problems.
-
- Verifying that an identity is correct is called `authentication',
- and one classic example of the problems associated with it is
- H.G.Well's ``War of the Worlds'' radio broadcast that fooled segments
- of the population into thinking that an alien invasion was in
- progress. Hoaxes of this order are not uncommon on Usenet and
- forged identities makes them more insideous. People and their
- reputations can be assaulted by forgery.
-
- However, the fluidity of identity on the internet is for some one of
- its most attractive features. Identity is just as useful as it is
- harmful. A professor might carefully explain a topic until he
- finds he his talking to an undergraduate. A person of a particular
- occupation may be able to converse with others who might normally
- shun him. Some prejudices are erased, but, on the other hand, many
- prejudices are useful! A scientist might argue he can better
- evaluate the findings of a paper if he knows more about the
- authors. Likewise, he may be more likely to reject it based on
- unfair or irrelevant criteria.
-
- Identity is especially crucial in establishing and regulating
- `credit' (not necessarily financial) and `ownership' and `usage'.
- Many functions in society demand reliable and accurate techniques
- for identification. Heavy reliance will be placed on digital
- authentication as global economies become increasingly electronic.
- Many government functions and services are based on identification,
- and law enforcement frequently hinges on it. Hence, employees of
- many government organizations push toward stronger identification
- structures. But when does identification invade privacy?
-
- The growth of the internet is provoking social forces of massive
- proportions. Decisions made now on issues of identity will affect
- many future users, especially as the network becomes increasingly
- global, universal, widespread, and entrenched; and the positive or
- adverse affects of these actions, intended and inadvertent, will
- literally be magnified exponentially.
-
- _____
- <1.3> How does my email address identify me and my background?
-
- Your email address may contain information that influences people's
- perceptions of your background. The address may `identify' you as
- from a department at a particular university, an employee at a
- company, or a government worker. It may contain your last name,
- initials, or cryptic identification codes independent of both. In
- the US some are based on parts of social security numbers. Others
- are in the form 'u2338' where the number is incremented in the
- order that new users are added to the system.
-
- Standard internet addresses also can contain information on your
- broad geographical location or nationhood. However, none of this
- information is guaranteed to be correct or be there at all. The
- fields in the domain qualification of the username are based on
- rather arbitrary organization, such as (mostly invisible) network
- cabling distributions. The only point to make is that early fields
- in the address are more specific (such as specific computer names
- or local networks) and the later ones the most general (such as
- continental domains). Typically the first field is the name of the
- computer receiving mail.
-
- Gleaning information from the email address alone is sometimes an
- inspired art or an inconsistent and futile exercise. (For more
- information, see the FAQs on email addresses and known
-
- geographical distributions below.) However, UNIX utilities exist
- to aid in the quest (see the question on this).
-
- Examples
- --------
-
- jamison@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
- User named 'jamison' with university identified by `uwm', probably
- in the computer science department.
- fred@inode.com
- User named 'fred' at the commercial company identified as 'inode'.
- microman@black.ox.ac.uk
- An alias 'microman' for someone in the United Kingdom, possibly
- Oxford.
-
- _____
- <1.4> How can I find out more about somebody with a given email address?
-
- One simple way is to send email to that address, asking. Another
- way is to send mail to the postmaster at that address (i.e.
- postmaster@address), although the postmaster's job is more to help
- find user ID's of particular people given their real name and solve
- mail routing problems. The sysadmin (i.e. `root@address') may also
- be able to supply information. Users with related email address
- may have information. However, all of these methods rely on the
- time and patience of others so use them minimally.
-
- One of the most basic tools for determining identity over the
- internet is the UNIX utility 'finger'. The basic syntax is:
-
- finger user@here.there.everywhere
-
- This utility uses communication protocols to query the computer
- named in the address for information on the user named. The
- response is generated completely by the receiving computer and may
- be in any format. Possible responses are as follows.
-
- - A message `unknown host' meaning some aspect of the address is
- incorrect, two lines with no information and '???'
-
- - A message 'In real life: ???' in which case the receiving
- computer could not find any kind of a match on the username. The
- finger utility may return this response in other situations.
-
- - A listing of information associated with multiple users. Some
- computers will search only for matching user IDs, others will
- attempt to find the username you specified as a substring of all
- actual full names of users kept in a local database.
-
- - At some sites 'finger' can be used to get a list of all users on
- the system with a `finger @address'. In general this is often
- considered weak security, however, because `attackers' know valid
- user ID's to `crack' passwords.
-
- More information on the fields returned by `finger' is given below.
- More information on `finger' and locating people's email addresses
- is given in the email FAQ. Just as you can use these means to find
- out about others, they can use them to find out about you. You can
- `finger' yourself to find out what is publicly reported by your
- UNIX system about you. Be careful; generally anyone with internet
- access worldwide can query this information.
-
-
- _____
- <1.5> Why is identification unstable on the internet?
-
- Generally, identity is an amorphous and almost nonexistent concept
- on the Internet for a variety of reasons. One is the inherent
- fluidity of `cyberspace' where people emerge and submerge
- frequently, and absences are not readily noted in the `community'.
- Most people remember faces and voices, the primary means of casual
- identification in the 'real world'. The arbitary and cryptic
- sequences of letters and digits comprising most email addresses are
- not particularly noticeable or memorable and far from a unique
- identification of an individual, who may use multiple accounts on
- multiple machines anywhere in the world.
-
- Currently internet users do not really have any great assurances
- that the messages in email and USENET are from who they appear to
- be. A person's mailing address is far from an identification of
- an individual. First, anyone with access to the account, e.g. they
- know the password, either legitimately or otherwise, can send mail
- with that address in the From: line. Secondly, as part of current
- mailing protocol standards, forging the From: line is a fairly
- trivial operation for many hackers. Much less forgable is the
- status and path information prepended to messages by intermediate
- hosts. However, in general, while possible, forgeries are fairly
- rare on most newsgroups and in email.
-
- Besides these pathological cases there are simple problems with
- today's internet protocols affecting identification on the
- internet. Internet mail standards, described in RFC (?), are still
- evolving rapidly and not entirely orderly. For example, standards
- for mail address `munging' or `parsing' tend to vary slightly
- between sites and frequently mean the difference between finding
- addresses and bouncing mail (in other words, between identifying
- and contacting someone and not). Also, domain names and computer
- names are changed at sites. Addresses cannot be resolved when
- certain critical computers crash, such as the receiving computer
- or computers involved in resolving names into addresses. A whole
- slew of problems is associated with the `nameservers' in the latter
- category; if they are not updated they will not find name
- addresses, and even the operation of what constitutes `updating'
- has different interpretations at different sites.
-
- The current internet mailing and addressing protocols are slightly
- anachronistic in that they were created when the network was
- somewhat obscure and not widespread, with only a fraction of the
- traffic it now sees. Today a large proportion of internet traffic
- is email, comprising millions of messages.
-
- _____
- <1.6> What is the future of identification on the internet?
-
- Some new technologies and standards are introducing facial images
- and voice messages into mail and these will improve the sense of
- community that comes from the familiarity of identification.
- However, they are not currently widespread, require large amounts
- of data transfer, standardized software, and make some compromises
- in privacy.
-
- Promising new cryptographic techniques may make 'digital signatures'
- and 'digital authentication' common (see below). Also, the trend
- in USENET standards is toward greater authentication of posted
- information. On the other hand, advances in ensuring anonymity
- (such as remailers) are forthcoming. See below.
-
-
- PRIVACY
- =======
-
- _____
- <2.1> What is `privacy' on the internet?
-
- Generally, while `privacy' has multiple connotations in society and
- perhaps even more on the internet, in cyberspace most take it to
- mean that you have exclusive use and access to your account and the
- data stored on and and directed to it (such as email), and you do
- not encounter arbitrary restrictions or searches. In other words,
- others may obtain data associated with your account, but not
- without your permission. These ideas are probably both fairly
- limiting and liberal in their scope in what most internet users
- consider their private domains. Some users don't expect or want
- any privacy, some expect and demand it.
-
- _____
- <2.2> Why is privacy (un)important on the internet?
-
- This is a somewhat debatable and inflammatory topic, arousing
- passionate opinions. On the internet, some take privacy for
- granted and are rudely surprised to find it tenuous or nonexistent.
- Most governments have rules that protect privacy (such as the
- illegal search and seizure clause of the U.S. constitution, adopted
- by others) but have many that are antithetical to it (such as laws
- prohibiting secret communications or allowing wiretapping). These
- rules generally carry over to the internet with few specific rules
- governing it. However, the legal repercussions of the global
- internet are still largely unknown and untested (i.e. no strong
- legal precedents and court cases). The fact that internet traffic
- passes past international boundaries frequently complicates and
- discourages its regulation.
-
-
- _____
- <2.3> How private/secure is my account?
-
- By default, not very. There are a multitude of factors that may
- reinforce or compromise aspects of your privacy on the internet.
- First, your account must be secure from other users. The universal
- system is to use a password, but if it is `weak' (i.e. easy to
- guess) this security is significantly diminished. Somewhat
- surprisingly and frighteningly to some, certain users of the
- system, particularly the administrator, generally have unlimited
- access regardless of passwords, and may grant that access to
- others. This means that they may read any file in your account.
-
- Furthermore, not universally known, UNIX systems keep fairly
- extensive accounting records of when and where you logged in, what
- commands you execute, and when they are executed (in fact, login
- information is public). Potentially, every keystroke you type could
- be intercepted by someone else. System administrators make
- extensive backups that are completely invisible to users which may
- record the states of an account over many weeks. Erased files can,
- under many operating systems, be undeleted. Some software
- exacerbates these problems. For example, the widespread Xwindow
- system is extremely insecure; anyone with an account on server
- machine can disrupt the display or read it electronically. There
- are no protections from this type of access (even the ``access
- control'' xhost command can be evaded by regular users). Generally,
- you should expect little privacy on your account.
-
-
- Be aware of the rights associated with your files and directories in
- UNIX. If the `x' (`execute') right on your parent directory is off
- for users, groups, and other, these users cannot gain information
- on anything in your directories. Anything less may allow others to
- read, change, or even delete files in your home directory. By
- default most accounts are accessable only to the owner, but the
- initial configuration varies between sites based on administrator
- preference. The default file mode specifies the initial rights
- associated with newly created files, and can be set in the shell.
- The details of rights implementations tend to vary between versions
- of UNIX. Consult man pages on `chmod' and `ls'.
-
- Examples
- --------
-
- traver.lance % ls -ld ~
- drwx------ 15 ld231782 1536 Jan 31 21:22 /users/ld231782/
-
- Here is a listing of the rights associated with a user's home
- directory, denoted by `~'. The columns at the left identify what
- rights are available. The first column identifies the entry as a
- directory, and the next three columns mean that read, write, and
- execute rights, respectively, are permitted for that user. For
- directories, the `x' right means that contents (file and
- subdirectory names) within that directory can be listed. The
- subsequent columns indicate that no other users have any rights to
- anything in the directory tree originating at that point. They
- can't even `see' any lower files or subdirectories; the hierarchy
- is completely invisible to them.
-
- traver.lance % ls -l msg
- -rw-r--r-- 1 ld231782 35661 Jan 29 23:13 msg
- traver.lance % chmod u=rw,g=,o= msg
- traver.lance % ls -l msg
- -rw------- 1 ld231782 35661 Jan 29 23:13 msg
-
- Here the modes on the file `msg' were changed to take away rights
- from `group' and `other'.
-
- Indepedent of malevolent administrators are fellow users, a much
- more commonly harmful threat. There are multiple ways to help
- ensure that your account will not be accessed by others, and
- compromises can often be traced to failures in these guidelines:
-
- - Choose a secure password. Change it periodically.
- - Make sure to logout always.
- - Do not leave a machine unattended for long.
- - Make sure no one watches you when you type your password.
- - Avoid password references in email.
- - Be conservative in the use of the .rhost file.
- - Use utilities like `xlock' to protect a station, but be
- considerate.
-
- Be wary of situations where you think you should supply your
- password. There are only several basic situations where UNIX
- prompts you for a password: when you are logging in to a system or
- changing your password. Situations can arise in which prompts for
- passwords are forged by other users, especially in cases where you
- are talking to them (such as Internet Relay Chat). Also, be aware
- that forged login screens are one method to illegitimately obtain
- passwords.
-
-
- _____
- <2.4> How private/secure is my email?
-
- By default, not very. The characters that you are reading are
- almost certainly encoded in ASCII, the American Standard Code for
- Information Interchange that maps alphabetic and symbolic
- characters onto numeric codes and vice versa. Virtually every
- computer system uses this code, and if not, has ways of converting
- to and from it. When you write a mail message, by default it is
- being sent in ASCII, and since the standard is virtually
- universal, there is no intrinsic privacy.
-
- `Theoretically' people at any site in the chain of sites with access
- to hardware and network media that forwards a given mail message
- over the Internet (globally about a half-dozen (?) on average,
- depending on the distances) could potentially compromise the
- privacy of that message and read it. Technologies exist to `tap'
- magnetic fields given off by electrical wires without detection. In
- reality these breaches are generally unlikely and rare, with
- disturbing but isolated incidents known. Something more common is
- instances of immature or unscrupulous system operators reading
- private mail in the `spool files' at a local site (i.e. the
- ultimate source or destination of the message), such as a
- university. System administrators may also release files to law
- enforcement agencies, but protocols for warrants have not been
- established and tested.
-
- Note that bounced messages go to postmasters at a given site in
- their entirety. This means that if you address mail with an
- incorrect address it has a good chance of being seen by a human
- other than the recipient.
-
- Typically new user accounts are always set up such that the local
- mail directory is private, but this is not guaranteed and can be
- overridden.
-
- Finally, be aware that some mailing lists (email addresses of
- everyone on a list) are actually publicly accessable via mail
- routing software mechanisms. This `feature' can be disabled.
-
- Most potential compromises in email privacy can be avoided with
- the use of strong cryptography, which has its own set of caveats
- (for example, unscrupulous administrators may still be a threat if
- the encryption site is shared or nonlocal).
-
- _____
- <2.5> How do I provide more/less information to others on my identity?
-
- The public information of your identity and account is mostly
- available though the UNIX utility `finger' described above. You
- have control over most of this information with the utility `chfn',
- the amount varying between sites. You can provide unlimited
- information in the .plan file which is copied directly to the
- destination during the fingering. Your signature is determined by
- the environment variable SIGNATURE, and USENET signatures are
- usually kept in the .signature file in your home directory. Many
- people put disclaimers in these signatures that don't protect their
- identity but dissociate it from parent organizations as a
- precaution.
-
- Providing less information is more difficult and involved. One
- approach is to ask your system adminstrator to change or delete
- information about you (such as your full name). You may be able to
- obtain access on a public account or one from someone unrelated to
- you personally. You may be able to remotely login (via modem or
- otherwise) to computers that you are not physically near. There
- are tactics for hiding or masking your online activities but
- nothing is foolproof. Consult man pages on the 'chmod' command and
- the default file mode. Generally, files on a shared system have
- good safeguards within the user pool but very little protection is
- possible from corrupt system administrators.
-
- To mask your identity in email or on USENET you can use different
- accounts. More untraceable are new `anonymous posting' and
- remailing services that are very recently being established. See
- below.
-
- _____
- <2.6> Who is my sysadmin? What does s/he know about me?
-
- The requirements and screening for getting a system administration
- job (and access to all information on a system) vary widely between
- sites and are sometimes frighteningly lax, especially at
- universities. Many UNIX systems at universities are largely
- managed by undergraduates with a background in computing and often
- `hacking'. In general, commercial and industrial sites are more
- strict on qualifications and background, and government sites are
- extremely strict.
-
- The system adminstrator (root user) knows what commands you used
- and at what times. S/he may have a record of files on your account
- over a few weeks. S/he can monitor when you send email or post
- USENET messages, and potentially read either. S/he may have access
- to records indicating what hosts you are using, both locally and
- elsewhere.
-
- As punishment or whatever, your system can revoke certain
- `privileges' such as emailing, USENET posting or reading certain
- groups, file transferring, remote communications, or generally any
- subset of capabilities available from your account. This all is
- completely at the discretion of the local administrator and under
- the local procedures followed at the site (which are generally
- rather arbitrary).
-
- _____
- <2.7> Why is privacy unstable and nonexistent on the internet?
-
- For the numerous reasons listed above, privacy should not be an
- expectation with current use of the internet. Furthermore, large
- parts of the internet are funded by the U.S. NSF (National Science
- Foundation) which places certain restrictions on its use (such as
- prohibiting commercial use). Some high-level officials in this and
- other government agencies may be opposed to emerging techniques to
- guarantee privacy (such as encryption and anonymous services).
- However, traffic is generally completely unimpeded on the internet
- and only the most egregious offenders are pursued. Currently
- significant portions of USENET traffic, and less so internet
- traffic, are comprised of digitized images from copyrighted
- material, including amounts labelled `pornographic' by many.
-
- In some cases `abusive' posters to USENET are given admonitions from
- their system administrators as urged by others on the `net'.
- However, some argue that this is also used as a questionable means
- of attacking or silencing `harmless crackpots'. Currently there
- are virtually no guidelines for restricting use to any internet
- services and local administrators are free to make arbitrary
-
- decisions. Perhaps the most common example of this are the
- widespread occurrences of university administrators refusing to
- carry some portion of USENET newsgroups labelled as `pornographic'.
- The `alternative' hierarchy in the USENET system, which has
- virtually no restrictions on propagation and new group creation, is
- frequently targeted (although this material may appear anywhere).
-
- _____
- <2.8> What is the future of privacy on the internet?
-
- Some argue that the internet currently has an adequate or
- appropriate level of privacy. Others will argue that as a
- prototype for future global networks it has woefully inadequate
- safeguards. The internet is growing to become a completely global,
- international superhighway for data, and this traffic will
- inevitably entail data such as voice messages, postal mail, and
- many other items of extremely personal nature. Computer items that
- many people consider completely private (such as their local hard
- drives) will literally be inches from global network connections.
- Also, sensitive industrial and business information is exchanged
- over networks currently and this volume may conceivably merge with
- the internet.
-
- Most would agree that, for these basic but sensitive uses of the
- internet, no significant mechanisms are currently in place to
- ensure much privacy. New standards are calling for uniform
- introduction of `privacy enhanced mail' (PEM) which uses encryption
- technologies to ensure privacy, so that privacy protection is
- automatic, and may significantly improve safeguards.
-
- The same technology that can be extremely destructive to privacy
- (such as with surreptitious surveilance) can be overwhelmingly
- effective in protecting it (e.g. with encryption). Some government
- agencies are opposed to unlimited privacy in general, and believe
- that it should lawfully be forfeited in cases of criminal conduct
- (e.g. court-authorized wiretapping). However, powerful new
- technologies to protect privacy on computers are becoming
- increasingly popular, provoking some to say that ``the cat is out
- of the bag'' and the ``genie can't be put back in the bottle''. In
- less idiomatic terms, they believe that the spread of strong
- cryptography is already underway will be socially and technically
- unstoppable.
-
- To date, no feasible system that guarantees both secure
- communication and government oversight has been proposed (the two
- goals are largely incompatible). Proposals for ``registration'' of
- secret keys (by D. Denning on sci.crypt, for example) have been met
- with hot controversy at best and ridicule and derision at worst,
- mainly because of concerns for the right to privacy and objections
- of inherent feasibility. Electronic privacy issues, and
- particularly the proper roles of networks and the internet, will
- foreseeably become highly visible and explosive over the next few
- years.
-
-
- ANONYMITY
- =========
-
- _____
- <3.1> What is `anonymity' on the internet?
-
- Simply stated, anonymity is the absence of identity, the ultimate in
- privacy. However, there are several variations on this simple
- theme. A person may wish to be consistently identified by a
- certain pseudonym and establish a reputation under it in some area,
- providing pseudo-anonymity. A person may wish to be completely
- untraceable for a single one-way message (a sort of `hit-and-run').
- Or, a person may wish to be openly anonymous but carry on a
- conversation with others (with either known or anonymous
- identities) via an `anonymous return address'. A user may wish to
- appear as a `regular user' but actually be untraceable. Sometimes
- a user wishes to hide who he is sending mail to (in addition to the
- message itself). The anonymous item may directed at individuals or
- groups.
-
- All of these uses are feasible on the internet but are currently
- tricky to carry out in practice, because of all the tracking
- mechanisms inherent to operating systems and network protocols.
- Officials of the NSF and other government agencies may be opposed
- to any of these uses because of the potential for abuse.
- Nevertheless, the inherent facelessness of large networks will
- always guarantee a certain element of anonymity.
-
- _____
- <3.2> Why is `anonymity' (un)important on the internet?
-
- Anonymity is another powerful tool that can be beneficial or
- problematic depending on its use. Arguably absence of
- identification is important as the presence of it. It may be the
- case that many strong benefits from electronic anonymity will be
- discovered that were unforeseen and unpredicted, because true
- anonymity has been historically very difficult to establish.
-
- One can use anonymity to make personal statements to a colleague
- that would sabotage a relationship if stated openly (such as
- employer/employee scenarios). One can use it to pass information
- and evade any threat of direct retribution. For example,
- `whistleblowers' reporting on government abuses (economic, social,
- or political) can bring issues to light without fear of stigma or
- retaliation. Sensitive, personal, potentially damaging information
- is often posted to some USENET groups, a risky situation where
- anonymity allows conversations to be carried on completely
- independent of the identities of the participants. Some police
- departments run phone services that allow anonymous reporting of
- crimes; such uses would be straightforward on the network.
- Unfortunately, extortion and harassment become more insideous with
- assurances of anonymity.
-
- _____
- <3.3> How can anonymity be protected on the internet?
-
- The chief means, as alluded to above, are masking identities in
- email and posting. However, anonymous accounts (public accounts as
- accessable and anonymous as e.g. public telephones) may be
- effective as well, but this use is generally not officially
- supported and even discouraged by some system adminstrators and NSF
- guidelines. The nonuniformity in the requirements of obtaining
- accounts at different sites and institutions makes anonymous
- accounts generally difficult to obtain to the public at large.
-
- Many communications protocols are inherently detrimental to
- anonymity. Virtually every protocol in existence currently
- contains information on both sender and receiver in every packet.
- New communications protocols will likely develop that guarantee
- much higher degrees of secure anonymous communication.
-
- _____
- <3.4> How do I send anonymous mail?
-
- One approach has been to set up an `anonymous server' that, when
- activated by email to its address, responds by allocating and
- supplying an `anonymous ID' that is unique to the person requesting
- it (based on his email address). This will vary for the same
- person for different machine address email originations. To send
- anonymous mail, the user sends email directed to the server
- containing the final destination. The server `anonymizes' the
- message by stripping of identification information and forwards the
- message, which appears to originate from the anonymous server only
- from the corresponding anonymous user id. This is the
- `interactive' use of anonymity or pseudonymity mentioned above.
-
- Another more `fringe' approach is to run a `cypherpunk' remailer
- from a regular user account (no root system privileges are
- required). These are currently being pioneered by Eric Hughes and
- Hal Finney <hal@alumni.caltech.edu. The operator runs a process on
- a machine that anonymizes mail sent to him with certain
- characteristics that distinguish it from his regular incoming mail
- (typically fields in the header). One has been implemented as a
- PERL script running on UNIX. Several of these are in existence
- currently but sites and software currently are highly unstable;
- they may be in operation outside of system administrator knowledge.
- The remailers don't generally support anonymous return addresses.
- Mail that is incorrectly addressed is received by the operator.
- Generally the user of the remailer has to disavow any
- responsibility for the messages forwarded through his system,
- although actually may be held responsible regardless.
-
- Both of these approaches have several disadvantages. The anonymous
- server approach requires maintaining a mapping of anonymous ID's to
- real addresses that must be maintained indefinitely. One
- alternative is to allow `deallocation' of aliases at the request of
- the user, but this has not been implemented yet. Traffic to any of
- these sites could conceivably be monitored, necessitating the use
- of cryptography for basic protection. Local administrators can
- shut them down either out of caprice or under pressure from
- government agencies. Unscrupulous providers of the services can
- monitor the traffic that goes through them. Most remailers
- currently keep logs that may be inspected.
-
- Currently the most direct route to anonymity involves using SMTP
- protocols to submit a message directly to a server with arbitrary
- field information. This practice, not uncommon to hackers, and the
- approach used by remailers, is generally viewed with hostility by
- most system administrators. Information in the header routing data
- and logs of network port connection information may be retained
- that can be used to track the originating site. In practice, this
- is generally infeasible and rarely carried out. Some
- administrators on the network will contact local administrators to
- request a message be tracked and its writer admonished or punished
- more severely (such as revoking the account), all of this actually
- happening occasionally but infrequently.
-
-
- _____
- <3.5> How do I post anonymously?
-
- For this use anonymous servers have been established as well with
- all the associated caveats above (monitored traffic, capricious or
- risky local circumstances, logging). anon.penet.fi operated by
- @DATAPHONE@ julf@penet.fi can be used here too; mail to help@penet.fi for
-
- information. Make sure to test the system at least once by e.g.
- anonymous posting to misc.test. Make sure no signature data slips
- through.
-
- Another direct route involves using NNTP protocols to submit a
- message directly to a newserver with arbitrary field information.
- This practice, not uncommon to hackers, is also generally viewed
- with hostility by most system administrators, and similar
- consequences can ensue.
-
-
- _____
- <3.5> What are some known anonymous remailing and posting sites?
-
- Following are some anonymous remailing and posting sites. Make sure
- to test the system at least once by e.g. sending anonymized mail to
- yourself. Make sure no signature data slips through. Be courteous
- to the system operator, who may be personally risking his account
- for your convenience. Do not send abusive, harrassing or
- threatening messages, or anything else that may endanger the
- operator of the site.
-
-
- anon.penet.fi
- -------------
- Anonymized mail, posting, and return addresses (no encryption).
- Send mail to help@penet.fi for information.
-
- elee7h5@rosebud.ee.uh.edu
- -------------------------
- Experimental anonymous remailer run Karl Barrus
- <elee9sf@Menudo.UH.EDU>. Send to the site name a message with
- the following text:
-
- ::
- command: help
-
- user@host
-
- where `user@host' is the return address.
-
- hal@alumni.caltech.edu
- ----------------------
- Experimental remailer with encryption and return addresses.
- Request information from above address.
-
- nowhere@bsu-cs.bsu.edu
- ----------------------
- Experimental remailer allowing chaining. Run by Chael Hall.
- Request information from above address.
-
- phantom@mead.u.washington.edu
- -----------------------------
- Experimental remailer with encryption. `finger' site address
- for information.
-
-
- Notes: Currently the most stable of anonymous remailing sites is
- probably anon.penet.fi operated by julf@penet.fi for several
- months, who has system adminstrator privileges. So far, all
- encryption is based on public-key cryptography and PGP software
- (see the question on cryptography). Encryption aspects (message
- text, destination address, replies) vary between sites.
-
- _____
- <3.6> Why is anonymity unstable and nonexistent on the internet?
-
- As noted, many factors compromise the anonymity currently available
- to the general internet community, and these services should be
- used with great caution. To summarize, the technology is in its
- infancy and current approaches are unrefined, unreliable, and not
- completely trustworthy. No standards have been established and
- troubling situations of loss of anonymity and bugs in the software
- are prevalent. (For example, one anonymous remailer reallocated
- already allocated anonymous return addresses. Others passed
- signature information embedded in messages unaltered. Address
- resolution problems resulting in anonymized mail bounced to a
- remailer are common.)
-
- Source code is being distributed, tested, and refined for these
- systems, but standards are progressing slowly and weakly. The
- field is not likely to improve without official endorsement and
- action by network agencies. The whole idea is still viewed with
- suspicion and distrust by many on the internet and seen as
- illegitimate or favorable to criminality.
-
- A very sophisticated anonymous posting system was recently set up by
- dclunie@pax.tpa.com.au that used cryptography in both directions
- (to/from) the server for the highest degree of confidentiality seen
- so far. However, it was running on a public access account, and he
- had to shut it down after receiving requests and conditions
- apparently ultimately originating from NSF representatives.
-
-
- _____
- <3.7> What is the future of anonymity on the internet?
-
- New anonymous protocols effectively serve to significantly increase
- safeguards of anonymity. For example, the same mechanism that
- routes email over multiple hosts, thereby threatening its privacy,
- can also be used to guarantee it. In a scheme called `chaining' an
- anonymous message is passed through multiple anonymous servers
- before reaching a destination. In this way generally multiple
- links of the chain have to be `broken' for security to be
- compromised. Re-encryption at each link makes this scenario even
- more unlikely. Even more significantly the anonymous remailers
- could be spread over the internet globally so that local weaknesses
- (such as corrupt governments or legal wiretapping within a nation)
- would be more unlikely to sacrifice overall security by message
- tracing. However, remailers run by corrupt operators are possible.
-
- The future of anonymous services on the internet is, at this time,
- highly uncertain and fraught with peril. Nevertheless, its
- widespread introduction and use may be inevitable and its
- implementation could carry significant and unforeseen social
- repercussions. However, if its use is continued to be generally
- regarded as subversive it may be confined to the underground.
-
- MISCELLANEOUS
- =============
-
- _____
- <4.1> What is ``digital cash''?
-
- With digital encryption and authentication technologies, the
- possibility of a widespread digital cash system may someday be
- realized. A system utilizing codes sent between users and banks
- (similar to today's checking except entirely digital) may be one
- approach. The issues of cryptography, privacy, and anonymity are
- closely associated with transfer of cash in an economy. See the
- article in Scientific American by David Chaum.
-
- An experimental digital bank is run by Karl Barrus
- <elee9sf@Menudo.UH.EDU> based on suggestions by Hal Finney on the
- cypherpunks mailing list. To use the server send mail to
- elee7h5@rosebud.ee.uh.edu message with the following text:
-
- ::
- command: help
-
- user@host
-
- where `user@host' is your email address.
-
- _____
- <4.2> What is a ``hacker'' or ``cracker''?
-
- These terms arouse strong feelings by many on their meaning,
- especially on the internet. In the general news media in the past
- a person who uses computers and networks to malicious ends (such as
- breaking into systems) has been referred to as a hacker, but most
- internet users prefer the term ``cracker'' for this. Instead, a
- ``hacker'' is perceived as a benign but ambitious and intensely
- curious computer user who explores obscure areas of a system, for
- example---something of an electronic pioneer and patriot. This is
- the sense intended in this document. See also the ``Hacker's
- Dictionary'' and the alt.security FAQ.
-
- _____
- <4.3> What is a ``cypherpunk''?
-
- From the charter of the cypherpunk mailing list:
-
- > Cypherpunks assume privacy is a good thing and wish there were
- > more of it. Cypherpunks acknowledge that those who want privacy
- > must create it for themselves and not expect governments,
- > corporations, or other large, faceless organizations to grant
- > them privacy out of beneficence. Cypherpunks know that people
- > have been creating their own privacy for centuries with whispers,
- > envelopes, closed doors, and couriers. Cypherpunks do not seek
- > to prevent other people from speaking about their experiences or
- > their opinions.
-
- See information on the cypherpunk mailing list below.
-
- _____
- <4.4> What new standards are needed to guard electronic privacy?
-
-
- General
- -------
-
- - Recognition of anonymity, cryptography, and related privacy
- shields as legitimate, useful, desirable, and crucial by the
- general public and their governments.
- - Widespread use and implementation of these technologies in
- hardware, software, and standards, implemented `securely,'
- `seamlessly,' and `transparently'.
- - General shift of use, dependence, and reliance to means other than
- wiretapping and electronic surveillance by law enforcement
-
- agencies.
- - Publicity, retraction, and dissolution of laws and government
- agencies opposed to privacy, replaced by structures dedicated to
- strengthening and protecting it.
-
- Remailing/Posting
- -----------------
-
- - Stable, secure, protected, officially sanctioned and permitted,
- publicly and privately operated anonymous servers and hubs.
- - Official standards for encryption and anonymity in mail and USENET
- postings.
- - Truly anonymous protocols with source and destination information
- obscured or absent and hidden routing mechanisms (chaining,
- encrypted addresses, etc.)
- - Standards for anonymous email addressing, embedding files, and
- remailer site chaining.
-
-
- RESOURCES
- =========
-
- _____
- <5.1> How can I run an anonymous remailer?
-
- Cypherpunk remailer source is at soda.berkeley.edu in the
- /pub/cypherpunks directory. It's written in PERL, and is relatively
- easy to install (no administrative rights are required). Karl Barrus
- <elee9sf@menudo.uh.edu> has more information and modifications. Also,
- most remailer operators mentioned above are amenable to discussing
- features, problems, and helping new sites become operational.
-
- _____
- <5.2> What is the cypherpunks mailing list?
-
- Eric Hughes <hughes@toad.com> runs the `cypherpunk' mailing list
- dedicated to ``discussion about technological defenses for privacy
- in the digital domain.'' Send email to
- cypherpunks-request@toad.com to be added or subtracted from the
- list. From the charter:
-
- > The most important means to the defense of privacy is encryption.
- > To encrypt is to indicate the desire for privacy. But to encrypt
- > with weak cryptography is to indicate not too much desire for
- > privacy. Cypherpunks hope that all people desiring privacy will
- > learn how best to defend it.
-
- _____
- <5.3> What are some privacy-related newsgroups? FAQs?
-
- Newsgroups
- ==========
-
- alt.cyberpunks
- --------------
- Virtual reality, (science) fiction by William Gibson and Bruce
- Sterling, cyberpunk in the mainstream.
-
- alt.hackers
- -----------
- USENET Network News Transfer Protocol (NNTP) posting mechanisms,
- Simple Mail Transfer Protocol (SMTP), `obligatory hack' reports.
-
- alt.security.pgp
- ----------------
- Dedicated to discussing PGP, or ``Pretty Good Privacy'' Software
- developed by Phil Zimmerman for public key encryption.
-
- sci.crypt
- ---------
- Considers scientific and social issues of cryptography.
- Examples: legitimate use of PGP, public-key patents, DES,
- cryptographic security, cypher breaking, etc.
-
- alt.privacy
- -----------
- General privacy issues involving taxpaying, licensing, social
- security numbers, etc.
-
- comp.society.privacy
- --------------------
- Privacy issues associated with computer technologies. Examples:
- caller identification, social security numbers, credit
- applications, mailing lists, etc. Moderated.
-
- comp.eff.news
- comp.eff.talk
- -------------
- Moderated and unmoderated groups associated with the Electronic
- Frontier Foundation started by Mitch Kapor for protecting civil
- and constitutional rights in the electronic realm.
-
- alt.comp.acad-freedom.news
- alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
- --------------------------
- Moderated and unmoderated issues related to academic freedom and
- privacy at universities. Documented examples of violated
- privacy in e.g. email. Documented examples of `censhorship' as
- in e.g. limiting USENET groups local availability.
-
- alt.security
- comp.security.misc
- ------------------
- Computer related security issues. FAQ in news.answers below.
-
-
- FAQs
- ====
-
- FAQs or ``Frequently-Asked Questions'' are available in the
- newsgroup news.answers or via anonymous FTP to
- pit-manager.mit.edu [18.172.1.27] from the directory
- /pub/usenet/news.answers.
-
- network-info/part1
- ------------------
- Sources of information about the Internet and how to connect to
- it, through the NSF or commercial vendors.
-
- alt-security-faq
- ----------------
- Computer related security issues arising in alt.security and
- comp.security.misc, mostly UNIX related.
-
- ssn-privacy
- -----------
- Privacy issues associated with the use of the U.S. Social
- Security number (SSN).
-
- pdial
- -----
- Public dialup internet accounts list.
-
- college-email/part1
- -------------------
- How to find email addresses for undergraduate and graduate
- students, faculty and staff at various colleges and
- universities.
-
- ripem/faq
- ---------
- Information on RIPEM, a program for public key mail encryption
- officially sanctioned by Public Key Partners Inc., the company
- that owns patents on public key cryptography.
-
- unix-faq/faq/part1
- ------------------
- Frequently-asked questions about UNIX, including information on
- `finger' and terminal spying.
-
- distributions/*
- ---------------
- Known geographic, university, and network distributions.
-
- _____
- <5.4> What is the MIT ``CROSSLINK'' anonymous message TV program?
-
- > CROSSLINK is an anonymous message system run on MIT Student
- > Cable TV-36. It provides an anonymous medium through which MIT
- > students can say those things they might otherwise find
- > difficult, inconvenient or impossible to say in person. It's
- > also a way to send fun or totally random messages to your
- > friends over the air. It is similar to the anonymous message
- > pages found in many college newspapers, except that it's
- > electronic in nature and it's free.
-
- Messages can be posted to the service via email. For more
- information send email to crosslink@athena.mit.edu.
-
- _____
- <5.5> What are the standards for internet PEM (Privacy Enhanced Mail)?
-
- Internet drafts on Privacy Enhanced Mail (PEM), a standard under
- revision for six years delineating the official protocols for
- email encryption.
-
- - ``Privacy Enhancement for Internet Electronic Mail: Part I:
- <draft-ietf-pem-msgproc-02.txt>
-
- - ``Privacy Enhancement for Internet Electronic Mail: Part II:
- Certificate-Based Key Management'' <draft-ietf-pem-keymgmt-01.txt>
-
- - ``Privacy Enhancement for Internet Electronic Mail: Part III:
- Algorithms, Modes, and Identifiers''
- <draft-ietf-pem-algorithms-02.txt>
-
- - ``Privacy Enhancement for Internet Electronic Mail: Part IV: Key
- Certification and Related Services'' <draft-ietf-pem-forms-01.txt>
-
-
- _____
- <5.6> What UNIX utilities are related to privacy?
-
- For more information, type `man [cmd]' or `apropos [keyword]' at the
- UNIX shell prompt.
-
- finger - obtain information about a remote user
- chfn - change information about yourself obtainable by remote
- users
- chmod - change the rights associated with a file or directory
- umask - (shell) change the default (on creation) file access
- rights
- ls - list the rights associated with files and directories
- xhost - allow or disable access control of particular users to
- an Xwindow server
- last - list the latest user logins on the system and
- their originations
- who - list other users, login/idle times, originations
- w - list other users and what they are running
-
- .signature - file in the home directory appended to USENET posts
- $SIGNATURE - used as name in email and USENET postings
-
- _____
- <5.7> How can I learn about or use cryptography?
-
- A general introduction to mostly theoretical cryptographic issues,
- especially those frequently discussed in sci.crypt, is available
- in FAQ form:
-
- > Compiled by:
- > cme@ellisun.sw.stratus.com (Carl Ellison)
- > Gwyn@BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn)
- > smb@ulysses.att.com (Steven Bellovin)
-
- NIST (U.S. National Institute for Standards and Technology)
- publishes an introductory paper on cryptography, special
- publication 800-2 ``Public-Key Cryptograhy'' by James Nechvatal
- (April 1991). Available via anonymous FTP from
- csrc.ncsl.nist.gov (129.6.54.11), file pub/nistpubs/800-2.txt.
- Also via available anonymous FTP from wimsey.bc.ca as crypt.txt.Z
- in the crypto directory. Covers technical mathematical aspects
- of encryption such as number theory.
-
- More general information can be found in a FAQ by Paul Fahn of RSA
- Labortories via anonymous FTP from rsa.com in /pub/faq.ps.Z. See
- the `readme' file for information on the `tex' version. Also
- available as hardcopy for $20 from RSA Laboratories, 100 Marine
- Parkway, Redwood City, CA 94065. Send questions to
- faq-editor@rsa.com.
-
- Phil Zimmerman's PGP (Pretty Good Privacy) public-domain package
- for public key encryption is available at numerous sites, and is
- in widespread use over the internet for general UNIX-based file
- encryption (including email). Consult the archie FTP database.
- Also see the newsgroup alt.security.pgp. Mailing list requests
- to info-pgp-request@lucpul.it.luc.edu.
-
- From the RIPEM FAQ by Marc VanHeyningen
- <mvanheyn@whale.cs.indiana.edu> on news.answers:
-
- > RIPEM is a program which performs Privacy Enhanced Mail (PEM)
- > using the cryptographic techniques of RSA and DES. It allows
- > your electronic mail to have the properties of authentication
- > (i.e. who sent it can be confirmed) and privacy (i.e. nobody can
- > read it except the intended recipient.)
- >
- > RIPEM was written primarily by Mark Riordan
- > <mrr@scss3.cl.msu.edu>. Most of the code is in the public domain,
- > except for the RSA routines, which are a library called RSAREF
- > licensed from RSA Data Security Inc.
- >
- > RIPEM is available via anonymous FTP to citizens and permanent
- > residents in the U.S. from rsa.com; cd to rsaref/ and read the
- > README file for info.
- >
- > RIPEM, as well as some other crypt stuff, has its `home site' on
- > rpub.cl.msu.edu, which is open to non-anonymous FTP for users in
- > the U.S. and Canada who are citizens or permanent residents. To
- > find out how to obtain access, ftp there, cd to pub/crypt/, and
- > read the file GETTING_ACCESS.
-
- Note: cryptography is generally not well integrated into email yet
- and some system proficiency is required by users to utilize it.
-
- FOOTNOTES
- =========
-
- _____
- <6.1> Most Wanted list
-
- Hopefully you have benefitted from this creation, compilation, and
- condensation of information from various sources regarding privacy,
- identity, and anonymity on the internet. The author is committed
- to keeping this up-to-date and strengthening it, but this can only
- be effective with your feedback. In particular, the following
- information would be useful:
-
- - How large is internet traffic? How much is email? How much
- USENET? What are the costs involved?
-
- - What are NSF standards and regulations on the use and privacy
- associated with the internet?
-
- - What laws have been passed and are under consideration regarding
- privacy on networks?
-
- - What are references on privacy?
-
- - What are some famous or obscure examples of compromised privacy
- on the internet? (Esp. pointers to info on the Steve Jackson
- Games incident.)
-
- - What RFCs are available on privacy-related subjects? What are FTP
- sites?
-
- - What are the exact details of Xwindow security? Particularly
- MIT-MAGIC-COOKIE-1, described in `man Xsecurity' at some sites.
-
- - Where is the code (FTP site) to turn the .plan file into a named
- pipe for sensing/reacting to remote `finger's?
-
- email feedback to ld231782@longs.lance.colostate.edu. Please note
- where you saw this (which newsgroup, etc.).
-
- _____
- <6.2> Change history
-
- 2/3/93 v1.0 (current)
- More newsgroups & FAQs added. More `Most Wanted'. Posted to
- news.answers. Future monthly posting to sci.crypt, alt.privacy.
-
- 2/1/93 v0.3
-
- Formatted to 72 columns for quoting etc. `miscellaneous,'
- `resources' sections added with cypherpunk servers and use
- warnings. More UNIX examples (`ls' and `chmod'). Posted to
- alt.privacy, comp.society.privacy.
-
- 1/29/93 v0.2
-
- `Identity' and `Privacy' sections added. `Anonymity' expanded.
- Remailer addresses removed due to lack of information and
- instability. Posted to sci.crypt.
-
- 1/25/93 v0.1
-
- Originally posted to the cypherpunks mailing list on 1/25/93 as a
- call to organize a list of anonymous servers.
-
- email ld231782@longs.lance.colostate.edu for earlier versions.
-
- --
-
- ld231782@longs.LANCE.ColoState.EDU
-
-