PRZ Announcement

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

  In light of the great amount of discussion currently taking
place in regard to the benefits and disadvantages of my latest
bid for money, power, fame and the respect of the corporate
computer industry, I would like to reassure the cynics that
my committment to privacy has never been stronger.
  However, I have reassessed my views of who truly has a right
to control access to privacy and have come to the conclusion
that privacy is too important an issue to be left in the hands
of the individual, with the obvious potential for misuse.
  After a review of the astounding success of the PGP Public Key
Server's use, in conjunction with our PGP Privy Products, in
ensuring proper key management and control of forgery, spoofing
and misuse of Public/Private Key technology, it has become clear
that individual privacy can best be ensured under the watchful
eye of those with the resources to provide proper surveillance
of those who have earned the right to privacy, in order to 
prevent abuse of that right.

  I would like to thank my other brother, Phil (Hallam-Baker),
for helping me to see that unsupervised use of the right to
privacy could result in individuals misusing that right to
publish extremely embarassing pictures of me in compromising
positions which could affect my credibility.
  As a matter of fact, it was PH-B who suggested my new
signature line.

PRZ
~~~
"I don't put them in the PGPtray...I just turn on the GAK."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQA/AwUBNE/sV17MfpC8gEO7EQKaCQCePKAo033KBg/O/T9Nz5IrGLIcCZcAn0L4
JDtdMovT9RZKA4PXwJTNdvpr
=Xvzl
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQA/AwUBNE/svUlfPVhsMJvfEQI2zgCg8aQ15PEU4eNItEprsLQHd2259fIAn2a1
wwKyecnoEQuCElB3ZtJBZQBz
=53jb
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Phillip R. Zimmermann wrote:
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
...
> PRZ
> ~~~
> "I don't put them in the PGPtray...I just turn on the GAK."
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> 
> - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
> Charset: noconv
> 
> iQA/AwUBNE/sV17MfpC8gEO7EQKaCQCePKAo033KBg/O/T9Nz5IrGLIcCZcAn0L4
> JDtdMovT9RZKA4PXwJTNdvpr
> =Xvzl
> - -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
> Charset: noconv
> 
> iQA/AwUBNE/svUlfPVhsMJvfEQI2zgCg8aQ15PEU4eNItEprsLQHd2259fIAn2a1
> wwKyecnoEQuCElB3ZtJBZQBz
> =53jb
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On Thu, 23 Oct 1997, there's no way in nine hells that Phillip R. Zimmermann
could have wrote:
...
>   However, I have reassessed my views of who truly has a right
> to control access to privacy and have come to the conclusion
> that privacy is too important an issue to be left in the hands
> of the individual, with the obvious potential for misuse.

Hmm...I haven't checked any signatures or headers yet, but something tells me
that this ain't PRZ. For example, the Organization: header refers to Orwell's
1984 as a "blueprint"...forget the signatures (just got a message saying they
match -- either that person's lying, "they" cracked his key, or it's some
detail that has the program using a different key/ignoring some text), it is
psychologically impossible for someone to go from privacy advocate to
1984-as-a-blueprint that quick.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Randall Farmer
    rfarmer@hiwaay.net
    http://hiwaay.net/~rfarmer

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Randall Farmer wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 23 Oct 1997, there's no way in nine hells that Phillip R. Zimmermann
> could have wrote:
> ...
> >   However, I have reassessed my views of who truly has a right
> > to control access to privacy and have come to the conclusion
> > that privacy is too important an issue to be left in the hands
> > of the individual, with the obvious potential for misuse.
> 
> Hmm...I haven't checked any signatures or headers yet, but something tells me
> that this ain't PRZ. 

Randall,
Good eye. This forgery even fooled some of us at PGP.

However, I immediately recognized that PRZ's alleged new signature
line: "I don't put them in the PGPtray...I just turn on the GAK."
was backwards. That is Lying Jackoff Fuck Louis J. Freeh's line.

  Phil's new signature line now reads:
"I just put them in the PGPtray...I don't turn on the GAK."

Jason
~~~~~
"It's not a mask, it's an attitude."
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQA/AwUBNFAEDsIoHaOg9jRdEQJrNQCeIPY8Kx8SX0XF/iI+Dt0lkZ94F3QAniWQ
BRedHLydVsyjxBLmfP6d9NNo
=rLE4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


Some lame forger pretended Randall Farmer wrote:
 
> On Thu, 23 Oct 1997, there's no way in nine hells that Phillip R. Zimmermann
> could have wrote:
> ...
> >   However, I have reassessed my views of who truly has a right
> > to control access to privacy and have come to the conclusion
> > that privacy is too important an issue to be left in the hands
> > of the individual, with the obvious potential for misuse.
> 
> Hmm...I haven't checked any signatures or headers yet, but something tells me
> that this ain't PRZ. For example, the Organization: header refers to Orwell's
> 1984 as a "blueprint"...forget the signatures (just got a message saying they
> match -- either that person's lying, "they" cracked his key, or it's some
> detail that has the program using a different key/ignoring some text), it is
> psychologically impossible for someone to go from privacy advocate to
> 1984-as-a-blueprint that quick.
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

  The above is a lame forgery by some troublemaker, and only 
serves to underscore PRZ's new position, namely, that access
to privacy should be supervised by people who have shown that
they have the maturity to act responsibly, as evidenced by
their success in a corporate atmosphere.

  I am PGP signing this post so that there can be no doubt as
to its source and authenticity.
  Cypherpunks list subscribers should be more careful about
checking signatures before believing everything they read.

Randall Farmer
    rfarmer@hiwaay.net
    http://hiwaay.net/~rfarmer

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQA/AwUBNFAK/BpRm26Z4YsSEQIA0wCeJZ7R9w/XfDuE0HMo+eP/0ihYOykAoNef
Gt1hIbRHpYtJ1jp/79hWZl0G
=E9PX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Damn, that's annyoing. I don't have a PGP key, and never sign my messages. Note
that my real message trailer has a line of dashes before it. I'm putting
something confirming that the other message was a forgery (and confirming that
I don't have a PGP key) on my web page -- http://hiwaay.net/~rfarmer (even the
forger agrees that's my page). 

I'll also (possibly) create a key and post the real fingerprint/ID on my page
if this becomes a problem. (Actually, probably not...can only run 2.6.2)

Note that the keyserver probably has this as my key...I'll use a different name
for my real key.

Some lame forger pretended Randall Farmer wrote:

> Some lame forger pretended Randall Farmer wrote:
>  
> > On Thu, 23 Oct 1997, there's no way in nine hells that Phillip R. Zimmermann
> > could have wrote:
> > ...
> > >   However, I have reassessed my views of who truly has a right
> > > to control access to privacy and have come to the conclusion
> > > that privacy is too important an issue to be left in the hands
> > > of the individual, with the obvious potential for misuse.
> > 
> > Hmm...I haven't checked any signatures or headers yet, but something tells me
> > that this ain't PRZ. For example, the Organization: header refers to Orwell's
> > 1984 as a "blueprint"...forget the signatures (just got a message saying they
> > match -- either that person's lying, "they" cracked his key, or it's some
> > detail that has the program using a different key/ignoring some text), it is
> > psychologically impossible for someone to go from privacy advocate to
> > 1984-as-a-blueprint that quick.
> > 
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
>   The above is a lame forgery by some troublemaker, and only 
> serves to underscore PRZ's new position, namely, that access
> to privacy should be supervised by people who have shown that
> they have the maturity to act responsibly, as evidenced by
> their success in a corporate atmosphere.
> 
>   I am PGP signing this post so that there can be no doubt as
> to its source and authenticity.
>   Cypherpunks list subscribers should be more careful about
> checking signatures before believing everything they read.
> 
> Randall Farmer
>     rfarmer@hiwaay.net
>     http://hiwaay.net/~rfarmer
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
> Charset: noconv
> 
> iQA/AwUBNFAK/BpRm26Z4YsSEQIA0wCeJZ7R9w/XfDuE0HMo+eP/0ihYOykAoNef
> Gt1hIbRHpYtJ1jp/79hWZl0G
> =E9PX
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> 
> 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Randall Farmer
    rfarmer@hiwaay.net
    http://hiwaay.net/~rfarmer

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

In order to clear up some confusion in regard to recent posts to
the cypherpunks and coderpunks lists, I would like to remind PGP
users that the only way to truly check the authenticity of any
message is by verifying the PGP signature of a message with the
copy on the PGP Key Server.

Now that we have Key Server technolgy fully developed, all of
the paranoid warnings in the original PGP documentation no longer
apply, as long as a person takes the time to compare message
signatures to the original keys held on the PGP Key Server.

Since PRZ sometimes spells his first name with _one_ 'l' and
sometimes with _two_, it can be confusing. Likewise, his
occasional spelling of his last name with _one_ 'n' and then
with _two_ on other occassions.
I vary the spelling of my own name--between 'Marc' and 'Mark',
and occasionally, 'Marck'--but as long as you can verify my
middle digital signature, you can be assured it is me sending
the message.

Please distribute this message as widely as possible, so that
PGP users realize that adhering to the principles espoused in
the original PGP documentation only makes us all look like a
bunch of paranoid lunatics.

Marck
~~~~~
"I can put my dick in my ear...can you?"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQA/AwUBNFAZVxurK3YPheUYEQLhQwCdHlpQi3QrVchZu0pfHGWcTlb7TXEAoI/R
eeFnnXIvATOoSbAFmUVnmis9
=3MQh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

My name is spelled Philip, not Phillip.  --prz

At 8:44 PM -0500 10/23/97, Randall Farmer wrote:
>On Thu, 23 Oct 1997, there's no way in nine hells that Phillip R. Zimmermann
>could have wrote:
>...
>>   However, I have reassessed my views of who truly has a right
>> to control access to privacy and have come to the conclusion
>> that privacy is too important an issue to be left in the hands
>> of the individual, with the obvious potential for misuse.
>
>Hmm...I haven't checked any signatures or headers yet, but something tells me
>that this ain't PRZ. For example, the Organization: header refers to Orwell's
>1984 as a "blueprint"...forget the signatures (just got a message saying they
>match -- either that person's lying, "they" cracked his key, or it's some
>detail that has the program using a different key/ignoring some text), it is
>psychologically impossible for someone to go from privacy advocate to
>1984-as-a-blueprint that quick.
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Randall Farmer
>    rfarmer@hiwaay.net
>    http://hiwaay.net/~rfarmer

Damn, but Toto's improving with those forgeries... I'm not at all
expert on forgeries, but usually you can spot Toto's because it says

: X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01C-SYMPA  (Win95; U)

in the headers, other tell tales signs being headers with
sk.sympatico.ca in the header such as this:

: Received: from default (orenco30.sk.sympatico.ca [142.165.99.30]) by
: wombat.sk.sympatico.ca with SMTP (8.7.1/8.7.1) id SAA28139 for
: <cypherpunks@toad.com>; Thu, 23 Oct 1997 18:33:57 -0600 (CST)

But this one, can anyone see anything wrong with this... no sympatico,
no X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01C-SYMPA (Win95; U), someone knows how to
forge well, or PRZ has developed a sense of humor about this CMR
business.

Full headers follow.

Adam

Received: from www.video-collage.com [199.232.240.107] by hermes via ESMTP (TAA06933); Fri, 24 Oct 1997 19:17:50 +0100
Received: (from ichudov@localhost)
	by www.video-collage.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id OAA08153
	for cypherpunks-outgoing; Fri, 24 Oct 1997 14:05:36 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sirius.infonex.com (sirius.infonex.com [206.170.114.2])
	by www.video-collage.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id OAA08141
	for <cypherpunks@algebra.com>; Fri, 24 Oct 1997 14:05:21 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from cpunks@localhost) by sirius.infonex.com (8.8.5/8.7.3) id LAA16816; Fri, 24 Oct 1997 11:07:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rigel.cyberpass.net (root@rigel.infonex.com [206.170.114.3]) by sirius.infonex.com (8.8.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id LAA16810 for <cpunks@sirius.infonex.com>; Fri, 24 Oct 1997 11:07:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from toad.com (toad.com [140.174.2.1]) by rigel.cyberpass.net (8.8.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id LAA09467 for <cypherpunks@cyberpass.net>; Fri, 24 Oct 1997 11:04:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by toad.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id LAA16579 for cypherpunks-unedited-outgoing; Fri, 24 Oct 1997 11:01:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from fusebox.pgp.com (fusebox.pgp.com [205.180.136.16]) by toad.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id LAA16574; Fri, 24 Oct 1997 11:01:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [205.180.136.41] (shiva1.pgp.com [205.180.136.41])
	by fusebox.pgp.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) with ESMTP id LAA14655;
	Fri, 24 Oct 1997 11:01:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Sender: prz@mail.pgp.com
Message-Id: <v03007802b07692bd74f3@[205.180.136.41]>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.OSF.3.96.971023202351.6541A-100000@fly.HiWAAY.net>
References: <344FEE15.673F@pgp.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 11:02:22 -0700
To: Randall Farmer <rfarmer@HiWAAY.net>
From: Philip Zimmermann <prz@pgp.com>
Subject: Re: PRZ Announcement
Cc: cypherpunks@toad.com, coderpunks@toad.com
Sender: owner-cypherpunks@Algebra.COM
Precedence: bulk
X-Mailing-List: cypherpunks@algebra.com
X-List-Admin: ichudov@algebra.com
X-Loop: cypherpunks@algebra.com
Status: R


My name is spelled Philip, not Phillip.  --prz

In my last message to this list, I pointed out that my name is spelled
Philip.  I neglected to point out that I also did not write the message
allegedly from me (or from Phillip).  This is why that for signed messages, 
we need to make sure that the signing key is properly signed by trusted 
introducers.  --prz

At 8:44 PM -0500 10/23/97, Randall Farmer wrote:
>On Thu, 23 Oct 1997, there's no way in nine hells that Phillip R. Zimmermann
>could have wrote:
>...
>>   However, I have reassessed my views of who truly has a right
>> to control access to privacy and have come to the conclusion
>> that privacy is too important an issue to be left in the hands
>> of the individual, with the obvious potential for misuse.
>
>Hmm...I haven't checked any signatures or headers yet, but something tells me
>that this ain't PRZ. For example, the Organization: header refers to Orwell's
>1984 as a "blueprint"...forget the signatures (just got a message saying they
>match -- either that person's lying, "they" cracked his key, or it's some
>detail that has the program using a different key/ignoring some text), it is
>psychologically impossible for someone to go from privacy advocate to
>1984-as-a-blueprint that quick.
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Randall Farmer
>    rfarmer@hiwaay.net
>    http://hiwaay.net/~rfarmer