From: Black Unicorn <unicorn@schloss.li>
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 1996 15:16:08 +0800
To: Cypherpunks <cypherpunks@toad.com>
Subject: My nym: Statement
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.93.960428215100.25014G-100000@polaris.mindport.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----


I thought I would take a moment to discuss my nym, given the Web of Trust
issues floating about right now.

When I developed this nym I hoped to merely avoid connecting my political
views with my real life persona.  Generally speaking many of my
associates, my family and what clients I still serve would find my
political views somewhat distasteful.  It was with a view to prevent this
connection that I originally created the nym on cypherpunks.

As time went by I found it useful for other reasons involving my
previous employer which I won't go into in detail.

Some on the list have met me, either at the cypherpunks meeting in D.C.
when the clipper issue was emerging, or relating to ongoing and emerging
projects.  Others have spoken to me on the phone extensively or briefly.

Really I preserve the nym for reputation capital more than anything else.

I serve the list best with my input (whether you agree with it or not)
when there is some reputation context attached.  Hopefully the majority of
it relates to the perception that I post 'good' material or that I 'have a
clue.'  With any luck some of you are not so quick to delete messages that
bear my address as you would be to delete something from
"nobody@whereever.com."  By the same token, certainly some of you are
burning up the "D" key when I post a lot.  If nothing else a consistant
address helps in filtering.  Those generally interested in my subjects of
expertise and interest will have an extra bit of filtering information
(1=is a black unicorn post) as will those who find my posts annoying.

When I communicate securely it's generally with people who I have some
business or personal dealings with.  This tends to eliminate the need for
me to be extensively interwraped in the web of trust.  Those who don't
know me would be as unwise to send me sensitive mailings as they would be
to cc: fbi.gov.  (At least until "is not a fed" signatures start to become
popular).

Because most of my encrypted traffic is of a financial and business nature
I like the overkill of a 2048 bit key.  I also want a published 2048 bit
key in the event it becomes difficult to publically distribute keys in the
future.

The man in the middle problem with my nym is not really an issue as far as
I can tell.  I suppose someone might argue that they wouldn't want to mail
me anything asking for legal advice for fear it might be intercepted and
returned to them with disinformation attached.  As these are people I
generally don't know, it's equally likely to them that I am simply an
agent provocateur who has no man in the middle problems.

- From my end, man in the middle attacks are difficult to use against me
because those with whom I have extensive business and personal
communications know me well enough to permit end to end verification
through seperate secure channels.  (I use secure telephones regularly, and
this permits voice recognition).

"But you could be more than one person..."

So?  Do you like this group's legal and political views?  Then who cares
how many people I am?

I suppose if it makes people happy I will get 10 signatures binding me
strongly to the larger web of trust.  It's never seemed worth the effort
before.


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQEVAwUBMYQf/S1onm9OaF05AQHBFQf/cHK9XAeFsWSGb02skl+2Tbr71fBb5EB9
B9ySM9+z6pbaXlTrpE5b4U2951Q3qidpppm09f05KHKYhfdVjck3I2vvoF1tFa9q
gVZnjW8CmiYQFc7F65wvvdvjeet7sB4+ki/PbojXz9cYt7x5mDegdPWEOAx82yh1
eLs3WyMqUAL2NUqNaL48Dr7Y8xSvO24qdyARC4FHEvDQFomhYme6kZ33RKtKaoFx
K2qCGYEJkyaIMtNkBYR5B15JPhmLuEKUbHDkQYiaYv1cRKguF55nGlh9vsq6Qr5j
oyB5MkK8sZZKqwIFnUPLwxD3d1DCgvm5gWV3W2LeiQq9Ovk74Nh95A==
=Xm1B
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


---
My preferred and soon to be permanent e-mail address:unicorn@schloss.li
"In fact, had Bancroft not existed,       potestas scientiae in usu est
Franklin might have had to invent him."    in nihilum nil posse reverti
00B9289C28DC0E55  E16D5378B81E1C96 - Finger for Current Key Information
Opp. Counsel: For all your expert testimony needs: jimbell@pacifier.com