Eye Say, and Lord Gnome Answers

My interactions with Private Eye started in May 1995, shortly after I'd started bleating on usenet. I tried to get the Eye
interested in my case, as I thought they more than anyone have their finger on the pulse, and would surely already know
something about my case. In my first email to them, entitled "pas de bouteille?" (wot no bottle?), I asked if they had the
nerve to publish what was known to many thousands of people. Their email flunky answered;

Date: Thu, 11 May 95 13:40 BST-1
From: strobes@cix.compulink.co.uk (Private Eye)
Subject: Re: pas de bouteille?

In-Reply-To: <199505102232.SAA19988@freenet.carleton.ca>
Bottle? Dunno really - but I've passed your mail on to the Ed for his
consideration.

Steve Mann
(strobes)
==========================================================
Date: Mon, 15 May 95 12:51 BST-1
From: strobes@cix.compulink.co.uk (Private Eye)
Subject: Re: hello again

In-Reply-To: <199505122236.SAA02574@freenet.carleton.ca>
Hello yourself...

Counter-surveillance sweep by Nationwide Investigations Group

In July 1994 the private detective agency Nationwide Investigations Group conducted an electronic counter-surveillance
sweep of my parents' home in London. They checked for radio transmitter devices, and tested the telephone line for attached
bugs. They found nothing.

I am afraid that I was unsurprised at their not finding any evidence of covert surveillance. It had been made very clear to me,
particularly during 1990-92, that audio, and almost certainly video, surveillance of my parents' home was taking place. But this
would not have been made quite so obvious unless the persecutors were confident of their apparatus being undetectable using the
technology the police, or a private agency like Nationwide, would be using.

I don't know very much about the surveillance technology that has been used against me, but I understand that devices can be built
which switch off on receiving a coded command, and may switch on again after a counter- surveillance sweep has completed; that devices
may rapidly alter the frequency of transmission, "frequency-hopping" devices which presumably cannot be detected in a sequential scan
of the sort employed by Nationwide; and of course "probe" microphones can be inserted "through-the-wall", although I hesitate to
believe our neighbours would permit this.

We paid Nationwide

On 28 Nov 2006 07:43:58 -0800, "Tom St Denis" gmail.com>
wrote:

Yeah. Issues.

[...]

The senseless flamewar is in your fat head.

Its imaginary. As imaginary as the job you arrive at every day all
tingly and jacked up and ready to pounce on all good people.

Of course I'm speaking of the invented (made up by you) job of
sci.crypt group netcop.

Hint: There's no position to fill here. Move on.

Fact: We don't need, want, or approve of anyone being group netcop.

An Analogy: You lecturing to people about how and what to post is
like a turd yelling at a beautiful sunset.

Data Protection application to Keith Hill MP, 2002

In May 2002 I made a subject access application under the Data Protection Act 1998 to Keith Hill, my local MP. I was interested
to see who he had spoken to during 1997-1999, when we were communicating by letter. The Information Commissioner's office told
me that Mr Hill had been convicted in May 2000 under the DPA, presumably by omission of knowing the relevant law; consequently
Mr Hill was more helpful than usual in his response to my application. For the sake of interest, I reproduce the Evening Standard
news report here.

Coupled to my data protection application, I asked Mr Hill;

Additionally I ask the non-data-protection question of whether you spoke to the Police about me, about our communications or my
faxes to Parliament, either in April 2000 or at any other time. Please identify any such communications.

His response consisted of a computer printout, with covering letter, which are shown here. His letter says he may have spoken to
Police about the faxes Parliament had been receiving, but his memory is unclear "at this remove in time". I suspect that his memory
would allow him to remember whether or not he complained to Police two years previously; but it would not be to his advantage to
remember, would it.

The data printout spells out that I asked for Mr Hill's assistance against "BBC news readers who are spying on him through the
television." It also contains a reference of Mr Hill's office referring my case to Social Services, to whom I am unknown. "Presents
Challenging Issues" sounds a code, like the nursing UNDY = "Unfortunately Not Dead Yet" (but we continue to hope).

I wrote again to Mr Hill on 13 May and told him I did not accept his apparent memory lapse regarding the police. I asked him to
elucidate; in his response of 17 May he said he was unable to add to his earlier note on this point.

302

"Douglas A. Gwyn" null.net> wrote in message
news:456DFBF7.FD41AF0B@null.net...

If it were filled with random base ten numbers then the probability of not
seeing a single digit (in this case 9) would be incredibly low

"Markus Jansson" wrote in message
news:Duqbh.62674$hL7.6349@reader1.news.jippii.net...

You have to ask what is the definition of a pen and paper cipher? It is
theoretically possible to do any cipher with pen and paper - even something
like AES - it would just take awhile.

Correspondence with Keith Hill MP, 1997-2001

In early 1997 I went to see my local MP, Keith Hill (Labour - London Streatham), at one of his surgeries, to ask his advice
and enlist his support in combating the MI5 conspiracy. He appeared helpful during the meeting, promising assistance to find
a lawyer and help with my legal efforts. Unfortunately, a month after the meeting he was much less inclined to assist, as the
following letter shows.

My thought on reading his letter was that he had appeared helpful at the surgery merely to get rid of me without a fuss; he
never had any intention of constructive advice or assistance.

I wrote to Mr Hill a year later, on 20 May 1998, stating that I wished to make a complaint to Police regarding the continuing
actions against me, and requesting his help in so doing. He responded a week later;

Again I wrote to Mr Hill on 10 November 1998, stating;

I am sure you will remember me from your surgery a year and a half ago, and subsequent letter dated 20/5/98 which is reproduced
over the page.

Once again I am asking you if you can help me, particularly in obtaining the passenger list for the BA flight in 1993, where four
of my persecutors confronted me. The harassment has restarted over the last two weeks, by "coincidence" as I have restarted
faxing your fellow MPs. If these faxes worry my persecutors then they must be having some effect - therefore, I feel encouraged
to continue them.

Several of your Parliamentary colleagues have expressed the view that I should be making more of an effort to secure the
assistance of my MP rather than presenting the matter to random members of the Commons. I hope you will be more helpful now
than on the earlier occasions I contacted you.

Can someone recommend hash libraries written in C++. Speed is not the
single most important factor but it is important.

I've been asked to (and have) write some simple bios verification code
for the OLPC (laptop.org) project. Essentially, they wanted a simple
tool where they could sign a bios with various algorithms (in case one
dies in the future) and then verify it from the BIOS side (which has no
libc).

I've written the following code

http://libtomcrypt.com/olpc_crypto_bios.tar.bz2

Which is very rough [but functional] initial code that uses LTC and TFM
to perform the crypto (what else?).

The code fits in at around 70KB, and uses 64KB of heap so it's nice and
small (could be smaller I suppose but I do include both RSA and ECC,
Whirlpool and SHA512 in there, as well as an ASN1 library...)

Basically there are two pieces of code. The cli_tool can make keys,
signatures and verify the signatures. The bios_side is a rough stub
for what will be placed in the BIOS (with suitable use of -fPIC for
instance).

The signatures and key formats are ASN.1 encoded (to make porting this
to another library in the future possible if need be). The key format
is basically

A letter from MI5

I wrote to the Security Service stating that I wished to bring a complaint against their activities in my life. Here
is their reply; "if you believe you have been the subject of inquiries by the Security Service or that the Security Service
has done anything else in relation to you or your property, you may wish to apply to the Security Service Tribunal who are
able to pursue these points on your behalf."

Please see further items for replies from the Security Service Tribunal, and Interception of Communications Tribunal.

302