RE: [iwar] Re: thought activation

From: Ozair (
Date: 2001-06-10 01:34:47

Return-Path: <>
Received: from by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-5.1.0) for fc@localhost (single-drop); Sun, 10 Jun 2001 01:30:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 21457 invoked by uid 510); 10 Jun 2001 07:29:57 -0000
Received: from ( by with SMTP; 10 Jun 2001 07:29:57 -0000
Received: from [] by with NNFMP; 10 Jun 2001 08:29:18 -0000
Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_3); 10 Jun 2001 08:29:17 -0000
Received: (qmail 23435 invoked from network); 10 Jun 2001 08:29:16 -0000
Received: from unknown ( by with QMQP; 10 Jun 2001 08:29:16 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO ( by mta1 with SMTP; 10 Jun 2001 08:29:13 -0000
Received: from Ozair ([]) by (8.11.2/8.11.2) with ESMTP id f5A8M6t03330 for <>; Sun, 10 Jun 2001 13:22:07 +0500
To: <>
Message-ID: <000001c0f188$3ae7f420$6301a8c0@Ozair>
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2616
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200
From: "Ozair" <>
Mailing-List: list; contact
Delivered-To: mailing list
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <>
Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2001 13:34:47 +0500
Subject: RE: [iwar] Re: thought activation
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I am not sure if it is possible to steal a personality, it may be
possible to steal an image, but then personality is even more difficult
unless... the person is so well known that he is duplicatable, even if
every thing is duplicated the human perception is far more accurate to
see the differences.

Therefore we can only talk about a person being duplicated, and perhaps
not see it in reality. (twins not covered).


-----Original Message-----
From: c.b r [] 
Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2001 10:50 AM
Subject: Re: [iwar] Re: thought activation

Tony: I understand the matter of biometrics is a
serious problem and  devices that are present
generation are clearly far from perfect.  This leaves
us all in a bad position, and it is hard to regain
possession of your fingerprints, or voice as you had questioned.  All I
was trying to do was extend your problem out to a dimension where the
technology to steal even you personal "image" is available.

I had no intention of not answering your question of biometrics-AIAA is
very interested in that matter at present-and I only hoped that theft of
a person voice, or image would be considered.  Check the AIAA website on
biometrics.Also check with OPSEC.

--- "c.b r" <> wrote:
> OK Tony : While I may be new to this list, I am not
> to
> the matter of morphing you onto TV and having seen
> voices faked-in this case -for purposes of the
> motion
> pix industry.  What you really need to worry about
> is
> being taken hostage and then see yourself on the
> Beijing Chinese TV station denouncing this
> government,
> or giving away TS CODE info that would aid 3rd world
> nations in the CBRN terrorism game, or WMD wanna
> haves.
> If you have seen the movie "Forest Gump", you have
> already seen Tom Hanks supposidly having chats with
> President Kennedy and Nixon-very convincing
> stuff-that
> was done by a friend who worked at the time for
> Industrial Lights and Magic. Actually, he ran their
> cgi special effects unit. He is now with SKG
> Dreamworks and wrote a paper with a law professor
> from
> Harvard after he did his work on "Gump" that was
> simply a one voice in the wilderness on a problem
> that
> is going to become a potential nightmare: The Abuse
> of
> Morphing technology by either nations, or
> sub-national
> actors to spread very convincing disinfirmation.
> Many
> more  discussions on the entire matter of protection
> of identity are to come.The only 100% ID is your DNA
> and while something that has begun to free people
> unjustly convicted of a crime they never committed,
> it
> is-at present-the only exacting differentiator.
> You, or someone else in this group from the Labs, or
> some policy type like myself could end up on the
> only
> TV station in in Nation Z giving away secrets, or disinforming the 
> American public that we are in a crisis and need to negotiate 
> away.....take your pick and you are a "guest" of the nation who you 
> are being
> not so nicely pursuaded to speak for.
> Want to make this easier, simply morph your head on
> someone elses body and let the voice techs do their
> magic. Worse case-BLACKMAIL-you are approached and
> told that unless you give whoever the info they
> want,
> you become the anchor on the Iraqui 6pm news spewing
> out disinformation for hours on end.
> Stealing identities is frightening enough, but
> forcing
> a hostige with classified knowledge to make a major
> TV
> broadcast threatening the US, and you know about our
> weapons capibility-that should scare the hell out of
> you.  We are way past identity theft, now.  If you
> grab the right person who has a high enough TV-Q
> rating, then even sub-national actors with limited
> means and TV through a third party nation who they
> have befriended-an enemy of the US-and you have a
> problem with profoundly nasty implications on your
> hands. How about a staged "war crime" with video of
> US
> troops shooting and "killing" innocent citizens. 
> When
> a director says CUT, they all stand up and remove
> the
> "wounds" created by makeup artists playing for the
> wrong nation.  Instant war crime-just add no death
> and
> some good video tape.  Video is very convincing
> stuff.Dump the tape on the net with a fake human
> rights abuse web site name,and as they say, one
> picture is worth a thousand words.
> I recognize that I have throw out several  possible
> scenarios that can be done with technology that
> already exists.  However, they all fall loosly into
> the arena of the theft of person for use by ill
> intentioned folks.
> So, Tony-how are you going to defend against either
> a
> politico, or well known expert putting out
> disinformation on TV-against their will- and how do
> will you correct the situation, before nations who
> actually believe your broadcast declair war?
> Note-my spell checker is a mess. If I use it, you
> will
> have html tags all over this.  Spello's, I do
> appologize for
> --- Beth Russell sent this to up the ante on Tonys
> question.  Find a technically and politically
> feasible
> answer and you are one step closer to the real
> world.
> This is from Tony:>
> I wanted the list to think these problems
> over,)Biometrics? How about kidnapping the head of
> one
> of the LABS for the above purposes, or the
> Presidents
> Science Advisor?
> > 
> Tony injured digit, or sore throat aside, how
> quickly
> could the US do a convincing job of refuting the
> Science Advisor, to the point where Joe and Jane Q. "Six-Pack" are no 
> longer alarmed by these actions? and
> of course I do know about both conventional and nuke
> order of batle matters including PAL
> authorization.That is, at least as it stands today. Otherwise, we all 
> must ask "DR Strangerum"(SECDEF Rumsfeld as commented on by the sunday

> NYT) at the pentagon what he might do other than look for the
> cold
> war.   Consider it an intellectual exercise.
>          beth russell
> > At 08:34 AM 6/8/01 -0400,
> > This is from Tony at LLNL.
> > >But this is related to a serious concern I have
> > about biometrics.  Let me
> > >admit from the outset that this may be the result
> > of a lack of understanding
> > >of the technology on my part.  How do biometric
> > devices deal with normal
> > >deviations in what they sense and act on?  For
> > instance, how would something
> > >that reads a fingerprint work if I've cut or
> burned
> > a finger while cooking
> > >the previous night?  Or in the case of voice
> > activation, how does it work if
> > >one has a sore throat one day?
> > 
> > Not very well, I suppose.  Improved techniques
> > employ all sorts of fuzzy
> > and statistical measures to produce "templates"
> that
> > can be reliably
> > matched, despite *some* variations in a read.
> > 
> > My issue with biometrics is that, in the zealous
> > desire to find more
> > definitive forms of attribution, it is often
> > considered the "final 
> > word".  I have wondered, if biometrics were to
> > become commonplace, whether 
> > it will become a criminal offense to publish your
> > biometric data in public 
> > fora.  "Here are the holographic images of my
> > fingerprints, my retinal 
> > scans, and my skin conductivity measurements.  Go
> > ahead and use them to 
> > impersonate me if you like."  Would this help to
> > enable a repudiation 
> > defense?  "It wasn't me.  Anyone could have placed
> > my prints there."
> > 
> > The problem with biometrics is that they cannot be "revoked" if
> > compromised.  If someone steals my fingerprints, I
> > cannot (yet!) get a new 
> > set of fingers.
> > 
> > ___tony___
> > 
> > 
> > Tony Bartoletti 925-422-3881 <>
> > Information Operations, Warfare and Assurance
> Center
> > Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
> > Livermore, CA 94551-9900
> > 
> > 
=== message truncated ===

Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 
a year!


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to 


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to 

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : 2001-06-30 21:44:16 PDT