21 June 1997
Source: William H. Payne

See related documents: http://jya.com/whpfiles.htm

FILED
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
97 JUN -4 1:55
Robert M. March
CLERK-ALBUQUERQUE

                      UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                     FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO

    William H. Payne                            )
    Arthur R. Morales                           )
                                                )
                    Plaintiffs,                 )
    v                                           )   CIV N0 97 0266 SC/DJS
                                                )
    Lieutenant General Kenneth A. Minihan, USAF )
    Director, National Security Agency          )
    National Security Agency                    )
                                                )
                    Defendant                   )

                    MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

    1  COMES NOW plaintiffs Payne [Payne] and Morales [Morales]

    [Plaintiffs], pro se litigants to exercise their right

    guaranteed under the Rules of Civil Procedure,

            Rule 56 Summary Judgment
            (a) For Claimant.  A party seeking to recover upon a
            claim, ... or to obtain a declaratory judgment may, at
            any time after the expiration of 20 days from the
            commencement of the action or after service of a motion
            for summary judgment by the adverse party, move with or
            without supporting affidavits for a summary judgment in
            the party's favor upon all or any part thereof. ...

            (c) Motion and Proceeding Thereon.  The motion shall be
            served at least 10 days before the time fixed for the
            hearing.  The adverse party prior to the day of hearing
            may serve opposing affidavits.  The judgment sought shall
            be rendered forthwith if the pleading, deposition, answer
            to interrogatories, and admission on file, together with
            the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine
            issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is
            entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.

    2  Sandia National Laboratories [Sandia] has as it main charter

    duties development and maintenance of the non-nuclear parts

    of nuclear weapons.  This includes implementation of the

    electronic cryptographic locks used to secure the weapons.

      The National SecuritY AGency [NSA] supplies the

                               1

    algorithms and implementation guidelines to Sandia.  But delegated

    implementation to Sandia at about the start of the Cold War.

      As a result some Sandian, including Payne, had access to NSA

    crypto algorithms and implementation guidelines.

    3  At issue in this FOIA lawsuit is the release of documents
    showing

            1       deficient NSA crypto technical expertise and

                    ability,

            2       spy sting tactical battlefield messages given

                    to Iraq during the Iran/Iraq war.

    NSA got caught in this spy sting.  Swiss and other crypto units

    were spiked so that the crypto key was transmitted with the

    cipher text.

    4  There is NO GENUINE ISSUE AS TO ANY MATERIAL FACT and

    THE MOVING PARTY IS ENTITLED TO A JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF LAW.

      NSA merely seeks to hide behind the veil of classification abuse

    or improper influence of the court.

    5  The view that NSA and the government attempts to improperly

    control cryptography but lacks ability and expertise in this field

    is supported by lawyer from Electronic Privacy Information Center,

    Marc Rotenberg.  Rotenberg writes,

            Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 09:13:29 -0500
            From: Marc Rotenberg <rotenberg@epic.org>

            http://www.wired.com/wired/4.05/idees.fortes/eurocrats.html

            Eurocrats Do Good Privacy

            Marc Rotenberg

            Late last November, David Chaum received the Information
            Technology European Award for 1995. The prize, given for
            DigiCash's ecash technology, consisted of a trophy plus

                               2

            200,000 ecu (approximately US$250,000). Chaum is best known
            for the development of anonymous payment schemes that are
            becoming increasingly popular in Europe  for everything from
            online commerce to highway toll systems.

            At about the same time that Chaum received the prestigious
            award, Phil Zimmermann, inventor of the popular Pretty Good
            Privacy encryption program, sat in his Boulder, Colorado, home
            wondering whether the US government would make good on its
            threat to prosecute him for trafficking in munitions. Although
            federal prosecutors announced recently that they will drop
            the case against Zimmermann, the prospects that he will get
            a big cash award from the US government anytime soon are less
            than slim.

            The contrast between a decorated cryptographer in Europe and
            one trying to avoid prosecution in the United States is more
            than curious. It shows that governments, at least some
            governments, can be a force for progress in the crypto world.

            Reread that sentence. It is not conventional wisdom in the
            United States. Cyberlibertarians have been unrelenting in their
            opposition to any federal role in crypto policy. Free marketers
            argue simply that there is no place for government in the
            development of high-tech products.  ...

            Of course, the Clipper debacle provides plenty of
            ammunition for these arguments. Clipper combined in
            equal measure government arrogance, technological
            incompetence, and profound disregard for the rights
            of citizens. As an exercise in public policy, it ranks
            somewhere between the Bay of Pigs and the CIA's
            experiments with psychics.

    And this is one of the subject of the FOIA lawsuit.

    NSA "technological incompetence" also discovered at Sandia

    National Laboratories.

    6  Payne, in a Sandia-approved unclassified report, took the

    opportunity to also point out generic deficiencies in NSA crypto

    algorithms and implementation guidelines.

      Sunday June 1 the report, in its entirety including schematics,

    source code. and mechanical drawings, was posted on Internet at

    jya.com, click Cryptome at,

      whpda.htm          Data Authenticator for the Deployable Seismic
                         Verification  System, Rev. June 1, 1997 (98K)

                               3

    About 2,500 International readers access jya.com EACH DAY.

    7  Payne, who helped Sandia build the Missile Secure Cryptographic

    Unit [MSCU], wrote a Sandia-approved book on the software

    technology Payne's group used for that task.  And that Payne used

    for the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty data authenticator.

      Source code and documentation accompanying Payne book was

    posted at jya.com at,

      whpf86.htm         Payne: Embedded Controller Forth for the
                         8051 Family, May 31, 1997

    Code from Payne's book was previously posted on computer bbss

    all over the world.

    A fellow from Nova Scotia told Payne he downloaded the code and

    documentation from a computer bbs located in Portugal.

    8  Payne, after his wrote this book, learned from NSA employee

    Donald Simard that the Forth was used by the former USSR to

    program it bombs and other weapon systems.

    9  Thursday April 3, 1997, Switzerland, Zurich,  Sood-

    Oberleimbach, Payne speaks to many Germans, some Belgians, a

    few Swiss, and one Russian about technical details in high tech

    espionage.

    10  Sunday April 6, 1997, Zurich airport, Payne has a phone long

    talk with Hans Buehler at his home in Oerlikon.

      Buehler spent 9.5 months in an Iranian military prison as a

    result of getting snared in the NSA crypto spiking spy sting

    against Iran.

      Payne and Buehler speak of settlement techniques.

    11  The technical world knows the details of the uncovered NSA spy

    sting.

                               4

    12  Summary judgment should be awarded the Plaintiffs as a result

    of good business sense, in addition to law, too.

      If the US is hit with a retaliatory anti-terrorist attack, then

    aggrieved relatives of US victims will hold the US government

    responsible for not having settled with the aggrieved its

    aggrieved victims.

    13  The aggrieved victims, too, would surely consider a

    financial settlement superior to some other sort of settlement.

     Other forms of settlements, might bring another retaliatory

    military strike by the US, similar to those made against Libya

    'terrorist centers' for allegedly bombing PAN AM 103 and Iraq

    for allegedly trying to kill former President Bush.

    13  Payne, too, was caught in a NSA operation.

          James Bamford in his book, The Puzzle Palace, writes,

            Meanwhile, as the Agency [NSA] continued it public campaign,
            it was also making significant headway on its second front -
            the quiet, behind-the-scenes effort to gain control from the
            National Science Foundation of all cryptographic funding.
            By controlling the dollars, the NSA would control the
            research. ...

              On Thursday, August 14, Leonard Adelman, a theoretical
            computer scientist at MIT and one of the fathers of
            public-key cryptography received a telephone call from Bruce
            Barns of the NSF.  To his surprise Barns told him that the NSF
            had decided not to fund part of his grant proposal.  When asked
            why, Barns merely said something about an "interagency matter."

    14  April 1978, Communications of the ACM publishes [copy attached

    as Exhibit A]  Orderly Enumeration of Nonsingular Binary Matrices

    Applied to Text Encryption by W. H. Payne and K. L. McMillen.

    Footnote reads, Work funded by NSF Grant DCR75-08822.

    Bruce Barns was NSF monitor of grant DCR75-08822.

    Grant DCR75-08822 was not renewed.

                               5

    WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray this court to,

    15  GRANT summary judgment to Plaintiffs for release of documents

    so that documents can be posted at jya.com.

      This posting will serve as an admission by NSA of an unfortunate

    event.  And that the NSA now wishes to begin settlement with the

    aggrieved relatives of its victims.

    16  DIRECT defendant to issue a written letter of apology to the

    aggrieved victims of NSA's spy stings.   This letter will, of course,

    be posted on jya.com.

    17  AWARD Plaintiff Payne $500,000 for his more than 10 year effort

    at Sandia to penetrate, then expose, NSA for deficient crypto work,

    lost wages, and legal work.

    18  AWARD Plaintiff Morales $20,000 his about four years legal work

    with Payne to bring this lawsuit.

    19  CONSIDER the alternatives of failure to settle.

    20  GRANT such other relief as the Court may deem just and

    proper.

                        Respectfully submitted,

                        [Signature]

                        William H.Payne
                        13015 Calle de Sandias NE
                        Albuquerque, NM 871111

                        [Signature]

                        Arthur R. Moralles
                        1024 Los Arboles NW
                        Albuquerque, NM 87107

                        Pro se litigants

    CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

    I HEREBY CERTIFY that a copy of the foregoing demand was mailed

                               6

    to Lieutenant General Kenneth A. Minihan, USAF, Director,
    National Security Agency, National Security Agency, 9800 Savage
    Road, Fort George G. Meade, MD 20755-6000 and hand delivered to
    John J. Kelly, US Attorney, 525 Silver SW, ABQ, NM 87102 this
    Wednesday June 4, 1997.

                        [Signature: W H Payne]

                                7

Exhibit A

Communications of the ACM, April 1978, Volume 21, Number 4, pp. 259-263.

Scientific Applications
F.N. Fritsch Editor

### Orderly Enumeration of Nonsingular Binary Matrices Applied to Text Encryption

W. H. Payne and K. L. McMillen
Washington State University

[Abstract]

Nonsingular binary matrices of order N, i.e., nonsingular over the field {0, 1), and an initial segment of the natural numbers are placed in one-to-one correspondence. Each natural number corresponds to two intermediate vectors. These vectors are mapped into a nonsingular binary matrix. Examples of complete enumeration of all 2 x 2 and 3 x 3 nonsingular binary matrices were produced by mapping the intermediate vectors to the matrices.

The mapping has application to the Vernam encipherment method using pseudorandom number sequences. A bit string formed from bytes of text of a data encryption key can be used as a representation of a natural number. This natural number is transformed to a nonsingular binary matrix. Key leverage is obtained by using the matrix as a "seed" in a shift register sequence pseudorandom number generator.

Key Words and Phrases: binary matrices, combinatorics, combinations, nonsingular matrices, encryption, Vernam, pseudorandom numbers, feedback shift register sequences, random numbers.

CR Categories: 3.7, 5.3

___________________________

General permission to make fair use in teaching or research of all or part of this material is granted to individual readers and to nonprofit libraries acting for them provided that ACM's copyright notice is given and that reference is made to the publication, to its date of issue, and to the fact that reprinting privileges were granted by permission of the Association for Computing Machinery. To otherwise reprint a figure, table, other substantial excerpt, or the entire work requires specific permission as does republication, or systematic or multiple reproduction.

Computer time and supplies were purchased with NSF money from Finch's Wheatland Realty, Pullman, Washington. Work funded by NSF Grant DCR75-08822.

Authors' Address: Department of Computer Science, Washington State University, Pullman, WA 99164.

© 1978 ACM 0001-0782/78/0400-0259 $00.75

Introduction

Functions that map combinatorial configurations onto the integers are often useful. The Julian Day Number is a map of the Gregorian calendar onto the integers. The inverse function which maps the Julian Day Number onto the Gregorian calendar is also known [13]. Less well known are functions which map permutations and combinations onto the integers [6]. Such maps usually require that the permutation or combination first be mapped onto an intermediate vector. This vector is then mapped onto the integers. In the case of permutations the vector is the factorial digits. For combinations the digits are the combinatorial digits of given nome, [6].

Algorithms which map combinatorial configurations onto the intermediate vectors are generally not unique. Many algorithms are known which map permutations onto the factorial digits [4, 6]. Similarly, many algorithms are known which map combinations onto the combinatorial digits of given nome and conversely [2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 12].

The purpose of this paper is to establish a one-to-one correspondence between an initial segment of the natural numbers and nonsingular binary matrices or order N. That is, matrices of order N which are nonsingular over the Galois field of order 2, GF(2). Each such integer is first mapped onto two intermediate vectors. An algorithm is presented which maps the two intermediate vectors onto a unique nonsingular zero-one matrix of order N. The map of successive integers gives the orderly enumeration of all nonsingular binary matrices of order N. The algorithm has application to text encryption using the Vernam encipherment method employing pseudorandom number sequences.

A nonsingular binary matrix is used as a "seed" for generalized feedback shift register pseudorandom number generator. The integer representation of a text string key is mapped into a seed matrix.

Vernam encipherment uses a randomly generated stream of bits. Encoding of the message is accomplished by exclusive-or'ing the random bit stream and the message text. Decrypting the cipher text requires knowledge of the random bit stream. The cipher key is the entire random bit stream.

Pseudorandom number sequences are often substituted for the random bit stream for the Vernam encryption method. The encryption key is the starting "seed" required by the pseudorandom number generator.

*****

[Balance of 5-page article omitted.]

[End 4 June 1997 Motion]

FILED
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
97 JUN -9 1:08
Robert M. March
CLERK-ALBUQUERQUE

                      UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                     FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO

    William H. Payne                            )
    Arthur R. Morales                           )
                                                )
                    Plaintiffs,                 )
    v                                           )   CIV N) 97 0266
                                                )   SC/DJS
                                                )
    Lieutenant General Kenneth A. Minihan, USAF )
    Director, National Security Agency          )
    National Security Agency                    )
                                                )
                    Defendant                   )

         MOTION TO ACCEPT DISCOVERY PLAN OF PLAINTIFFS
         AS AN UNOPPOSED MOTION BEFORE THE COURT

    1  COMES NOW plaintiffs Payne [Payne] and Morales [Morales]

    [Plaintiffs], pro se litigants to exercise their rights

    guaranteed under the Constitution and the Rules of Civil

    Procedure.

    2  INITIAL SCHEDULING ORDER FILED May -2 1997 stated,

      The parties, appearing through counsel or pro se, shall "meet
      and confer" no later than May 14, 1997 to formulate a provisional
      discovery plan.  Fed.R.Civ.P.26(f).  The time for discovery,
      generally 120 and 150 days, will run from the Rule 16 initial
      scheduling conference.  The provisional discovery plan shall be
      filed with the Court no later than May 23, 1997.  The parties
      will cooperate in preparing an Initial Pre-Trial Report (IPTR)
      which will follow the IPTR form obtainable from the Court Clerk.
      The blanks for dates should not be filled in

    3  Assistant US Attorney Jan Elizabeth Mitchell [Mitchell] declined

    to meet with Plaintiffs.

    4  MINUTE ORDER, FILED 97 JUN stated,

      IT IS ORDERED that the Initial Pre-Trial Report filed by
      Plaintiff,William Payne, on May 23, 1997, be and hereby is,
      stricken and returned to William Payne for failure to comply with
      the Scheduling Order filed by Magistrate Svet.

                                    ROBERT M. MARCH, Clerk

                               1

                                    By:  Margret Montoya
                                         Courtroom Clerk

    5  Thursday June 5 Magistrate judge Svet [Svet] learns that Mitchell

    did not sign Payne's IPTR.

    6  Svet orders parties to file signed IPTR with five days.

    7  5/23/97,  Item 9, docket sheet, 97cs266, June 5, 1997 10:10 logs

    MOTION by plaintiff to accept discover plan [MOTION].

    8  MOTION includes the quotations and statements

        1   Admissions

        Rule 36.   Request for admission (a) A party may serve upon
        any other party a written request for the admission, for the
        purposes of the pending action only, of the truth of any
        matters within the scope of Rule26(b) set forth the request
        that relate to statements or opinions of fact or of the
        application of law to fact including the genuineness of any
        documents described in the request.  Copies of documents shall
        be served with the request unless they have been or
        otherwise furnished or made available for inspection and
        copying.  The request may WITHOUT LEAVE OF THE COURT,
        be served upon the plaintiff after commencement of the action
        and upon any other party with or after service of the summons
        and complaint upon that party. ...

      I capitalize WITHOUT LEAVE OF THE COURT.

        2   Interrogatories Rule 33 Interrogatories to Parties
        (a) Availability; Procedures for Use. Any party may serve upon
        any other party written interrogatories to be answered by the
        party served or, if the party served is a public or private
        corporation or a partnership or association or governmental
        agency, by any officer or agent, who shall furnish such
        information as is available to the party.  Interrogatories may
        WITHOUT LEAVE OF THE COURT, be served upon the plaintiff after
        commencement of the action and upon any other partY with
        or after service of  the summons and complaint upon that party. ...

      I, again, capitalize WITHOUT LEAVE OF THE COURT.

        3   Depositions

        Rule 30  Deposition Upon Oral Examination  (a) When Depositions
        May be Taken.  After commencement of the action, any party may
        take the testimony of any person, including a party, by deposition
        upon oral examination.  Leave of court, granted with or without
        notice, must be obtained ONLY if the plaintiff seeks to take a
        deposition prior to the expiration of 30 days after service of the
        summons and complaint upon any defendant or service made under

                               2

        Rule 4(e),  ...

      I capitalize ONLY

    9   Rule 26(f) Discovery Conference states,

      (5) A statement showing that the attorney making the motion
      has made reasonable effort to reach agreement with opposing
      attorneys on the matters set forth in the motion.  Each party
      and each party's attorney are under a duty to participate
      in good faith in the framing of a discovery plan if a plan is
      opposed by the attorney for any party.  Objections or additions
      to matters set forth in the motion shall be served not later
      than 10 days after the service of the motion.

    10  Since MOTION was filed 5/23, this leaves 8 days in May.  As of

    Friday June 6 June NO,

      Objections or additions to matters set forth in the motion
      shall be served not later than 10 days after the service of
      the motion.

    means that US Attorney Mitchell has ACCEPTED plaintiffs' MOTION

    by non-response since at least 14 days has elapsed.

    11  Thursday June 5, 1997 Svet SUGGESTED,

            No deposition will be taken until hearing or filing of
            notice or supplemental motion.

            Depositions will be taken with leave of court.

    12  Plaintiffs took Svet statement in 11 mean that Plaintiffs

    could only as conduct discovery approved by Svet.

    13 Svet, at the Initial Scheduling Conference on June 5 instructed

    Payne to produce a copy of LOCAL CIVIL RULES,  UNITED DISTRICT

    COURT, DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO.  Payne did this.

    14  Payne read Svet from the Federal Civil Judicial Procedure and

    Rules,

      Rule 83.  Rules By District Courts

      Each district court by action of a majority of the judges thereof
      may from time to time, after giving appropriate notice and an
      opportunity to comment, make and amend rules governing its
      practice NOT INCONSISTENT WITH THESE RULES.

                               3

    15  LOCAL CIVIL RULES,  UNITED DISTRICT COURT, DISTRICT OF

    NEW MEXICO, page 11, 26.4 states,

            Timing of Discovery and Initial Disclosures.
            (a) A party may not seek discovery under these rules or the
            Fed.R.Civ.P. before the initial scheduling conference except
            except by agreement of all parties or by Court order.

    16  Local Rule 26.4 appears to be inconsistent with Rules 83 and

    26-37 of the Rules of Civil Procedure.

    17  Svet's REQUEST for Plaintiffs to adopt rules for Discovery other

    than the Rules 25-37 is UNACCEPTABLE to Plaintiffs.

    WHEREFORE,

    18  ACCEPT Plaintiffs'  May 23, 1997 MOTION as an unopposed MOTION.

    19  RESPECTFULLY INFORM Svet that Plaintiffs prefer to adhere to

    Rule 26-37 to conduct Discovery.

    20  STRIKE Local Rule 26.4 if it inconsistent with the Constitution

    and Rules 26-37 of the Federal Civil Procedure.

    21 GRANT such other relief as the Court may deem just and  proper.

                        Respectfully submitted,

                        [Signature]

                        William H. Payne
                        13015 Calle de Sandias NE
                        Albuquerque, NM 87111

                        [Signature]

                        Arthur R. Morales
                        1024 Los Arboles NW
                        Albuquerque, NM 87107

                        Pro se litigants

    CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

    I HEREBY CERTIFY that a copy of the foregoing demand was mailed
    to Lieutenant General Kenneth A. Minihan, USAF, Director,
    National Security Agency, National Security Agency, 9800 Savage

                               4

    Road, Fort George G. Meade, MD 20755-6000 and hand delivered to
    John J. Kelly, US Attorney, 525 Silver SW, ABQ, NM 87102 this
    Monday June 9, 1997.

                        [Signature: W. H. Payne]

                                 5

[End 9 June 1997 Motion]

COPY

FILED
at Santa Fe NM
JUNE 11 1997
ROBERT M. MARCH Clerk
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO

                      UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                     FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO

    WILLIAM H. PAYNE, ARTHUR R. MORALES,

              Plaintiffs,

         v.                                 CIV. NO. 97-266 SC/DJS

    LT  GEN. KENNETH A. MINIHAN,
    et al.,

              Defendants

                                 ORDER

         THIS MATTER comes before the Court sua sponte following an

    Initial Scheduling Conference held June 5, 1997. The establishment

    of deadlines for discovery and pre-trial pleadings is necessary for

    the orderly hearing of this case. However, this case is not one in

    which  an  Initial  Pre-trial  Report  will  assist  the  Court.

    Accordingly,  such a document will not be entered. Further,  the

    parties will not be permitted to undertake any discovery in this

    matter  absent  Court permission.  The parties  shall  submit  any

    proposed discovery to the Court for approval, accompanied by a

    motion  to  permit  discovery  and  a  memorandum  of  points  and

    authorities explaining the need for that discovery.

         IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the following deadlines are

    hereby established:

         1.   The parties shall complete discovery necessary by

              September 3, 1997.

         2.   Motions relating to discovery shall be filed no

                                   1

              later than September 23, 1997.

         3.   All pretrial motions regarding matters other than

              discovery shall be filed by October 3, 1997.

         4.   The Pre-Trial Order shall be provided as follows:

              Plaintiffs to Defendants by November 3, 1997;

              Defendants to the Court by November 18, 1997.

         IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that discovery in this matter shall only

    be undertaken upon obtaining Court permission. The parties shall

    submit  any  proposed  discovery  to  the  Court  for  approval,

    accompanied by a motion to permit discovery and a memorandum of

    points and authorities explaining the need for That discovery.

                                       [Signature]

                                       DON J. SVET
                                       UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

                                   2

[End 11 June 1997 Order]