Computer underground Digest Fri, Mar 13, 1992 Volume 4 : Issue 11 Editors: Jim Thomas and

---
Master Index Current Directory Index Go to SkepticTank Go to Human Rights activist Keith Henson Go to Scientology cult

Skeptic Tank!

Computer underground Digest Fri, Mar 13, 1992 Volume 4 : Issue 11 Editors: Jim Thomas and Gordon Meyer (TK0JUT2@NIU.BITNET) Associate Editor: Etaion Shrdlu CONTENTS, #4.12 (Mar 13, 1992) File 1--Correction on THE WELL Access File 2--Readers Reply: "Bury Usenet" (CuD, #4.09) File 3--Readers Reply: Sidetracked--Yet Another Usenet Problem (4.09) File 4--CUD Archives Have Moved File 5--The FBI initiative File 6--Sun Devil FOIA Ruling (CPSR suit) Issues of CuD can be found in the Usenet alt.society.cu-digest news group, on CompuServe in DL0 and DL4 of the IBMBBS SIG, DL1 of LAWSIG, and DL0 and DL12 of TELECOM, on Genie, on the PC-EXEC BBS at (414) 789-4210, and by anonymous ftp from ftp.cs.widener.edu (147.31.254.132), chsun1.spc.uchicago.edu, and ftp.ee.mu.oz.au. To use the U. of Chicago email server, send mail with the subject "help" (without the quotes) to archive-server@chsun1.spc.uchicago.edu. European distributor: ComNet in Luxembourg BBS (++352) 466893. NOTE: THE WIDENER SITE IS TEMPORARILY RE-ORGANIZING AND IS CURRENTLY DIFFICULT TO ACCESS. FTP-ERS SHOULD USE THE ALTERNATE FTP SITES UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE. COMPUTER UNDERGROUND DIGEST is an open forum dedicated to sharing information among computerists and to the presentation and debate of diverse views. CuD material may be reprinted as long as the source is cited. Some authors do copyright their material, and they should be contacted for reprint permission. It is assumed that non-personal mail to the moderators may be reprinted unless otherwise specified. Readers are encouraged to submit reasoned articles relating to computer culture and communication. Articles are preferred to short responses. Please avoid quoting previous posts unless absolutely necessary. DISCLAIMER: The views represented herein do not necessarily represent the views of the moderators. Digest contributors assume all responsibility for ensuring that articles submitted do not violate copyright protections. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 13 Mar 92 11:15:16 CST From: Moderators Subject: File 1--Correction on THE WELL Access We inadvertently reported in #4.11 that The Well (Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link) in Sausalito, Calif., was available through ftp. This is not correct. The Well is accessible through TELNET (192.132.30.2). We are told that it can also be reached through well.sf.ca.us, although this address doesn't seem to work on some systems. It remains correct that The Well is perhaps the best system in the country, if not the world. It is inexpensive, rich in diversity and content, and intellectually stimulating. The voice phone for those wanting more information: (415) 332-4335 (9 am to 5 pm PST). ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Mar 92 11:38:55 PST Subject: File 2--Readers Reply: "Bury Usenet" (CuD, #4.09) From: Steve Elias As the one who created alt.dcom.telecom after one of my "disagreements" with Patrick regarding the telecom digest, I've got three things to say: 1 -- Patrick decided not to post some articles I submitted, but mostly those that had quotes from an anonymous source inside US Sprint. Other articles i submitted, without anonymous sources, he did usually post. 2 -- I also agree with nearly everything Steve Steinberg wrote in his "Bury Usenet" article. I think usenet usually sucks wind, hence i *usually* ;) decline to participate in the net. But don't allege that the net should be completely "abolished" or "buried". I have mostly "buried usenet" from my own point of view, because the benefits to me are not worth any effort and time i might put into posting articles, and the real-life penalties for stating controversial views can be substantial. 3 -- gnu not usenet. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Mar 1992 23:46:05 GMT From: tom_limoncelli@WARREN.MENTORG.COM(Tom Limoncelli) Subject: File 3--Readers Reply: Sidetracked--Yet Another Usenet Problem (4.09) One of the big problems I've always found with Usenet is the fact that a good, productive discussion can be side tracked by any user that wants to. Or, more usually, a person can unintentionally do so. For example, the discussion of "Bury Usenet" has now been side-tracked and is a debate over whether or not the Telcom Digest moderator is biased. For example, the countless discussions on many newsgroups where one or two grammar (or spelling) queens will kill a productive thread by pointing out typos. [I'm trying not to add to the problem here, so let me bring it directly back to "Bury Usenet"] Solutions have been attempted: Moderated newsgroups, which many people have problems with; and "experts only" newsgroup, which doesn't stop people from asking how to delete a file called "-f" on a Unix system. Neither works as well as some would wish. The one solution that works is to avoid (uhhh, should I say "bury") Usenet and use a standard mailing list. There are a few really high- quality mailing lists out there that don't get advertised. One is for system administrators that use NNTP, rather than users. It avoids unwanted conversation because it's hidden from people that shouldn't know about it. Another example is the problem that all of the activism forums on the net are bombarded with pro/con arguments rather than discussions that aid the activist's work itself. Recently there have been two mailing lists created where the topic is not "Who's right?" but "We're pooling resources, giving advice, and helping each other." I hate to say it, but if the quality of either of those mailing lists drops too much, I will create a new mailing list under a new and more secret name and start over. Given a topic you can create two forums. One talks about the topic, one has a goal of achieving that topic. The problem with Usenet is that all newsgroups are created to be the later, but turn into (or users later assume it is) the former. The written proposal for soc.motss dictates that it is for gay, lesbian and bisexual Usenet members to discuss gay, lesbian and bisexual life AND it explicitly prohibits discussions about if homosexuality/bisexuality is right or wrong. Amazingly enough, homophobes post enough messages each day to make the newsgroup useless to many people. Future directions: Sometimes I think that I'd be willing to pay for a service where I could explain my likes and dislikes and they would pre-scan netnews for me and mark anything I would find interesting; I could skip all the rest. This might be worth-while for certain ultra-high volume newsgroups. Then I think that it might be better to pay some highly trained individual to go through my newsfeed as it arrives and add a new header to each message that would list five to a hundred and five keywords from the official Library of Congress keywords list [i.e. synonyms are removed; you don't look in the card catalog under "Movies", you look under "Films"] so that a killfile would have a better fighting chance. Then I start to think about the first mailing list I was ever on. Our VAX at school wasn't on any networks yet, but someone in a silly mood created the "SMC" mailing list and started sending people joking invitations saying that they were invited to her "Secret Mail Club." Maybe the SMC was going in the right direction the whole time. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Mar 1992 22:08:07 -0500 From: Brendan Kehoe Subject: File 4--CUD Archives Have Moved The Computer Underground Digest archives have moved! For a number of reasons, including decreasing disk space, the archives at Widener have found a new home at the Electronic Frontier Foundation. Everything looks the same, and over a dozen new items are available, including Phrack 37. FTP to ftp.eff.org (presently with the IP address of 192.88.144.4, but keep in the habit of using the name), and go to the directory pub/cud. My thanks to the folks at the EFF for their aid & assistance. A copy of the present Index appears below. Please send offers of submissions (not the submissions themselves) to cudarch@eff.org. Thanks, Brendan ++ Computer Underground Digest Archives ==================================== Last updated: 03/11/92 To subscribe to the Computer Underground Digest, write to TK0JUT2@NIU.BITNET. See the bottom of this file for information on submitting to the archives. The archives on ftp.eff.org are now the main CuD archives. Two shadow sites are being maintained: * chsun1.spc.uchicago.edu in the directory pub/cud * ftp.ee.mu.oz.au in the directory pub/text/CuD If you're in Australia please go to your nearby site. If you're in Japan, England, or Germany, and would be willing to maintain a mirror of these archives (~13Mb of space), please write cudarch@eff.org. An email server is available at archive-server@chsun1.spc.uchicago.edu. See the file "uncompressing" for info on how to uncompress files with a ".Z" extension. File Description ---- ----------- alcor/* Files on the Alcor Cryonics email privacy suit. ane/* Anarchy & Explosives Digest, #1-7. ati/* The Activist Times Incorporated files, #1-57. Files #4 and #9 are missing. [ They supposedly don't exist. ] Contact gzero@tronsbox.xei.com for info on future issues. bootlegger/* Issues 6 and 7 of the Bootlegger misc. info collections. ccc/* Stuff from titania.mathematik.uni-ulm.de:/info/CCC. See the file LIES_MICH [README in German] for info on specific files. Also included are things from the CCC Congress. chalisti/* The Chalisti German Newsletter, #1-12,14-17. [ They're in German. Some ambitious and talented linguicist care to translate 'em? ] cpi/* Corrupted Programming International Newsletter #1-2. cud/* The Computer Underground Digest, #1.00 - 4.11. Also: Indices to Volumes 1, 2 and 3; Niedorf Flash. Contact tk0jut2@niu.bitnet for a subscription. fbi/* Freaker's Bureau Inc newsletter, #1.1-1.2. dfp/* Digital Free Press, #1.1-1.2. inform/* Informatik #1-2. law/ Current computer crime laws are online for: AL, AK, AZ, CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, GA, HI, IA, ID, IL, IN, MD, MN, NC, NJ, NM, NY, OR, TX, VT, VA, WA, WI, and WV. (Everyone [law students especially] is encouraged to send along other statutes...we want to build this area up to [hopefully] a full set.) Still needed: AR, DC, KS, KY, ME, MI, MO, MS, MT, ND, NH, NV, OK, RI, SC, SD, TN, UT, WY law/ Current computer crime laws are online for: The United States (federal code), Canada, Ghana, and Great Britain. law/bill.s.618 Senate bill 618, addressing registration of encryption keys with the government. law/hr3515 House of Rep bill 3515, Telecommunications Law law/improve Improvement of Information Access bill law/monitoring Senate bill 516; concerning abuses of electronic monitoring in the workplace. law/us.e-privacy Title 18, relating to computer crime & email privacy. law/scourt-bios Biographies of the Superme Court Justices. lod/* The LOD/H Technical Journals, #1-4. misc/anarch.man Manual of the Anarchist, volume 1. misc/basic1.net Basic Networking (old Telenet lore) misc/cdc-100.Z The "Cult of the Dead Cow", #100. misc/china-2.3 CHiNA Educational InfoFile Series II, #3. misc/codaphone Coda-Phones (about message-taking machines) misc/codehack What to Look For in a Code Hacking Program misc/cyberspace-1.1 The Cyberspace Chronicle misc/defense Defense Data Network Blues by "Harry Hackalot" misc/elektrix-001 ELEKTRIX Issue 1. misc/fbi-1.1 The Freakers Bureau Incorporated newsletter. Vol 1 No 1. misc/globe-1.x The Globe Trotter, issues 1.1-1.3. misc/hnet.1 H-Net Digest, #1. (Started June 1990) (None since) misc/hun-1.2 Hackers Unlimited Magazine, Vol 1 Issue 2. misc/kcah.1,2 Kcah Vol 1-2. misc/phreak1.bok (Another) Phreaker's Handbook misc/ppa.2 Phreakers/Hackers/Anarchists Newsletter Vol 1 #2. misc/rrg.1 Rebels' Riting Guild #1. misc/tph-1 The Phreaker's Handbook, #1. misc/watch* See CuD 3.19 for more info. narc/* The Nuclear Anarchists/Phreakers/Hackers Digest, #1-10. networks/* Acceptable Use Policies for a number of networks. See networks/Index for more information. nfx/* The New Fone Express #1-3. nia/* The Network Information Access Newsletter, #1-73. Contact elisem@nuchat.sccsi.com for more information about NIA. nsa/* National Security Anarchists #1.1-1.4. papers/baudy.world Appears in F. Schmalleger's "Computers In Criminal Justice" ``The Baudy World of the Byte Bandit: A Postmodernist Interpretation of the Computer Underground'' by Gordon Meyer and Jim Thomas papers/bbs.and.the.law.Z %%The Electronic Pamphlet--Computer Bulletin Boards and the Law by Michael H. Riddle papers/bbs.defamation Defamation Liability of Computerized Bulletin Board Operators and Problems of Proof by John R. Kahn papers/biblio A bibliography of CU-related news articles. by Bob Krause papers/candp "Story" of sorts describing a view on the world in which we live. ``Crime and Puzzlement'' by John Barlow (an EFF founder) papers/civil.disobedience "Civil Disobedience" by Henry David Thoreau. papers/closing.the.net "Closing The Net" by Greg Costikyan. Reproduced from _Reason_ magazine with permission. papers/company-email Formulating a Company Policy on Access to and Disclosure of Electronic Mail on Company Computer Systems by David R. Johnson and John Podesta for the Electronic Mail Association papers/computer.crime Computer Crime: Current Practices, Problems and Proposed Solutions by Brian J. Peretti papers/const.in.cyberspace Laurence Tribe's keynote address at the first Conference on Computers, Freedom, & Privacy. "The Constitution in Cyberspace" papers/crime.puzzle The 2600 Magazine article about Crime & Puzzlement. papers/cyberspace Cyberspace and the Legal Matrix: Laws or Confusion? by Lance Rose papers/denning Paper presented to 13th Nat'l Comp Security Conf ``Concerning Hackers Who Break into Computer Systems'' by Dorothy E Denning. papers/dennis.hayes About Dennis Hayes' arrest & conviction for copyright violation. papers/ecpa.layman The Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986: A Layman's View by Michael H. Riddle papers/edwards_letter A letter from the Director of the Secret Service to US Rep. Don Edwards, D-California, in response to questions raised by Edwards' Subcommittee. This copy came from Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility in Washington, D.C. papers/electropolis Electropolis: Communication & Community on Internet Relay Chat by Elizabeth M. Reid papers/fbi.systems A description of how information's stored on the FBI's computer systems. papers/fyi.8 Network Working Group Site Security Handbook papers/gao-report US General Accounting Office report intended as a feeler to see if future electronic releases are of interest. papers/email_privacy Article on the rights of email privacy. by Ruel T. Hernandez papers/intro Intro to the Computer Underground, by "The Bandit" papers/len.rose A compilation of information on Len Rose's situation. papers/len.rose.news News articles on Len Rose. papers/lod_ss.Z The Secret Service, UUCP, and the Legion of Doom by Kevin Mullet papers/memetics Memetics: The Nascent Science of Ideas and Their Transmission by J. Peter Vajk papers/meyer Masters Thesis: The Social Organization of the Computer Underground by Gordon Meyer papers/morris.appeal Robert Morris's appeal. papers/netproposition An FYI about the proposed NREN setup. papers/privacy ``Computer Privacy vs First and Fourth Amendment Rights'' by Michael S. Borella papers/riggs.brief EFF Amicus Brief in the U.S. v. Riggs case challenging computer-use prohibition in "hacker" defendant's sentencing papers/riggs_comment.Z United States v. Riggs: Jacking Into the Net With the Illinois District Court Article for the Rutgers Computer & Technology Law Journal, by Jay Wood. papers/rights-of-expr Rights of Expression in Cyberspace by R. E. Baird papers/ripco-warrant The search warrant for the Ripco BBS. papers/rivera A transcript of Geraldo Rivera's ``Now It Can Be Told: Mad Hackers' Key Party''. papers/sj-resp Steve Jackson's response to the charges against him, denouncing the government's actions. papers/sundevil A collection of information on Operation SunDevil by the Epic nonprofit publishing project. Everything you wanted to know but could never find. papers/sysops What Files are Legal for Distribution on a BBS? by Bob Mahoney, sysop of Exec-PC papers/theft.of.software Article by William Cook, US Attorney in the Neidorf trial. phantasy/* Phantasy Newsletter, Issues 1-7 (volumes 1 through 3). phrack/* PHRACK Magazine, #1-37. Also an Index to the Phracks. Contact phracksub@stormking.com for information about future issues. phun/* PHun Magazine, #1-5. pirate/* Pirate Magazine, #1-5. ppp/* P... Phield Phreakers Newsletter #1. schools/* The policies of a number of schools. See schools/Index for a full list & description of these. sulaw/* The law archives from Sydney University (sulaw.law.su.oz.au). synd/* The Syndicate Reports, #1-17, 20. [ If you have #18-20, please send them in! We can't find them. ] tap/* The TAP Magazine Online, #1. wview/* The World View, #1.5-1.10, 2.0-2.2. Any requests for files to be added to the archives should be sent via email to cudarch@eff.org, cudarch@chsun1.uchicago.edu, cudarch@ee.mu.oz.au, or TK0JUT2@NIU.BITNET. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Mar 92 10:23:23 PDT From: Mike Godwin Subject: File 5--The FBI initiative 102nd Congress 2nd Session Amendment No. Offered by M. 1. SEC. 1. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES 2. (a) The Congress finds: 3. (1) that telecommunications systems and networks are often 4 used in the furtherance of criminal activities including 5 organized crime, racketeering, extortion, kidnapping, espionage, 6 terrorism, and trafficking in illegal drugs; and 7 (2 ) that recent and continuing advances in 8 telecommunications technology, and the introduction of new 9 technologies and transmission modes by the telecommunications 10 industry, have made it increasingly difficult for government 11 agencies to implement lawful orders or authorizations to 12 intercept communications and thus threaten the ability of such 13 agencies effectively to enforce the laws and protect the national 14 security; and 15 (3) without the assistance and cooperation of providers of 16 electronic communication services and private branch exchange 17 operators, the introduction of new technologies and transmission 18 modes into telecommunications systems witout consideration and 19 accommodation of the need of government agencies lawfully to 20 intercept communications, would impede the ability of such 21 agencies effectively to carry out their responsibilities. 22 1 The purpose of this Act are: 2 (1) to clarify the duty of providers of electronic 3 communication services and private branch exchange operators to 4 provide such assistance as necessary to ensure the ability of 5 government agencies to implement lawful orders or authorizations 6 to intercept communications; and 7 (2) to ensure that the Federal Communications Commission, 8 in the setting of standards affecting providers of electronic 9 communication services or private branch exchange operators, will 10 accommodate the need of government agencies lawfully to intercept 11 communications. 12 SEC. 2. Title II of the Communications Act of 1934 is amended 13 by adding at the end thereof the following new sections: 14 "Sec__. GOVERNMENT REQUIREMENTS 15 "(a) The Federal Communications Commission shall, 16 within 120 days after enactment of this Act, issue such 17 regulations as are necessary to ensure that the government 18 can intercept communications when such interception is 19 otherwise lawfully authorized 20 "(b) The regulations issued by the commission shall: 21 "(1) establish standards and specifications for 22 telecommunications equipment and technology employed by 23 providers of electronic communication services or 24 private branch exchange operators as may be necessary 25 to maintain the ability of the government to lawfully 26 intercept communication 1 "(2) require that any telecommunications 2 equipment or technology which impedes the ability of 3 the government to lawfully intercept communications and 4 and which has been introduced into a telecommunications 5 system by providers of electronic communication 6 services or private branch exchange operators shall not 7 expanded so as to further impede such utility until 8 that telecommunications equipment or technology is 9 brought into compliance with the requirements set forth 10 in regulations issued by the Commission; 11 "(3) require that modifications which are 12 necessary to be made to existing telecommunications 13 equipment or technology to eliminate impediments to the 14 ability of the government to lawfully intercept 15 communications shall be implemented by such providers 16 of electronic communication services and private branch 17 exchange operators within 180 days of issuance of such 18 regulations; and 19 "(4) prohibit the use by electronic communication 20 service providers and private branch exchange operators 21 of any telecommunications equipment or technoloqy which 22 does not comply with the regulations issued under this 23 section after the 180th day following the issuance of 24 such regulations. 25 "(c) For the purposes of administering and enforcing 26 the provisions of this section and the regulations 1 prescribed hereunder, the Commission shall have the same 2 authority, power, and functions with respect to providers of 3 electronic communication services or private branch exchange 4 operators as the Commission has in administering and 5 enforcing the provisions of this title with respect to any 6 common carrier otherwise subject to Commission jurisdiction. 7 Any violation of this section by any provider of electronic 8 communication service or any private branch exchange 9 operator shall be subject to the same remedies, penalties, 10 and procedures as are applicable to a violation of this 11 chapter by a common carrier otherwise subject to Commission 12 jurisdiction, except as otherwise specified in subsection 13 (d). 14 "(d) In addition to any enforcement authorities vested 15 in the Commission under this title, the Attorney General may 16 apply to the appropriate United States District Court for a 17 restraining order or injunction against any provider of 18 electronic communication service or private branch exchange 19 operator based upon a failure to comply with the provisions 20 of this section or regulations prescribed hereunder. 21 "(e) Any person who willfully violates any provision 22 of the regulations issued by the Commission pursuant to 23 subjection (a) of this section shall be subject to a civil 24 penalty of $10,000 per day for each day in violation. 25 "(f) To the extent consistent with the setting or 26 implementation of just and reasonable rates, charges and 1 classifications, the Commission shall authorize the 2 compensation of any electronic communication service 3 providers or other entities whose rates or charges are 4 subject to its jurisdiction for the reasonable costs 5 associated with such modifications of existing 6 telecommunications equipment or technology, or with the 7 development or procurement, and the installation of such 8 telecommunications equipment or technology as is necessary 9 to carry out the purposes of this Act, through appropriate 10 adjustments to such rates and charges. 11 "(g) The Attorney General shall advise the Commission 12 within 30 days after the date of enactment of this Act, and 13 periodically thereafter, as necessary, of the specific needs 14 and performance requirements to ensure the continued ability 15 of the government to lawfully intercept communications 16 transmitted by or through the electronic communication 17 services and private branch exchanges introduced, operated, 18 sold or leased in the United States. l9 "(h) Notwithstanding section 552b of Title 5, United 20 States Code or any other provision of law, the Attorney 21 General or his designee may direct that any Commission 22 proceeding concerning regulations, standards or 23 registrations issued or to be issued under the authority of 24 this section shall be closed to the public. 25 "(i) Definitions -- As used in this section -- 1 "(l) 'provider of electronic communication 2 service' or 'private branch exchange operator' means 3 any service which provides to users thereof the ability 4 to send or receive wire, oral or electronic 5 communications, as those terms are defined in 6 subsections 2510(1) and 2510(12) of Title 18, United 7 States Code; 8 "(2) 'communication' means any wire or electronic 9 communication, as defined in subsection 2510(1) and 10 2510 (12), of Title 18, United States Code; 11 "(3) 'impede' means to prevent, hinder or impair 12 the government's ability to intercept a communication 13 in the same form as transmitted; 14 "(4) 'intercept' shall have the same meaning l5 set forth in section 2510 (4) of Title 18, United States 16 Code; 17 "(5) 'government' means the Government of the 18 United States and any agency or instrumentality 19 thereof, any state or political subdivision thereof, 20 and the District of Columbia, and Commonwealth of Puerto 21 Rico; and 22 "(6) 'telecommunications equipment or technology' 23 means any equipment or technology, used or to be used 24 by any providers of electronic communication services 25 or private branch exchange operators, which is for the 1 transmission or recept of wire, oral or electronic 2 communications." 3 SEC 3. Section 510, Title V, P.L. 97-259 is amended deleting the 4 phrase "section 301 or 302a" and substituting the phrase "section 5 301, 302a, or ____. DIGITAL TELEPHONY AMENDMENT (report language) Significant changes are being made in the systems by which communications services are provided. Digital technologies, fiber optics, and other telecommunications transmission technologies are coming into widespread use. These changes in communications systems and technologies make it increasingly difficult for government agencies to implement lawful orders or authorizations to intercept communications in order to enforce the laws and protect the national security. With the assistance of providers of electronic communication services, these technological advances need not impede the ability of government agencies to carry out their responsibilities. This bill would direct the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to issue standards ensuring that communications systems and service providers continue to accommodate lawful government communications intercepts. The regulations are not intended to cover federal government communications systems. Procedure already exist by which the Federal Bureau of Investigation amy obtain federal agency cooperation in implementing lawful orders or authorizations applicable to such systems. Further, there would be no obligation on the part of the service providers or any other party to ensure access to the plain text of encrypted or other encoded material, but rather only to the communication in whatever form it is transmitted. It is thus the intent and purpose of the bill only to maintain the government's current communications interception capability where properly ordered or authorized. No expansion of that authority is sought. ANALYSIS Subsection 2(a) and (b) would require the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to issue any regulations deemed necessary to ensure that telecommunications equipment and technology used by providers of electronic communications services or private branch exchange operators will permit the government to intercept communications when such interception is lawfully authorized. The regulations would also require that equipment or technologies currently used by such providers or operators that impede this ability until brought into compliance with the regulations. Compliance with FCC regulations issued under this section would be required within 180 days of their issuance. Subsection 2(c) provides that the Commission's authority to implement and enforce the provisions of this section are the same as those it has with respect to common carriers subject to its jurisdiction. Subsection 2(d) would give the Attorney General the authority to request injunctive relief against non-complying service providers or private branch exchange operators. Subsection 2(e) provides civil penalty authority for willful violations of the regulations of up to $10,000 per day for each violation. Subsection 2(f) would permit the FCC to provide rate relief to service providers subject to its rate-setting jurisdiction for the costs associated with modifying equipment or technologies to carry out the purposes of the bill. Subsections 2(g), (h), and (i) require the Attorney General to advise the Commission regarding the specific needs and performance criteria required to maintain government intercept capabilities, require the FCC to ensure that the standards and specifications it promulgates may be implemented on a royalty- free basis, and authorize the Attorney General to require that particular Commission rulemaking proceedings to implement the Act be closed to the public. Subsection 2(j) provides definitions for key terms used in this section. ------------------------------ Date: 12 Mar 92 22:28:35 EST From: Gordon Meyer <72307.1502@COMPUSERVE.COM> Subject: File 6--Sun Devil FOIA Ruling (CPSR suit) U.S.. District Judge Thomas Hogan today upheld the decision of the Secret Service to withhold from public disclosure search warrant materials associated with the agency's controversial Operation Sun Devil investigation. Ruling from the bench in a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed in Washington by Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (CPSR), the judge accepted the government's contention that release of the requested documents would interfere with the Secret Service's ongoing investigation of alleged computer crime. CPSR had argued that disclosure of the documents -- search warrant applications, executed warrants and inventories of seized property -- would not hamper legitimate law enforcement interests. The Sun Devil raids were conducted in May 1990 in 13 cities across the country and have not, to date, resulted in any indictments. Similar documents are routinely available from judicial clerks' offices and are considered to be public records. While noting that the government has not alleged a conspiracy in the Sun Devil investigation, the judge ruled that the requested documents, when viewed in the aggregate, might reveal heretofore undisclosed aspects of the investigation and hamper the government's efforts. Such a "compilation" of information, according to the judge, would be likely to interfere with the investigation -- the standard the government must meet to justify the withholding of law enforcement records under the FOIA. CPSR plans to appeal the ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. David L. Sobel, CPSR Legal Counsel dsobel@washofc.cpsr.org ------------------------------ End of Computer Underground Digest #3.25 ************************************

---

E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank