Computer underground Digest Fri, Mar 13, 1992 Volume 4 : Issue 11 Editors: Jim Thomas and
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 (126.96.36.199),
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 firstname.lastname@example.org.
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
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
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
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
(188.8.131.52). We are told that it can also be reached through
well.sf.ca.us, although this address doesn't seem to work on some
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
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
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
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.
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
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 184.108.40.206, 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 email@example.com.
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 firstname.lastname@example.org.
An email server is available at
See the file "uncompressing" for info on how to uncompress files with
a ".Z" extension.
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 email@example.com for info on
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 firstname.lastname@example.org 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,
(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
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.
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
The Cyberspace Chronicle
misc/defense Defense Data Network Blues by "Harry Hackalot"
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.
(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 email@example.com for more information
nsa/* National Security Anarchists #1.1-1.4.
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
%%The Electronic Pamphlet--Computer Bulletin Boards and the Law
by Michael H. Riddle
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
``Crime and Puzzlement''
by John Barlow (an EFF founder)
"Civil Disobedience" by Henry David Thoreau.
"Closing The Net" by Greg Costikyan. Reproduced from
_Reason_ magazine with permission.
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
Computer Crime: Current Practices, Problems and
by Brian J. Peretti
Laurence Tribe's keynote address at the first Conference
on Computers, Freedom, & Privacy. "The Constitution in
The 2600 Magazine article about Crime & Puzzlement.
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.
About Dennis Hayes' arrest & conviction for copyright
The Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986: A Layman's
by Michael H. Riddle
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
Electropolis: Communication & Community on Internet Relay Chat
by Elizabeth M. Reid
A description of how information's stored on the FBI's
papers/fyi.8 Network Working Group Site Security Handbook
US General Accounting Office report intended as a feeler
to see if future electronic releases are of interest.
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.
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
Robert Morris's appeal.
An FYI about the proposed NREN setup.
papers/privacy ``Computer Privacy vs First and Fourth Amendment Rights''
by Michael S. Borella
EFF Amicus Brief in the U.S. v. Riggs case challenging
computer-use prohibition in "hacker" defendant's sentencing
United States v. Riggs: Jacking Into the Net With the
Illinois District Court
Article for the Rutgers Computer & Technology Law Journal,
by Jay Wood.
Rights of Expression in Cyberspace
by R. E. Baird
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
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 firstname.lastname@example.org for information about future
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 email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org,
email@example.com, or TK0JUT2@NIU.BITNET.
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 92 10:23:23 PDT
From: Mike Godwin
Subject: File 5--The FBI initiative
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.
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
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
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
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
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
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.
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
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
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
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
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
End of Computer Underground Digest #3.25
E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank