Computer underground Digest Sun Dec 5 1993 Volume 5 : Issue 91 ISSN 1004-042X Editors: Jim

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

Skeptic Tank!

Computer underground Digest Sun Dec 5 1993 Volume 5 : Issue 91 ISSN 1004-042X Editors: Jim Thomas and Gordon Meyer (TK0JUT2@NIU.BITNET) Archivist: Brendan Kehoe Shadow-Archivists: Dan Carosone / Paul Southworth Ralph Sims / Jyrki Kuoppala Ian Dickinson Copy Editor: Tamen O. DeSchrew, III CONTENTS, #5.91 (Dec 5 1993) File 1--Anarchy Gone Awry File 2--PC Security books reprints material from AIS (Review) File 3--Apple Computers bitten by Conservatives File 4--GAO Report on Computers and Privacy File 5--New Docs Reveal NSA Role in File 6--REMINDER: CFP '94 SCHOLARSHIP DEADLINE APPROACHING File 7--DIAC-94 Call for Participation Cu-Digest is a weekly electronic journal/newsletter. Subscriptions are available at no cost electronically from tk0jut2@mvs.cso.niu.edu. The editors may be contacted by voice (815-753-0303), fax (815-753-6302) or U.S. mail at: Jim Thomas, Department of Sociology, NIU, DeKalb, IL 60115. Issues of CuD can also be found in the Usenet comp.society.cu-digest news group; on CompuServe in DL0 and DL4 of the IBMBBS SIG, DL1 of LAWSIG, and DL1 of TELECOM; on GEnie in the PF*NPC RT libraries and in the VIRUS/SECURITY library; from America Online in the PC Telecom forum under "computing newsletters;" On Delphi in the General Discussion database of the Internet SIG; on the PC-EXEC BBS at (414) 789-4210; and on: Rune Stone BBS (IIRG WHQ) (203) 832-8441 NUP:Conspiracy; RIPCO BBS (312) 528-5020 CuD is also available via Fidonet File Request from 1:11/70; unlisted nodes and points welcome. EUROPE: from the ComNet in LUXEMBOURG BBS (++352) 466893; In ITALY: Bits against the Empire BBS: +39-461-980493 ANONYMOUS FTP SITES: AUSTRALIA: ftp.ee.mu.oz.au (128.250.77.2) in /pub/text/CuD. EUROPE: ftp.funet.fi in pub/doc/cud. (Finland) UNITED STATES: aql.gatech.edu (128.61.10.53) in /pub/eff/cud etext.archive.umich.edu (141.211.164.18) in /pub/CuD/cud ftp.eff.org (192.88.144.4) in /pub/cud halcyon.com( 202.135.191.2) in /pub/mirror/cud ftp.warwick.ac.uk in pub/cud (United Kingdom) KOREA: ftp: cair.kaist.ac.kr in /doc/eff/cud 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 for non-profit as long as the source is cited. Authors hold a presumptive copyright, 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: Thu, 02 Dec 93 04:36:10 -0700 From: "L. Detweiler" Subject: File 1--Anarchy Gone Awry Mr. Leichter raises some extremely pivotal issues in CUD #5.90 related to the `anarchy' of the Internet. B.Sterling is the author of one of the most brilliantly colorful characterizations and metaphors of the Internet as `anarchic', comparing its evolution and development to that of the English language: > The Internet's `anarchy' may seem strange or even unnatural, but > it makes a certain deep and basic sense. It's rather like the > `anarchy' of the English language. Nobody rents English, and > nobody owns English. As an English-speaking person, it's up > to you to learn how to speak English properly and make whatever > use you please of it (though the government provides certain > subsidies to help you learn to read and write a bit). > Otherwise, everybody just sort of pitches in, and somehow the > thing evolves on its own, and somehow turns out workable. And > interesting. Fascinating, even. Though a lot of people earn > their living from using and exploiting and teaching English, > `English' as an institution is public property, a public good. > Much the same goes for the Internet. Would English be improved > if the `The English Language, Inc.' had a board of directors > and a chief executive officer, or a President and a Congress? > There'd probably be a lot fewer new words in English, and a lot > fewer new ideas. Unfortunately, though, having attended a lecture by Mr. Sterling and having read `The Hacker Crackdown', I think he has a tendency to overdramatize and glorify quasi-criminal behavior and rebellious, subversive, revolutionary aspects of social structures, including those of the Internet. In my view, to the contrary the Internet is largely held together with the glue of social cohesion and human civility, and ingredients that are destructive to that order are likewise toxic to Cyberspace, and that, conversely, virtually all of the excruciating poison in the bloodstream today can be traced to violations and perversions of that trust. (Unfortunately, the English language is itself subject to unpleasant, corrupt, or toxic uses such as for profanity, disinformation, and lies, which are prevented or at least minimized through rejections by honest people.) I agree with Mr. Leichter in the belief (to paraphrase Twain) that `reports of the anarchy on the Internet are greatly exaggerated'. Leichter: >The Internet has been >described as an anarchy, but in fact only relatively small parts of >the Internet are actually anarchic. I would like to go further than this and suggest that the Internet has been over-promoted as `anarchic' by certain subversive, quasi-criminal segments that have found a tenacious hold there, namely extremist libertarians and `Cryptoanarchists'. The Cryptoanarchist cause is closely associated with the Cypherpunk founders E.Hughes and T.C.May (characterized particularly by the latter's infamous signature), who in my view appear to promote not merely `privacy for the masses' and `the cryptographic revolution', but at least condone or tolerate the use of collections of imaginary identities to manipulate and deceive others, and even to evade legitimate government actions such as criminal prosecutions. My most strident requests for their position, personal knowledge, and potential involvement in this practice have gone unanswered, evaded, and repressed over many weeks, but I have many statements from followers that might be regarded as `cult fanatics' about the Liberating Effects of `pseudoanonymity', which they exalt as True Anonymity. In my opinion, in this regard of the ease of creating fake identities, the `anarchic' vulnerability of the Internet reaches its peak in undesirable and socially poisonous consequences, which people are bloodily battling daily on many diverse mailing lists and Usenet groups. In my experience, the Internet inhabitants I have found who most fanatically worship the Internet `anarchy' seem to be closely associated with criminally subversive aims of pornography distribution, tax evasion, black marketeering, and overthrow of governments, goals which are all masked in much of the eloquent Cryptoanarchist dogma and rhetoric. While some of us have glimpsed various hideous corners of Cyberspatial Hell, those who subscribe to the Liberating Religion of Anarchy are in their Paradise on the Internet As We Know It. I call their Utopia a Ticking Time Bomb and a Recipe for an Apocalypse. I have come to these (admittedly melodramatic) conclusions after ~10 months and ~3500 messages of generally unpleasant and at times excruciatingly troubling and painful reading and participation on the Cypherpunks list and many personal communications with the Cypherpunk leaders including E.Hughes, T.C.May, and J.Gilmore. In fact, in my opinion the `Psychopunk Manifesto' parody in CUD #5.89, which longtime cypherpunk list subscriber P.Ferguson describes in 5.90 as having `made its rounds in the cyberspatial world', actually in many ways comes closer to delineating the actual cypherpunk agenda than the one authored by founder E.Hughes on soda.berkeley.edu: /pub/cypherpunks/rants/A_Cypherpunk's_Manifesto. The satire is actually a reformulated version of the original Manifesto, and the former's amazing meme-virus penetration of the into the cyberspatial psyche that P.Ferguson alludes to is indicative of its resonance over the latter. I gave the Cypherpunks the most extraordinary benefit of the doubt for months, far beyond that of a reasonable cyberspatial inhabitant. But now I must warn everyone who can hear me that if they assign the `cypherpunks' as an organization the same credibility as a group like EFF or CPSR they are dangerously, perhaps disastrously, misguided. They appear to me to the contrary to be the cultivators of a flourishing conspiracy and essentially the first Cyberspatial guerilla and terrorist group! The Psychopunk satirization of the Cryptoanarchists is representative of this Internet Anarchy Gone Awry. More information on the CryptoAnarchist & Cypherpunk agenda can be found in RISKS 15.25, 15.27, and 15.28x (FTP crvax.sri.com, directory RISKS:). I also have an essay `Joy of Pseudospoofing', regarding the dangerous consequences and poisonous effects of the manipulations of fake cyberspatial identities such as on the Internet by Cryptoanarchists, available to anyone who requests it from me by email at . * * * I think that many people have mistaken the word `anarchic,' implying no overseeing authority or order (which the Internet is less) with the word `decentralized' (which the Internet is more). Again, the Internet has many regulatory and self-governing systems and orders. For example, connecting sites are required to implement a certain minimum set of software standards and prevent or even root out corruptions in their local sites and software. We have centralized databases that require the registration of domains for fees. A complex network of agreements and policies governs interconnectivity and communication, and a complicated interplay of elements affects basic content such as `commercial vs. academic.' Lack of some of these regulations and protocols would be disastrous. Leichter: >Most of the Internet, in fact, is >better described as self-governing. There are a variety of social >norms concerning network use and interactions. One doesn't post >messages to unrelated groups. One doesn't evade moderation >restrictions. One maintains a certain (rather limited, it must be >admitted) degree of restraint in how one describes other network >participants. There are few effective mechanisms for enforcing these >norms, and they are certainly broken on an all-too-regular basis; but >the network continues to function because social pressure *can* be >applied to those who become too annoying; and in the most outrageous >cases, it's possible to remove the offenders' access to the net. I advocate that we build new formal mechanisms to enforce this order! We have for too long pretended that a central element of the Internet is not integral to it, namely that of the `degree of restraint over network participants' exerted through `social pressure'. Let us codify and formalize these `norms concerning network use and interactions' and develop systems that enforce them! I believe such systems can be developed that do not stray from the sacred Internet tradition of decentralization of control and freedom from censorship. Why should we continue to subject ourselves to the torture of `few effective mechanisms for enforcing these norms broken on an all-too-regular basis'? One of my most enduring Cyberspatial hallucinations is that of a Ratings server. A Ratings server would be a massive distributed network for the propagation of information similar to Usenet, and could conceivably be built upon it. But the Ratings server is not Information, as Usenet is, it is Information about Information. Anyone can post an arbitrary message to the Ratings server that refers to Information somewhere else in Cyberspace. It is in a sense a Rating of that Information. The Information could be *anything* -- a mailing list, a person, a particular Usenet posting, an FTP site. But postings on the Ratings server can be perused by anyone, and anyone can contribute Ratings to the server or indicate their own opinion on the existing Ratings. Different mechanisms exist such that some Ratings are `local' and some are updated globally. The fantastic possibilities of this system are evident upon some reflection and consideration. We could establish arbitrary new groups that have *formal* requirements that are matched by Ratings servers. For example, we could require that new sites that enter the Internet be `trusted' by an existing site. We could require that membership in certain groups requires a certain amount of collateral peer approval, with automatic suspension or expulsion as the consequences for violating it! We could have *meaningful* polls on arbitrary issues. We could have news servers that automatically sort and archive articles according to their passing certain Ratings thresholds. We could restrict the influence of troublemakers! These are all examples of strengthening and formalizing the informal social orders that are, in my opinion, today just barely holding the Internet together. With a Ratings system, I think the civility of the Internet would increase to a fantastic degree. In short, we could have our *own* cyberspatial government! Note that there is no centralized authority or unfair influence in this system, unless people corrupt their servers. When everyone who has joined a group *individually* decides to screen their postings of messages that fail to meet a certain `quality' or posters who have a certain `reputation', that is not Orwellian Censorship but the beautiful Internet freedom and right of Bozo Filtering. When everyone who joins a group *agrees* to a charter that may bar troublemakers based on Ratings, no one can claim they are being unfairly oppressed. Other extremely interesting implementation issues in the use of the Ratings servers can be addressed in detail. For example, the use of cryptographic protocols to ensure the integrity of voting or privacy of certain entries will certainly prove invaluable and even critical to their development. The optimal protocols for the localization or distribution of votes will surely be subject to extremely fascinating and fruitful research. In my view the concept of a Ratings server is wide open territory and holds some immensely promising potential in finally, valiantly slaying the dreaded, ugly, vicious Signal to Noise Monsters harassing, terrorizing, and torturing us everywhere on the Internet, to be replaced with Shining Castles. I urge anyone interested in developing `civilized systems for cyberspace' to subscribe to a new group I have helped start with J.Helgingius (owner of the popular and revolutionary anon.penet.fi anonymous server) called the Cypherwonks, dedicated to openness, honesty, and cooperation on the Internet, and building sophisticated new systems to promote social harmony in Future Cyberspace. We are particularly fascinated with the possibilities of `Electronic Democracy'. (Send a message to `MajorDomo@lists.eunet.fi' with the body the commands `info' or `subscribe cypherwonks'.) I fervently hope that the glorifications and manipulations of Internet Anarchy by mouth-frothing libertarian extremists, Cryptoanarchists, and sympathizers can be adequately controlled and minimized in the future, and some harmonious systems and effective countermeasures along the lines of the Rating server can be established by visionaries and tinkerers, but in any case, for the sake of humanity's integrity, sanity, and well-being, I pray that Future Cyberspace is far less Anarchic than the Current Internet. ------------------------------ Date: 24 Nov 93 15:32:40 EST From: Urnst Kouch - Crypt Newsletter <70743.1711@COMPUSERVE.COM> Subject: File 2--PC Security books reprints material from AIS (Review) "NETWORK SECURITY SECRETS" BENEFITS FROM PUBLIC ACCESS INFORMATION ON THE DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY'S 'UNDERGROUND' SECURITY BULLETIN BOARD SYSTEM "Network Security Secrets," by David Stang, Ph.D., and Sylvia Moon, (IDG Books, $49.95) is the first mainstream publication which benefits directly from the accumulated data on Kim Clancy's Dept. of Treasury bulletin board system (AIS), gagged earlier this year. board supervised by the Department of Treasury contained unadulterated hacker files which were given to callers interested in the material. Other computer security workers and anti-virus developers mounted a smear campaign which landed in the pages of The Washington Post, causing the system to withdraw the information. The original argument had been that it was information which would most benefit security managers unable to find the material elsewhere. The publication of "Network Security Secrets," proves the argument a valid one, although it tries hard to deny it. In keeping with the political correctness of the times (read _hypocrisy_), the book fails to directly cite the material gathered from the Dept. of Treasury system while reprinting portions of it essentially verbatim. Of course, this makes "Network Security Secrets" a very interesting read. One of Stang's central points in "Security Secrets" is that good security stems from bringing necessary information to the workers employed where the rubber meets the road. This practice, he writes, is often opposed to management interested only in imposing a rigid heirarchical structure on the workplace. The workers who will have to deal with security problems such as intrusion from desk-top dial-ups, password and access control plus the occasional virus aren't thought to be trustworthy enough to be brought into the information loop. "Network Security Secrets" says this is bad and it's correct. Consequently, where does quality information come from; where is it gathered? In the chapter "Bulletin Boards and Security" under "Looking at the Dark Side," Stang published a screen display taken from the Department of Treasury, of which he says, "We doubt the agency was aware of this part of its board," which presumes quite a bit, incorrectly, I might add. In any case, "This part of the board" lists the hacking files culled from PHRACK and other underground journals and BBS's. The data addresses viruses, telephonic and network security concerns. "Manly Hacking" is one such entry. Written by "Shit-Kicking Jim," it was only found on Clancy's system prior to publication in a later issue of PHRACK. "Network Security Secrets" also reprints an underground document gained from AIS called "Hacking Novell Local Area Networks" and marks it with one of those happy little icons computer books are seeded with to satisfy readers whose reading comprehension is deemed not much beyond "First Grade Coloring Book Exercises." The icon is a treasure chest marked "Secret: This icon points to information which gives some special insight into network security." The book also republishes material on network hacking programs NETCRACK and GETIT, a resident password and keystroke leech, all gained from AIS. So that answers the question: Yes, information written by the computer underground is valuable, worthy of exposure in a $50 mainstream computer volume. By the same token, Stang writes, "This is a sensitive subject, and some may argue the information may land into the wrong hands. We'll argue that it's already in the wrong hands and the 'good guys' need to know what they're up against." And that's the same argument Treasury used to defend AIS, a system Stang labels from "the Dark Side." What a poor sport! Stang and Moon wrestle on and off with the idea of information access throughout the book, coming down more in favor of those who weirdly think that by publishing such information, you somehow endorse it. They mention book publishers who specialize in so-called fringe subjects as lock-picking and personal revenge. "No, we won't give you their address!" they write. In the same paragraph "Network Security" mentions "Make 'Em Pay," one paperback devoted to practical jokes and payback techniques. Published by Lyle Stuart, I found "Make 'Em Pay" in the humor section of Crown Books, the largest generic bookstore chain in California. So much for the stone reality of access control, a reality which corporate management appears to work hard to ignore. Despite these major idiosyncracies, "Network Security Secrets" is still a better than average book on the subject. Stang works hard to avoid jargon, failing only when he hands off to someone else in a chapter on encryption: ". . . the DES was promulgated by NIST to provide a system that protects the confidentiality and integrity of the federal government's sensitive unclassified computer information. FIPS PUB 46 is based on work at IBM and has been approved as the American National Standard X3.92-1981/R1987." Sadly, it appears there will never be a shortage of computer writers who specialize in jargo-hackese. "Network Security Secrets" also sports a slight, dry sense of humor. On bulletin boards, Stang writes "Does the software include the use of a SYSOP-editable trashcan file of caller names that are immediately ejected ('hacker,' 'crap,' 'John Dvorak," and so on)?" I had to laugh at that one. At $50, even with two diskettes, "Network Security" isn't cheap. But it does give you your money's worth as a reasonably detailed overview of PC network security. [Addendum: Stang, who represents Norman Data Defense Systems, was the man the Secret Service called when its networks were contaminated with the Satan Bug virus.] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1993 09:47:07 -0600 (CST) From: Charles Stanford Subject: File 3--Apple Computers bitten by Conservatives ((MODERATORS' NOTE: The following was also reported on PBS' All Things Considered)). +--------- Forwarded message ---------- Date--Wed, 1 Dec 1993 08:06:04 -0600 From--"G. D. Mitchell" As a side note, Apple was originally considering building a plant in Texas, just north of Austin (the state capital). However, the county in which the plant was to be built decided not to extend the usual tax break to Apple because of their policy of extending benefits to non-married partners of Apple employees, both hetero- and homosexual. I heard county officials stating that the communities involved were less concerned about the possible jobs they would lose, and more concerned with "family values". I think this is taking place in Williamson County, fyi. There's so many damn counties in Texas that I probably don't know more than a fourth of them :) so I may be wrong. I was a little pissed about this when I heard the news yesterday. Apple was going to bring 700 jobs to Texas, but these rednecks were too afraid that having a few gay couples in the neighborhood might make little Johnny queer. It's stupid socially and economically. And to think, there are times when I can almost forget that Texas IS a backwards state. Anyone ready to start that Nation of Freaks I was raving about a year ago? :) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1993 17:09:20 -0600 From: Jerry Whelan Subject: File 4--GAO Report on Computers and Privacy ((MODERATORS' NOTE: Thanks to Jerry Whelan for forwarding over teh GAO report on "Communications Privacy." Here, we reprint the introduction. The entire document can be retrieved from the CuD ftp sites or the ftp sites listed below)). To--rsaref-users@RSA.COM Acknowledge-To-- KH3@NIHCU.BITNET GAO recently issued a report "Communications Privacy: Federal Policy and Actions", GAO/OSI-94-2, dated November 4, 1993, that may be of interest to members of your group. The report focused on the following issues: --The need for information privacy in computer and communications systems--through such means as encryption, or conversion of clear text to an unreadable form--to mitigate the threat of economic espionage to U.S. industry; --federal agency authority to develop cryptographic standards for the protection of sensitive, unclassified information and the actions and policies of the National Security Agency (NSA), Department of Defense, and of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NI ST), Department of Commerce, regarding the selection of federal cryptographic standards; --roles, actions, and policies of NSA and the Department of State related to export controls for products with encryption capabilities and industry rationale for requesting liberalization of such controls; and --the Federal Bureau of Investigation's (FBI) legislative proposal regarding telephone systems that use digital communications technology. I have placed an electronic version of the report named OSI-94-2.TXT in the GAO-REPORTS anonymous FTP directory at NIH (ftp.cu.nih.gov). Joe Sokalski, GAO--Los Angeles kh3@cu.nih.gov ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1993 14:54:51 EST From: Dave Banisar Subject: File 5--New Docs Reveal NSA Role in New Docs Reveal NSA Involvement in Digital Telephony Proposal From the CPSR Alert 2.06 (Dec. 1, 1993) A series of memoranda received by CPSR from the Department of Commerce last week indicate that the National Security Agency was actively involved in the 1992 FBI Digital Telephony Proposal. Two weeks ago, documents received by CPSR indicated that the FBI proposal, code named "Operation Root Canal," was pushed forward even after reports from the field found no cases where electronic surveillance was hampered by new technologies. The documents also revealed that the Digital Signature Standard was viewed by the FBI as "[t]he first step in our plan to deal with the encryption issue." The earliest memo is dated July 5, 1991, just a few weeks after the Senate withdrew a Sense of Congress provision from S-266, the Omnibus Crime Bill of 1991, that encouraged service and equipment providers to ensure that their equipment would "permit the government to obtain the plain text contents of voice, data and other communications...." The documents consist of a series of fax transmittal sheets and memos from the Office of Legal Counsel in the Department of Commerce to the National Security Agency. Many attachments and drafts, including more detailed descriptions of the NSA's proposals, were withheld or released with substantial deletions. Also included in the documents is a previously released public statement by the National Telecommunications and Information Administration entitled "Technological Competitiveness and Policy Concerns." The document was requested by Rep. Jack Brooks and states that the proposal could obstruct or distort telecommunications technology development by limiting fiber optic transmission, ISDN, digital cellular services and other technologies until they are modified, ... could impair the security of business communications ... that could facilitate not only lawful government interception, but unlawful interception by others, [and] could impose industries ability to offer new services and technologies. CPSR is planning to appeal the Commerce Department's decision to withhold many of the documents. To subscribe to the Alert, send the message: "subscribe cpsr " (without quotes or brackets) to listserv@gwuvm.gwu.edu. Back issues of the Alert are available at the CPSR Internet Library FTP/WAIS/Gopher cpsr.org /cpsr/alert Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility is a national, non-partisan, public-interest organization dedicated to understanding and directing the impact of computers on society. Founded in 1981, CPSR has 2000 members from all over the world and 22 chapters across the country. Our National Advisory Board includes a Nobel laureate and three winners of the Turing Award, the highest honor in computer science. Membership is open to everyone. For more information, please contact: cpsr@cpsr.org or visit the CPSR discussion conferences on The Well (well.sf.ca.us) or Mindvox (phantom.com). ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 4 Dec 1993 18:32:54 CST From: Jim Thomas Subject: File 6--REMINDER: CFP '94 SCHOLARSHIP DEADLINE APPROACHING ((MODERATORS' NOTE: The DEADLINE for applications for scholarships to the Computer Freedom and Privacy '94 Conference at the Palmer House in Chicago is 31 December. DO NOT WAIT UNTIL THE LAST MINUTE. We are reprinting the earlier announcement for those who may have missed it last month. For applicants who do not ultimately receive scholarships, the conference organizers are attempting to find inexpensive lodging within walking distance to the Palmer House, which is located in the center of The Loop)). The Conference on Computers, Freedom & Privacy (CFP'94) is pleased to announce that it will once again provide a number of full tuition scholarships for attendance at the conference. The conference will be held in Chicago, IL from March 23rd through March 26th, 1994 and will be hosted by the John Marshall Law School under the chairmanship of George Trubow. The conference traditionally attracts an extremely diverse group of persons concerned with issues relating to the rapid development of the "information society"; civil libertarians, information providers, law enforcement personnel, privacy advocates, "hackers", sociologists, educators and students, computer professionals, cryptography advocates, government policy makers and other interested parties have all played major roles in the three previous conference. Speakers at previous conferences have included Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) co-founders John Perry Barlow and Mitch Kapor, FBI Deputy Director William A. "Al" Bayse, writer Bruce Sterling, privacy advocate Simon Davies, Harvard University law professor Lawrence Tribe, hacker "Phiber Optik", Georgetown University's Dorothy Denning, "Cuckoo's Egg" author Clifford Stoll, Prodigy counsel George Perry, USA Today founder Al Neuwith, former FCC Chairman Nicholas Johnson, Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (CPSR)'s Marc Rotenberg, Arizona prosecutor Gail Thackeray, and Bay Area Women in Computing's Judi Clark. The scholarships are intended to provide access to the conference to those that would like to attend the conference but are unable to afford the tuition. They are available to undergraduate and graduate students in any discipline (previous student attendees have come from computer science, law, sociology, liberal arts, journalism, and womens' studies backgrounds), law enforcement personnel, hackers, social scientists, and others interested in the future of the information society. Persons interested in a scholarship should send the following information (e-mail greatly preferred) to: John F. McMullen CFP'94 Scholarship Chair Perry Street Jefferson Valley, NY 10535 mcmullen@panix.com (914) 245-2734 (voice) (914) 245-8464 (fax) 1. Personal Information -- Name, Addresses (including e-mail), Phone Numbers, School and/or Business Affiliation 2. Short Statement explaining what the applicant helps to get from CFP'94 and what impact that attendance may have in the applicant's community or future work. 3. Stipulation that the applicant understands that he/she is responsible for transportation and lodging expenses related to the conference. The scholarship includes tuition and those meals included with the conference. 4. Stipulation that the applicant would not be able to attend the conference if a scholarship is not granted. 5. Stipulation that the applicant, if granted a scholarship, will attend the conference. 6. Stipulation that the applicant, if granted a scholarship, will provide a written critique of the conference to the scholarship committee by April 30, 1994. Applications will be accepted until December 31, 1993 and scholarship winners will be notified by approximately February 1, 1994. Please contact John McMullen at the above e-mail address or phone numbers with any questions. John F. McMullen mcmullen@mindvox.phantom.com Consultant, knxd@maristb.bitnet mcmullen@well.sf.ca.us Writer, ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1993 17:49:50 EDT From: Paul Hyland Subject: File 7--DIAC-94 Call for Participation Please post and distribute to interested colleagues. Call for Workshop Proposals Developing an Effective and Equitable Information Infrastructure Directions and Implications of Advanced Computing (DIAC-94) Symposium Cambridge, MA, USA April 23 - 24, 1994 The National Information Infrastructure (NII) is being proposed as the next-generation "information superhighway" for the 90's and beyond. Academia, libraries, government agencies, as well as media and telecommunication companies are involved in the current development. Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (CPSR) and other organizations believe that critical issues regarding the use of the NII deserve increased public visibility and participation and is using the DIAC Symposium to help address this concern. The DIAC-94 symposium is a two-day symposium and will consist of presentations on the first day and workshops on the second day. The DIAC Symposia are held biannually and DIAC-94 will be CPSR's fifth such conference. We encourage your participation both through attending and through conducting a workshop. We are currently soliciting workshop proposals. We suggest proposals on the following themes but any topic relating to the symposium theme is welcome. Systems and Services Policy + Community networks + Funding + Information services + Role of government + Delivery of social services + Economic modelling of networks + Privacy (including medical) + Commercialization of the NII + Educational support + Universal access + Meeting diverse needs + Freedom of expression and community standards Electronic Democracy Directions and Implications + Access to information + Ubiquitous computing + Electronic town meetings + Global hypertext and multimedia + Threats to democracy + Computing in the workplace + Economic and class disparities + Computing and the environment International Issues Traditional and Virtual Communities + Language differences + MUDs + Cultural diversity + Communication ethics, values, and styles + National and international + Gender relations in cyberspace priorities + Cooperative projects + Networking for indigenous peoples Workshops will be an hour and half in length. The proposal should include title, presenter, purpose of workshop, references, and plan. Workshops should substantially involve the audience and proposals in which some group product or action plan is created are preferred. As the proposals may be collected into a book, workshop proposals should be clear and informative to people who don't participate in the workshop. Proposals are due February 15, 1994 and acceptance and rejection notices will be sent by March 15, 1994. To discuss workshops or to submit proposals for workshops contact the program chair, Doug Schuler, doug.schuler@cpsr.org. Electronic submissions are encouraged but paper versions are also acceptable (send them to CPSR/Seattle - - - - DIAC '94 Workshop Submission, P.O. Box 85481, Seattle, WA 98145-1481). Sponsored by Computer Professionals for Social Responsbility Potential co-sponsors are being sought. Please contact us if your organization would like to help with this event. For more information on co-sponsorship or on general issues, contact conference chair, Coralee Whitcomb, cwhitcomb@bentley.edu. ------------------------------ End of Computer Underground Digest #5.91 ************************************

---

E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank