Computer underground Digest Wed Dec 14, 1994 Volume 6 : Issue 105 ISSN 1004-042X Editors:

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

Skeptic Tank!

Computer underground Digest Wed Dec 14, 1994 Volume 6 : Issue 105 ISSN 1004-042X Editors: Jim Thomas and Gordon Meyer (TK0JUT2@NIU.BITNET) Archivist: Brendan Kehoe Retiring Shadow Archivist: Stanton McCandlish Shadow-Archivists: Dan Carosone / Paul Southworth Ralph Sims / Jyrki Kuoppala Ian Dickinson Copy Reader: Laslo Toth CONTENTS, #6.105 (Wed, Dec 14, 1994) File 1--A Hoax In Time (CyberWire Dispatch) File 2--UNABOM - $1,000,000.00 Reward - Series of 14 Unsolved Bombings File 3--DigitaLiberty File 4--Preliminary Info on the Pensacola BBS Busts File 5--Cu Digest Header Info (unchanged since 25 Nov 1994) CuD ADMINISTRATIVE, EDITORIAL, AND SUBSCRIPTION INFORMATION APPEARS IN THE CONCLUDING FILE AT THE END OF EACH ISSUE. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 9 Dec 1994 14:56:36 -0800 From: "Brock N. Meeks" Subject: File 1--A Hoax In Time (CyberWire Dispatch) CyberWire Dispatch // Copyright (c) 1994 // Jacking in from the "Back From the Dead" Port: Washington, DC -- Nothing chills -- or inflames -- the Net faster than when word of the dreaded "FCC Modem Tax" begins ooze through Cyberspace. Well... it's back. Sort of. Ruth Milkman, legal advisor to Federal Communications Commission Chairman Reed Hundt, said during a recent question and answer session that the agency might again take up the issue of the so-called modem tax. "Some years down the road I can see acceess fees [for enhanced service providers] being considered by the FCC," Milkman said during a phone interview. "But only under the scenario when access charges are reformed." These access charges are a kind of trip wire phrase which online activists have dubbed a "modem tax" when applied to enhanced service providers, which is another catch phrase meaning services like America Online and CompuServe. Milkman said the FCC would only consider an access charge under a very narrow scenario which would play out only if "enhanced service providers felt that by paying the access charges they weren't contributing to a subsidy scheme set up for (long distance phone companies)," Milkman said. So, what the hell is an "access charge"? Take a deep breath. Here goes: Access charges are paid by long distance companies to local telephone companies. Every time a company such as AT&T connects a caller in Des Moines with Uncle Bert in New York, it has to pay Nynex, the local telephone company, a fee for the privilege of carrying that long distance call over their facilities, commonly known as the "local loop." Long distance companies pay up to 40% of their entire revenues to local telephone companies. That's billions and billions of dollars each year that flow into the hands of the Baby Bells, just for completing the calls. The access fees are set at artificially high rates because they contain a mind numbing set of complex subsidies, the most obvious one is that which underwrites the public policy known as "Universal Service." Back in the days when the FCC only had rotary dial phones (circa 1987) someone came up with the brilliant idea that because modem use was increasing at such a rapid pace, that maybe services such as Sprintlink (then known as telenet) and CompuServe should have to pay these access charges, too. After all, the FCC wonks postured, they carry long distance (modem) traffic over the phone lines? It would only be fair to have these "enhanced service providers" as they are known in FCC-speak, also help out the impoverished long distance phone companies underwrite Universal Service. Bingo. The hue and cry that went up from the online community (it wasn't yet called "the Net") was enormous. The major players -- Telenet and CompuServe -- quickly branded the plan as a "tax" and thus the phrase "modem tax" was born. Dire warnings went out: If the FCC succeeded in making enhanced service providers chip in for access fees, it would increase the cost of each hour of online time by at least $6 per hour. And remember, this was in the days when a 2,400-bps modem was the hottest thing going. Six bucks an hour would have demolished the struggling online industry. The fallout among the nascent online community was astounding. For the first time in history, the "net" community rose up with a single voice and FLOODED the FCC with protests. FCC official "filing kits" made the rounds, teaching people how to file official comments of protest. The ground swell of opposition worked. The FCC was buried in responses. At the time, the FCC said it was the hottest item in its history, garnering more response than any issue in history. The FCC eventually backed off. The reason: It was persuaded that enhanced service providers were still entrepreneurial companies and couldn't afford the burden of access fees. The proposal was officially dropped. It was the first major victory for the Net. And it was empowering. The online community became educated and enlightened almost over night to the ways of an arcane governmental agency. And this community was drunk with a heady kind of power: It could sufficiently affect the outcome of governmental regulation. Small catch: The damn "modem tax" issue wouldn't die. Someone with the brains of a trout began to circulate the now infamous "modem tax" file. The file claims that Jim Eason, a San Franciso radio talk show host had aired a segment in which he claimed to have inside information that the FCC was about to relaunch its "modem tax" proposal. The message was and is a HOAX. But it also has never died. It's the Net's first "urban myth" and like Freddie, it refuses to die, even to this day. Milkman, who was on-board at the FCC during the 1987 modem tax firefight, sighed when explaining the complex issue: "Part of the problem is that nobody is exactly sure what all the subsidies are. Most people agree that there are subsidies in the access charges, but you can't break out those subsidies exactly." Another factor in play: Sometimes enhanced service providers are really just reselling long distance transport after having bought large blocks of time from a major carrier like AT&T. Thus, to have these enhanced service providers also pay an access fee amounts to a kind of double-dipping, Milkman said. As it turns out, Congress might have as much to say about a future "modem tax" as the FCC. This twisted scenario turns on the tenuous grasp that everyone from the Vice President to Commerce Department to the FCC has on exactly what constitutes "Universal Service," in the era of the Information Superhighway. Revamping the 60 year old Communications Act of 1934 will be up to Congress this year. And they will likely do it. But how universal service is defined remains a big mystery. And who ends up paying for and maintaining that public policy (which isn't about to be abolished) also remains a mystery. Don't be surprised if, when the legislative smoke clears, not only do enhanced service providers -- America Online, CompuServe and Prodigy, et al -- have to pay access fees, but also your Internet provider and your cable company. And who do you think will end up catching those cost increases?? Right. Your wallet. But for now? Rest easy, Milkman says: "I want to make this very clear: There is NO docket [open] in which the Commission is proposing making enhanced service providers pay access charges. And I don't anticipate it coming up." Meeks out... ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Dec 1994 22:40:00 -0600 From: Sociology Department Gopher Manager Subject: File 2--UNABOM - $1,000,000.00 Reward - Series of 14 Unsolved Bombings F.B.I. GOPHER Information Server Dear Netters: The information presented on the Internet about the UNABOM investigation has been made available publicly before. Recent electronic media presentations include: CBS's "Eye to Eye" with Connie Chung (12/16/93), and Fox's "America's Most Wanted" (11/23/93). Print media stories about the UNABOM investigation have also appeared: Washington Post (11/27/93), New York Times (10/7/93), etc. The purpose for submitting the information on the Internet is two-fold. First, the Internet is another medium that enables us to reach as wide an audience as possible; to "spread the word." Second, Internet users are precisely the type ofindividuals that to date have been recipients of explosive devices attributed toUNABOM; scholars and researchers. You are not being asked to place yourself in harm's way. You are encouraged to come forward if you have information that might help identify, arrest, and convict the person(s) responsible for these bombings. Contact the UNABOM Task Force at 1-800-701-2662. This information has been made available on the Internet in three ways: Anonymous FTP: Gopher: gopher:// World Wide Web: Thank you, William L. Tafoya, Ph.D. Special Agent, FBI UNABOM Task Force San Francisco, CA 1-800-701-2662 FAX: 415-553-7590 415-553-7400 ================================================= UNABOM $1,000,000 Reward SERIES OF 14 UNSOLVED BOMBINGS Beginning in May, 1978, a series of 14 bombing incidents have occurred across the United States for which there is no apparent explanation or motive. No person or group has been identified as the perpetrator(s) of these incidents. The explosions have taken place in seven states from Connecticut to California. As a result of these bombings, one person has been killed and 23 others injured, some grievously. There had been no incidents identified with this series of bombings since 1987. However that changed in late June, 1993, when a well known geneticist residing in Tiburon, California, and a renown computer scientist from Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, opened packages which had been mailed to them and both were severely injured when these packages exploded. In the past, targets of the bomber have been associated with the computer industry, the aircraft and airline industry and universities. Seven of these devices have been mailed to specific individuals and the other seven have been placed in locations which suggest there was no specific intended victim. All but two of the explosive devices functioned as designed and exploded. All 14 crimes, dubbed "UNABOM", have had common effects: all have caused terror, grief, and fear. On September 11, 1985, Hugh Scrutton, the owner of the Rentech Computer Company, in Sacramento, California, was killed by one of these diabolic devices. The two most recent victims narrowly escaped death. In response to the June, 1993, events, the Attorney General directed that a task force of federal law enforcement agencies be reestablished to urgently investigate and solve these crimes. The UNABOM Task Force, consisting of investigators from the FBI, ATF, and the U.S. Postal Inspection Service, has been operational in San Francisco and Sacramento, California, since July 12, 1993, and is dedicated exclusively to the investigation of these crimes. Among the clues in the case are the following words in what appears to be a note possibly written by the bomber as a reminder to make a telephone call: "call Nathan R--Wed 7PM." The UNABOM Task Force believes that "Nathan R" may be associated, perhaps innocently, with the bomber and that "Nathan R" may have received a telephone call from the bomber on a Wednesday prior to the June, 1993 bombings. The two most recent tragic bombings illustrate the senseless and tragic consequences of these crimes and demonstrate the urgent necessity of solving this case. This serial bomber will strike again. We do not know who the next victim will be. We do believe that there is someone out there who can provide the identity of the person or persons responsible for these crimes. This person may be a friend, a neighbor, or even a relative of the bomber(s). UNABOM's chronology is as follows: 1) Northwestern University Evanston, Illinois May 25, 1978 A package was found in the Engineering Department parking lot at the Chicago Circle Campus of the University of Illinois. The package was addressed to an Engineering Professor at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in Troy, New York. The package had a return address of a Professor at Northwestern's Technological Institute. The package was returned to the addressor who turned it over to the Northwestern University Police Department because he had not sent the package. On May 26, 1978 the parcel was opened by a police officer who suffered minor injuries when the bomb detonated. 2) Northwestern University Evanston, Illinois May 9, 1979 A disguised explosive device which had been left in a common area in the University's Technological Institute, slightly injured a graduate student on May 9, 1979, when he attempted to open the box and it exploded. 3) Chicago, Illinois November 15, 1979 An explosive device disguised as a parcel was mailed from Chicago for delivery to an unknown location. The bomb detonated in the cargo compartment of an airplane, forcing it to make an emergency landing at Dulles Airport. Twelve individuals were treated for smoke inhalation. The explosion destroyed the wrapping to such an extent that the addressee could not be determined. 4) Chicago, Illinois June 10, 1980 A bomb disguised as a parcel postmarked June 8, 1980 was mailed to an airline executive at his home in Lake Forest, Illinois. The airline executive was injured in the explosion. 5) University of Utah Salt Lake City, Utah October 8, 1981 An explosive device was found in the hall of a classroom building and rendered safe by bomb squad personnel. 6) Vanderbilt University Nashville, Tennessee May 5, 1982 A wooden box containing a pipe bomb detonated on May 5, 1982, when opened by a secretary in the Computer Science Department. The secretary suffered minor injuries. The package was initially mailed from Provo, Utah on April 23, 1982, to Pennsylvania State University and then forwarded to Vanderbilt. 7) University of California Berkeley, California July 2, 1982 A small metal pipe bomb was placed in a coffee break room of Cory Hall at the University's Berkeley Campus. A Professor of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science was injured when he picked up the device. 8) Auburn, Washington May 8, 1985 A parcel bomb was mailed on May 8, 1985, to the Boeing Company, Fabrication Division. On June 13, 1985, the explosive device was discovered when employees opened it. The device was rendered safe by bomb squad personnel without injury. 9) University of California Berkeley, California May 15, 1985 A bomb detonated in a computer room at Cory Hall on the Berkeley Campus. A graduate student in Electrical Engineering lost partial vision in his left eye and four fingers from his right hand. The device was believed to have been placed in the room several days prior to detonation. 10) Ann Arbor, Michigan November 15, 1985 A textbook size package was mailed to the home of a University of Michigan Professor in Ann Arbor, Michigan from Salt Lake City. On November 15, 1985, a Research Assistant suffered injuries when he opened the package. The Professor was a few feet away but was not injured. 11) Sacramento, California December 11, 1985 Mr. Hugh Scrutton was killed outside his computer rental store when he picked up a device disguised as a road hazard left near the rear entrance to the building. Metal shrapnel from the blast ripped through Scrutton's chest and penetrated his heart. 12) Salt Lake City, Utah February 20, 1987 On February 20, 1987, an explosive device disguised as a road hazard was left at the rear entrance to CAAMs, Inc. (computer store). The bomb exploded and injured the owner when he attempted to pick up the device. 13) Tiburon, California June 22, 1993 On June 22, 1993, a well known geneticist received a parcel postmarked June 18, 1993, at his residence. The doctor attempted to open the package at which time it exploded severely injuring him. It has been determined that this parcel was mailed from Sacramento, California. 14) Yale University New Haven, Connecticut June 24, 1993 On June 24, 1993, a Professor/Computer Scientist at Yale University attempted to open a parcel which he had received at his office. This parcel exploded severely injuring him. It has been determined that this parcel was mailed from Sacramento, California on June 18, 1993. At this time, the UNABOM Task Force would appeal to the public for assistance. For this purpose, a one million dollar reward is being offered for information which results in the identification, arrest and conviction of the person(s) responsible. Contact the UNABOM Task Force at 1-(800) 701- 2662. William L. Tafoya, Ph.D. Special Agent, FBI UNABOM Task Force San Francisco, CA ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 6 Dec 1994 18:38:13 -0800 From: email list server Subject: File 3--DigitaLiberty Friends of Liberty, It is becoming increasingly apparent that the arrival of cyberspace is destined to engender a fundamental discontinuity in the course of human relations. This is a source of great optimism and opportunity for those of us who believe in freedom. Many of you who participate in the lively debates that take place in these forums have seen a number of activist organizations spring up claiming to represent the cause of freedom. And if you are like me you have cheered these groups on only to watch them get bogged down in a quagmire of realpolitics. It is a sad fact that the beast in Washington has evolved into a self-perpetuating engine expert at co-opting the principles of even the most ardent reformers. Slowly but surely all those who engage the system are ultimately absorbed into the mainstream miasma of majoritarianism. For example, what can be more discouraging than watching an organization that started out as a cyber-civil liberties group shift its focus to creating new forms of government entitlements while endorsing intrusive wiretap legislation because they didn't want to jeopardize their influence and prestige amongst the Washington power elite? Some of us believe we can seek ultimate redress at the polls. Many pundits have declared our recent national elections a watershed in politics, a turning point that represents the high water mark of big government. Nonsense. The names have changed, the chairs have been rearranged, but the game remains the same. The so-called "choices" we are presented with are false, hardly better than the mock one-party elections held by failed totalitarian regimes. There must be a better way. I would like to announce the formation of a new group - DigitaLiberty - that has chosen a different path. We intend to bypass the existing political process. We reject consensus building based on the calculus of compromise. Instead we plan to leave the past behind, much as our pioneering forefathers did when they set out to settle new lands. It is our mission to create the basis for a different kind of society. If you would like to join us I invite you to read the information below. Yours in freedom, Bill Frezza Co-founder, DigitaLiberty December 6, 1994 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- *** What is DigitaLiberty? DigitaLiberty is an advocacy group dedicated to the principled defense of freedom in cyberspace. We intend to conduct this defense not by engaging in traditional power politics but by setting an active, persuasive example - creating tangible opportunities for others to join us as we construct new global communities. We believe deeply in free markets and free minds and are convinced that we can construct a domain in which the uncoerced choices of individuals supplant the social compact politics of the tyranny of the majority. *** Is DigitaLiberty a political party or a lobbying group? Neither. DigitaLiberty does not seek to educate or influence politicians in the hope of obtaining legislation favorable to our constituents. We plan to make politicians and legislators irrelevant to the future of network based commerce, education, leisure, and social intercourse. DigitaLiberty does not seek to persuade a majority of the electorate to adopt views which can then be forced upon the minority. We hope to make majoritarianism irrelevant. We invite only like minded individuals to help us build the future according to our uncompromised shared values. *** What do you hope to accomplish? DigitaLiberty is not hopeful that widespread freedom will come to the physical world, at least not in our lifetime. Too many constituencies depend upon the largess and redistributive power of national governments and therefore oppose freedom and the individual responsibility it entails. But we do believe that liberty can and will prevail in the virtual domains we are building on the net and that national governments will be powerless to stop us. We believe that cyberspace will transcend national borders, national cultures, and national economies. We believe that no one will hold sovereignty over this new realm because coercive force is impotent in cyberspace. In keeping with the self-organizing nature of on-line societies we believe we will chose to invent new institutions to serve our varied economic and social purposes. DigitaLiberty intends to be in the forefront of the discovery and construction of these institutions. *** But what about the construction of the "Information Superhighway"? The fabric of cyberspace is rapidly being built by all manner of entities espousing the full range of political and economic philosophies. While political activity can certainly accelerate or retard the growth of the net in various places and times it cannot stop it nor can it effectively control how the net will be used. Our focus is not on the institutions that can and will impact the building of the physical "information highway" but on those that will shape life on the net as an ever increasing portion of our productive activities move there. *** What makes you think cyberspace will be so different? The United States of America was the only country in history ever to be built upon an idea. Unfortunately, this idea was lost as we slowly traded away our liberties in exchange for the false promise of security. DigitaLiberty believes that technology can set us free. The economies of the developed world are now making a major transition from an industrial base to an information base. As they do, the science of cryptology will finally and forever guarantee the unbreachable right of privacy, protecting individuals, groups, and corporations from the prying eyes and grasping hands of sovereigns. We will all be free to conduct our lives, and most importantly our economic relations, as we each see fit. Cyberspace is also infinitely extensible. There will be no brutal competition for lebensraum. Multiple virtual communities can exist side by side and without destructive conflict, each organized according to the principles of their members. We seek only to build one such community, a community based on individual liberty. Others are free to build communities based on other principles, even diametrically opposed principles. But they must do so without our coerced assistance. Effective communities will thrive and grow. Dysfunctional communities will wither and die. And for the first time in human history, rapacious societies will no longer have the power to make war on their neighbors nor can bankrupt communities take their neighbors down with them. *** What does this have to do with my real life? I can't eat data. I don't live in a computer. Yes, but imagine the ultimate impact of mankind's transition from an agrarian economy to an industrial economy to an information economy. Our founding fathers would have consider anyone insane who predicted that a nation of 250 million could feed itself with fewer than 3% of its citizens involved in agriculture. Similarly, economist and politicians trapped in the policies of the past lament our move from a manufacturing economy to a knowledge worker and service based economy. We see this as a cause to rejoice. The day will come when fewer than 5% of the citizens of a nation of 1 billion will be involved in manufacturing - if we still bother calling geographically defined entities "nations". What will the rest of us be doing? We will be providing each other with an exploding array of services and we will be creating, consuming, and exchanging information. Most of this will occur entirely within or be mediated at least in part by our activities in cyberspace. Many of us will earn a very good living on the net. Our race, our religion, our gender, our age, our physical appearance and limitations will all be irrelevant and undetectable. Hard working individuals from underdeveloped nations who in the past might have been forced to emigrate in search of economic freedom and opportunity can now build productive lives in cyberspace. And much if not all of the wealth we create that we do not transform into visible physical assets will be ours to keep and use, beyond the grasp of sovereigns. *** What is the purpose of this forum? The DigitaLiberty Forum is a place where like minded individuals can share their views, observations, and strategies related to the development of virtual communities based on freedom. It is a place where people can exchange information and advice about how they have developed extra-territorial business and social relationships - away from the influence and outside the jurisdiction of governments. It is a forum for the posting of essays, questions, and ideas on the topic of liberty. It is a place where we can meet and debate the forms that our new institutions might take and discuss the practical problems and responsibilities that freedom entail. In time as our technology matures some of us will move on to more ambitious projects, launch other programs, and begin our virtual migration from the swamp of coerced collectivism. Best of all, there will be no need to physically move to 'Galt's Gulch' or escape to a floating 'Freedonia'. We can all participate in this exodus without hastily quitting our jobs or disrupting our lives. And as a larger and larger portion of our economic and social activities move onto the net we will create a new society, open to all with the will to enter. This new world will be interleaved with the physical world in which we now live and yet will be separate. And free. Join us as we begin the journey. *** Who can join DigitaLiberty? The DigitaLiberty Forum is open to anyone that can honestly answer yes to the following two questions: 1) I renounce the use of coercive force as a tool of social or economic policy. 2) I do not derive the majority of my income from funds taken from taxpayers. *** How do I join DigitaLiberty? If you qualify, send a message to with the words "SUBSCRIBE" in the subject line and the message body as follows SUBSCRIBE DigitaLiberty And welcome to the future. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Dec 1994 22:40:00 CST From: Various Subject: File 4--Preliminary Info on the Pensacola BBS Busts ((MODERATORS' NOTE: There have been rumors flying fast and furious about some "busts" in Pensacola, Florida, in the first week of December. One net post indicated that as many as 10 BBSes were raided, but there seemed to be few details on the incident(s). It seems that there were only two or three boards raided, but it's still not clear. CuD called around the Florida area in an attempt to obtain some information, but without much success. The Pensacola police indicated that they were not involved. An FBI spokesperson indicated that the FBI was not involved, and that we should call the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, a state law enforcement agency. We did, and talked to Larry Smith (904-444-8570) who could not provide many details, because it was an "ongoing investigation." He did tell us, however, that the description of the raids as posted on the Net was inaccurate. He confirmed that the FBI was not involved, and told us that "several" warrants had been served by his department and the U.S. Secret Service. He was unwilling to specify the alleged charges, but according to some observers (and suggested by the article below), pornography may have been an issue. Whether it was the original motive of the raids remains unclear. If it is true that this was a USSS case, it would raise the question of why the USSS is involved in a "pornography" raid. The facts remain murky, but the case is not invisible. The following (fwd) suggests that the mainstream media may also be concerned about some of the unanswered questions.)) ============================== (Originally posted by High-tech crimes lack high-tech law (Source: Pensacola News, Dec 10, 1994) When state and Federal agents pulled the plug--literally--on two Pensacola electronic bulletin boards, some serious questions were raised: What laws were broken, and what about protection against unfair search and seizure? Remember, property was taken, but no charges placed. Officers involved with the shutdowns--of Titan Software Solutions and Electric Blue--say they believed pornography was being transmitted over the bulletin boards. Board operators, or Sysops (system operators), say their boards do provide some nude photos, "Swimsuits, lingerie, a little T-and-A," but that's all. If true, what laws were violated? A few years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that community standards could be applied to determine "obscenity." But who is to interpret those standards? Police? Ministers? Who? And what of he question of community? Pensacola is a community and has somewhat understandable standards. But doesn't a computer network, comprised of people proven to be of age and engaged in a legal medium, also constitute a community? Should Pensacola's standards, or Hoboken's or Atlanta's, be applied to that electronic community? A problem here is that while technology has surged ahead, law has lagged behind. There are few laws that can be legitimately be applied in this case. And as for "pornographic material being sent over the computer," has anyone noticed what's available on television (NYPD Blue), on cable (HBO, Cinemax, The Movie Channel), or pay-per-view? There's the Playboy channel, Spice, etc. What's the difference between a computer, which requires passwords and access, and television which requires only a decoder and a telephone call to activate a channel? We're not condoning presentation or transmission of pornography. We're simply trying to understand what laws were broken, and how future infractions will play out. How will they be monitored? How enforced? We hope it's done better than the snatch-and-grab method we saw in this case where equipment was seized but no charges placed. That seems an overstep by law enforcement. If "obscene" material was being sent across electronic lines, a few visits to the bulletin board would have confirmed it and established a case. But the state seems to have acted first and thought later. That's a frightening prospect given the virtual explosion of information available via the computer, and the absolute lack of applicable law. [ That was the entire text of the editorial in the Pensacola News Journal, on Saturday, December 10 1994.] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1994 22:51:01 CDT From: CuD Moderators Subject: File 5--Cu Digest Header Info (unchanged since 25 Nov 1994) Cu-Digest is a weekly electronic journal/newsletter. Subscriptions are available at no cost electronically. CuD is available as a Usenet newsgroup: Or, to subscribe, send a one-line message: SUB CUDIGEST your name Send it to LISTSERV@UIUCVMD.BITNET or LISTSERV@VMD.CSO.UIUC.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, USA. Issues of CuD can also be found in the Usenet 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 RIPCO BBS (312) 528-5020 (and via Ripco on internet); and on Rune Stone BBS (IIRGWHQ) (203) 832-8441. CuD is also available via Fidonet File Request from 1:11/70; unlisted nodes and points welcome. EUROPE: In BELGIUM: Virtual Access BBS: +32-69-844-019 (ringdown) In ITALY: Bits against the Empire BBS: +39-461-980493 In LUXEMBOURG: ComNet BBS: +352-466893 UNITED STATES: ( in /pub/CuD/ ( in /pub/Publications/CuD/ ( in /pub/eff/cud/ in /src/wuarchive/doc/EFF/Publications/CuD/ in /pub/wuarchive/doc/EFF/Publications/CuD/ in /doc/EFF/Publications/CuD/ EUROPE: in pub/doc/cud/ (Finland) in pub/cud/ (United Kingdom) JAPAN: /mirror/ The most recent issues of CuD can be obtained from the NIU Sociology gopher at: URL: gopher:// 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. ------------------------------ End of Computer Underground Digest #6.105 ************************************


E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank