Computer underground Digest Sun May 8, 1994 Volume 6 : Issue 40 ISSN 1004-042X Editors: Ji

---
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 May 8, 1994 Volume 6 : Issue 40 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 Suspercollater: Shrdlu Nooseman CONTENTS, #6.40 (May 8, 1994) File 1--The check finally arrived--(Steve Jackson Games Update) File 2--"Why Censoring Cyberspace is Futile" (H. Rheingold reprint) File 3--The Great Clipper Debate 5/9/94 File 4--NII Summer Internship at the White House File 5--DOJ Clipper documents scheduled for summer release under FOIA File 6--Re: Comment on the Lamacchia case File 7--Opening of the Computer-Mediated Communication Studies Center File 8--Net-Letter Guide 5/05 File 9--RSA-1,600 number Encryption Code Broken Cu-Digest is a weekly electronic journal/newsletter. Subscriptions are available at no cost electronically. CuD is available as a Usenet newsgroup: comp.society.cu-digest 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 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 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: from the ComNet in LUXEMBOURG BBS (++352) 466893; In ITALY: Bits against the Empire BBS: +39-461-980493 FTP: UNITED STATES: etext.archive.umich.edu (141.211.164.18) in /pub/CuD/ aql.gatech.edu (128.61.10.53) in /pub/eff/cud/ EUROPE: nic.funet.fi in pub/doc/cud/ (Finland) ftp.warwick.ac.uk in pub/cud/ (United Kingdom) JAPAN: ftp.glocom.ac.jp /mirror/ftp.eff.org/ 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, 5 May 1994 18:56:10 -0500 (CDT) From: Steve Jackson Subject: File 1--The check finally arrived--(Steve Jackson Games Update) PRESS RELEASE May 5, 1994 - For Immediate Release SECRET SERVICE PAYS DAMAGES TO STEVE JACKSON GAMES On March 1, 1990, agents of the US Secret Service invaded the offices of Steve Jackson Games, in Austin, Texas, in what became a landmark case for the rights of computer users. The agents seized several computers, including the company's BBS, and hundreds of computer disks. Among the files taken were several uncompleted books, including one that was about to go to the printer! The raid was carried out under a sealed warrant. It was eventually revealed that the Secret Service was investigating an imaginary "conspiracy" based on false information, and knew it had no grounds to suspect SJ Games of any crime, but had never even considered asking the company for its cooperation while planning the raid! On March 12, 1993, a federal judge ruled for Steve Jackson Games and its co-plaintiffs - Steve Jackson himself and three users of the Illuminati Bulletin Board - on two separate counts. Judge Sam Sparks ruled for SJ Games on the PPA (Privacy Protection Act), saying that the publisher's work product was unlawfully seized and held. Under the ECPA (Electronic Communications Privacy Act), he ruled that the Secret Service had unlawfully read, disclosed and erased the computer messages on the BBS - despite their repeated denials that they had done any such thing. On a separate ECPA count, he ruled for the defendants, saying that taking the computer out the door was not an "interception" of the messages on it within the meaning of the law. That decision is now being appealed. Judge Sparks' opinion was harshly critical of the Secret Service's behavior before, during and after their raid, calling the affidavit and warrant preparation "simply sloppy and not carefully done." Now, more than a year later, the Secret Service has finally paid the judgment. The checks received today included $1,000 per plaintiff under the ECPA, plus about 3% interest since the judgment. Under the PPA, SJ Games received $52,431.50 for lost profits and direct costs of the raid. The government agreed to pay additional costs of the suit, originally borne by the EFF and the attorneys, adding another $252,405.54. Commented Jackson: "The heroes in this case are the people at the EFF and the attorneys who put it together - especially Sharon Beckman at Silverglate & Good, and Pete Kennedy at George, Donaldson and Ford. Without them, we never would have had our day in court. They made a big investment in justice. "As for us, we'll use our share to pay off old debts and buy new computers." Since the raid, Jackson's bulletin board service has grown hugely. Originally a one-line forum for game fans, it is now a full-scale Internet access service, specializing in helping newcomers learn their way around the Net. Doing business as "Illuminati Online," Jackson now serves over a thousand paying customers, with more signing up every day. "If not for the raid, I wouldn't have done it," he says. "It brought home to me how important the Internet is becoming. And even if we protect our legal right to be on the info highway, somebody has to teach people how to use it!" For more information, contact Steve Jackson at 512-447-7866. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 May 1994 22:21:32 CDT From: CuD Moderators Subject: File 2--"Why Censoring Cyberspace is Futile" (H. Rheingold reprint) By Howard Rheingold. Originally published in the San Francisco Examiner, part of a weekly series of columns called "Tomorrow." Reposted with permission.] ======================================= vc.181: Howard Rheingold's "Tomorrow" Columns Online vc.181.27: Howard Rheingold (hlr) Tue 5 Apr 94 20:30 The following appeared in the San Francisco Examiner on April 6, 1994 Why Censoring Cyberspace Is Futile By Howard Rheingold For years, many Netheads had a recurring nightmare that a pedophile would use a computer bulletin board system to make contact with a child, and follow up with physical abuse offline. Now this nightmare has become a reality. (See the news pages of today's Examiner.) It is only a matter of time before law enforcement authorities use cases like this to crack down on the free-wheeling, everything-is-permitted culture of cyberspace. It's not hard to imagine Jesse Helms standing before the US Senate, holding up an X-rated image downloaded from the Internet, raging indignantly about "public funds for porno highways." As the public begins to realize that communications technology is exposing them to an unlimited array of words and images, including some they might find thoroughly repulsive, the clamor for censorship and government regulation of the electronic highway is sure to begin. But it would be a mistake to let traffic cops start pulling people over on the highway. Yes, we have to think about ways of protecting our children and our society from the easy availability of every kind of abhorrent information imaginable. But the "censor the Net" approach is not just morally misguided. It's becoming technically impossible. As Net pioneer John Gilmore is often quoted: "The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it." The Net's technological foundation was built to withstand nuclear attack. The RAND Corporation designed the network to be a thoroughly decentralized command-and-control-and communications system, one that would be less vulnerable to intercontinental missiles than a system commanded by a centralized headquarters. This decentralization of control means that the delivery system for salacious materials is the same worldwide one that delivers economic opportunity, educational resources, civic forums, and health advice. If a hacker in Helsinki or Los Angeles connects to the Internet and provides access to his digital porno files, anybody anywhere else in the world, with the right kind of Internet connection, can download those steamy bits and bytes. This technological shock to our moral codes means that in the future, we are going to have to teach our children well. The locus of control is going to have to be in their heads and hearts, not in the laws or machines that make information so imperviously available. Before we let our kids loose on the Internet, they better have a solid moral grounding and some common sense. I bought an Internet account for my daughter when she was eight years old, so we could exchange e-mail when I was on the road. But I didn't turn her loose until I filled her in on some facts of online life. "Just because someone sends you mail, you don't have to answer unless you know them," I instructed her. "And if anybody asks if you are home alone, or says something to you that makes you feel funny about answering, then just don't answer until you speak to me." The worldwide virtual communities that provide users with companionship, personal support, enlightenment, and entertainment can also contain imposters and worse. Your 14 year old might look like he is doing his homework, but is actually secretly joining a hot chat session with lecherous strangers. (The same dangers exist with the telephone -- ask parents who have had to pay hefty bills for their kids' 976 habits.) You should have the the right, and the ability, to restrict the massive information-flow into your home, to exclude subject matter that you don't want your children to see. But sooner or later, your children will be exposed to everything you have shielded them from, and then all they will have left to deal with these shocking sights and sounds is the moral fiber you helped them cultivate. Teach your children to be politely but firmly skeptical about anything they see or hear on the Net. Teach them to have no fear of rejecting images or communications that repel or frighten them. Teach them to have a strong sense of their own personal boundaries, of their right to defend those boundaries physically and socially. Teach them that people aren't always who they present themselves to be in e-mail and that predators exist. Teach them to keep personal information private. Teach them to trust you enough to confide in you if something doesn't seem right. Yes, pedophiles and pornographers use computer networks. They also use telephones and the mail, but nobody would argue that we need to censor or shut down these forms of communication. The most relevant question now is: how do we teach our children to live, in an uncensorable world? ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 May 1994 18:17:02 +0000 From: Dave Banisar Subject: File 3--The Great Clipper Debate 5/9/94 The Great Clipper Debate: National Security or National Surveillance? Sponsored by: The Georgetown University Law Center Space Law Group and Communications Law Forum In Coordination with: The George Washington University Institute for Computer and Telecommunications Systems Policy, the Association for Computing Machinery Special Interest Group for Computers and Society, and the American Bar Association Criminal Justice Section. Date and Time: May 9, 1994, at 7:30 p.m. Place: The Georgetown University Law Center(Moot Court Room) 600 New Jersey Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. The Administration, through the Department of Justice and the National Security Agency, has proposed a standard encryption algorithm for both the public and commercial marketplace, with the goal of making this algorithm the method of choice for persons wishing to encode their telephone and other voice and data communications. The FBI and the NSA are concerned that the increasing availability, and affordability, of encryption mechanisms will make it difficult and in some cases impossible for law enforcement and intelligence agencies to tap into and to understand the communications of criminals and other pertinent groups. This proposal has become known as the "Clipper Chip," in that it would be implemented by the voluntary insertion of a computer chip into telephone, fax machine, and other communications systems. The Clipper Chip has generated considerable controversy. Opposing it are various civil libertarian groups, as well as telecommunications companies, software and hardware manufacturers, and trade associations. The debate has raged behind closed doors, and openly in the press. On Monday, May 9, at the Georgetown University Law School, a round table debate will take place on this controversy. The participants represent both sides of the issue, and are illustrative of the various groups which have taken a stand. The participants are: Dorothy Denning, Chairperson of the Computer Science Department of Georgetown University Michael Godwin, Legal Counsel of the Electronic Frontier Foundation; Geoffrey Greiveldinger, Special Counsel to the Narcotic and Dangerous Drug Section of the U.S. Department of Justice; Michael Nelson, of the Office of Science and Technology Policy of the White House; Marc Rotenberg, Director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center; and Stephen Walker, President of Trusted Information Systems, Inc., and a former cryptographer with the National Security Agency In addition, there will be two moderators: Dr. Lance Hoffman, Professor of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science at The George Washington University, and Andrew Grosso, a former federal prosecutor who is now an attorney in private practice in the District of Columbia. The program will last approximately two and one half hours, and will be divided into two parts. The first half will offer the panel the opportunity to respond to questions which have been submitted to the participants beforehand; the second will present the panel with questions from the audience. There is no charge for this program, and members of the public are encouraged to attend. Reservations are requested in advance, and should be directed to one of the following individuals: - C. Dianne Martin, Associate Professor, Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, The George Washington University, Phillips Hall, Room 624-C, Washington, D.C. 20052; telephone: (202) 994-8238; E mail: diannem@seas.gwu.edu - Sherrill Klein, Staff Director, ABA Criminal Justice Section,1800 M Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036; telephone: (202) 331-2624; fax: (202) 331-2220 - Francis L. Young, Young & Jatlow, 2300 N Street, N.W., Suite 600, Washington, D.C. 20037; telephone: (202) 663-9080; fax: (202) 331-8001 Questions for the panelists should be submitted, in writing, to one of the moderators: - Lance Hoffman, Professor, Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, The George Washington University, Washington, D.C. 20052; fax: (202) 994-0227; E mail: ictsp@seas.gwu.edu - Andrew Grosso, 2300 N Street, N.W., Suite 600, Washington, D.C., 20037; fax: (202) 663-9042; E mail: agrosso@acm.org ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 May 1994 10:33:57 -0700 From: cpsr-announce@SUNNYSIDE.COM Subject: File 4--NII Summer Internship at the White House SUMMER INTERNSHIP AT THE WHITE HOUSE The Technology Division of the Office of Science and Technology Policy in the Executive Office of the President has the intention of hiring an intern this summer. The Technology Division is the part of OSTP that works on the National Information Infrastructure Initiative. We would like our intern to be qualified to help the build the White House World Wide Web server, which is likely to be open to the public in the fall. The position will pay between $3,800 and $4,700 for 90 days. The person selected will devote approximately half of his or her time to the Web server and half to general office duties such as answering telephones, making photocopies, and sorting incoming paper mail. Anyone may apply for this position by responding to Vacancy Announcement Number OSTP-94-02-AR (Student Assistant GS-303-3/4/5). Applications must be received no later than close of business Friday 6 May 1994. How to Apply: Send your SF-171 form (Application for Federal Employment, available at a public library or campus placement office) and a written narrative summary of your experience and/or education on a separate sheet, and a SF-15 (Application for 10-point Veteran Preference, if applicable). Where to apply: Office of Science and Technology Policy, Technology Division Room 423, Executive Office of the President, Old Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20500. You may send your completed SF-171 by fax to 202- 456-6023. Applications must be *received* by the closing date and will not be returned. Relocation Expenses will *not* be paid to the applicant selected. A security prescreen will be conducted. The applicant tentatively selected for this position may be required to submit to urinalysis to screen for illegal drug use prior to appointment. After appointment, the employee will be included in the agency's random drug testing program. Applications will be accepted from all qualified persons. Consideration will be extended without discrimination for any non-merit reasons such as race, color, religion, gender, national origin, political affiliation, marital status, age, membership or nonmembership in employee organizations, or nondisqualifying physical handicap. Selective factors: Experience operating a personal computer and using word processing software; experience in locating and assembling information for reports, briefings, or meetings. Quality ranking factors: Ability to organize, follow procedures, prioritize tasks and complete deadlines; knowledge of grammar, punctuation, and spelling; ability to communicate effectively both orally and in writing; ability to achieve cooperative working relationships with all levels of staff. Important additional information: If you want to show us what you can do please send the URL to your Web home page in the subject line of an e-mail message to interns@ostp.eop.gov. Do not put any other information in the subject line, just http://your.own.address. No phone calls or faxes please. Be creative with your home page. You are not required to list telephone numbers or other information you would not want to be publicly accessible. Good luck! ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 May 1994 08:00:28 -0700 From: Lee Tien Subject: File 5--DOJ Clipper documents scheduled for summer release under FOIA As you know, there has been much debate about the Clipper Chip initiative, but relatively little hard information. John Gilmore, member of the board of directors of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, filed FOIA requests to numerous government agencies last April after the Clipper plan was announced. In June 1993, he filed a FOIA lawsuit against the Justice Department ("DOJ") and the Federal Bureau of Investigation ("FBI"). Gilmore v. FBI, et al, C-93-2117, U.S. District Judge Charles Legge, Northern District of California. As a result of this lawsuit, the Justice Department has agreed to a staggered release of some documents about Clipper and Digital Telephony. The Justice Department and Gilmore signed a joint stipulation and agreement on Friday, April 29, 1994, in which the Justice Department and several other federal agencies agreed to release documents over the next several months: a) DOJ's Office of Information and Privacy ("OIP") will transmit all documents recovered in its search for responsive documents that it has identified as requiring referrals or consultations to the appropriate agencies or DOJ components by May 31, 1994. OIP will complete processing of all documents that it has identified as not requiring referrals or consultations to other agencies or DOJ components by June 20, 1994. b) DOJ's Justice Management Division ("JMD") will complete processing of all documents recovered in its search for responsive documents, excluding documents which have been referred for processing to other agencies, by July 30, 1994. 0) The Office of Management and Budget ("OMB") will respond to all DOJ consultation requests which OMB had received as of April 20, 1994 by May 20, 1994. d) The National Security Agency ("NSA") will respond to all DOJ consultation requests which it had received as of April 20, 1994 by July 18, 1994. NSA will complete processing of all documents which had been referred to it by DOJ as of April 20, 1994 for direct response to plaintiff by July 18, 1994. e) The National Security Council ("NSC") will respond to all DOJ consultation requests which NBC had received as of April 20, 1994 by July 29, 1994. f) The Department of Commerce and National Institute of Standards and Technology (collectively "Commerce") will respond to all DOJ consultation requests which Commerce had received as of April 20, 1994 by August 7, 1994. Commerce will complete processing of all documents which had been referred to it by DOJ as of April 20, 1994 for direct response to plaintiff by August 7, 1994. The documents being processed by the NSC include the Presidential Review Directive and Presidential Decision Directive which started the Clipper initiative. We have been informed that NSC is processing the two final versions as well as 68 draft versions. We have also been informed that documents produced in the course of the OMB legislative clearance process for the Digital Telephony Bill are being processed. This should provide insight into how the government decided to proceed with this bill. We have also been informed that there are approximately 25 documents produced in the course of the government's solicitation of industry views on Clipper. Obviously, we do not know how much useful information will be released. It is probable that the documents will be heavily redacted. Given the recent directives from the President and the Attorney General that all possible discretionary disclosures of information should be made, we hope, optimistically, that these disclosures will prove illuminating. Unfortunately, the FBI is not a party to this agreement. We are in the process of attempting to obtain the release of about 3000 pages of FBI records. FBI has told the Court that it will be approximately 2 years and 8 months before it will even begin processing Gilmore's request, and that actual processing will take about a year, if not more. We believe that this delay is unlawful and cannot be countenanced. Lee Tien Attorney for John Gilmore tien@well.sf.ca.us PLEASE REDISTRIBUTE IF YOU THINK IT'S WORTH IT. (feel free to edit any obvious typos, too) ------------------------------ Date: 02 May 1994 18:57:20 -0000 From: timk@YCRDI.COM(Tim King) Subject: File 6--Re: Comment on the Lamacchia case The legal council for David LaMacchia posted an article in CUD #6.32, basically asserting that a BBS sysop or other computer administrator should not be held liable for information transferred illegally through his computer system, even if the sysop knows that this activity is occuring. J. Eric Townsend (jet@NAS.NASA.GOV) responded, "If the SYSOP actively encourages others to use the system, doesn't that somehow change this? This is something like saying that because a bar owner isn't responsible for the activities of prostitutes, they should go out and encourage prostitutes to frequent their bar." I am interested in understanding this point of view, but I don't see how the statement addresses the issue. The original statement did not say that bar owners _should_ encourage prostitution, although one might conclude that they _can_. I'll grant that the analogy holds, but it hasn't been shown that the hypothetical bar owner is responsible for the activities of the prostitutes. Is he? Why? By what reasoning? Again, Silverglate & Good state, "...Certain classified advertisements for '_dating services_'... are really covers for high-class *prostitution* rings. Yet... editors and publishers of the newspapers are *not* prosecuted... even if the editors and publishers were well aware of the fact..." Eric replied, "But what about instances where the editors or publishers actively sought out 'escort services' to advertise in their paper, with full knowledge that the 'escort services' were prostitution rings?" Okay, what about these instances? Please describe at least one. It is reasonable that the original posters would not cite instances that had not come to court, and they would have had to in order to support their claim that editors and publishers are not prosecuted. But Eric certainly should be expected to cite instances that have come to court, in order to support his counter-assertion. However, Silverglate & Good _did_ cite a case that supported their position. (_Smith v. California_, 361 U.S. 147 (1959)) This point was not addressed at all in Eric's response. So comes the conclusion, "In short, I don't buy the 1st Amendment defense in this case." Okay, but this doesn't change the way the courts view First Amendment rights, which is the only point on which Silverglate & Good were relying. I have not been provided any reason to believe that the defense has made any false statements, as Eric did not address the court's view. Furthermore, it is obvious that the issue has not been treated deeply enough to give me reason to develop a desire to see the law changed in this matter. There was no legal precedent treated. No one examined the reasons for which the current rules were established. Eric did not even thoroughly address the points that are already on the table. Therefore, Eric, I don't understand precisely what you want to accomplish. Why did you post your original response? Was it to try to convince readers of your views? Although, my gut reaction would be to agree with your conclusion, you've given me no objective reason to do so. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 30 Apr 1994 12:52:08 EDT From: John December Subject: File 7--Opening of the Computer-Mediated Communication Studies Center Announcing: Opening of the Computer-Mediated Communication Studies Center and first issue of _Computer-Mediated Communication Magazine_ The Computer-Mediated Communication Studies Center, a set of web pages dedicated to serving the needs of researchers, students, teachers, and practitioners interested in computer-mediated communication (CMC), is now open. This Center helps people share information, make contacts, collaborate, and learn about developments and events related to CMC. This center includes the first issue of _Computer-Mediated Communication Magazine_, links to people who are interested in CMC, a resources collection, and pointers to activities. If you are interested in CMC studies, you are invited to participate. About the CMC Studies Center MISSION * To provide a forum for the exchange of information about CMC * To foster community-building among CMC scholars students, developers, and users through collaboration and information exchange. * To articulate and define CMC studies * To inform and educate interested persons about CMC issues and scholarship SPONSORSHIP The CMC Studies Center is not sponsored or officially endorsed by any organization or institution. The opinions and information expressed belong to and are the responsibility of the participants. STATUS The CMC Studies Center is a non-profit, non-commercial, privately-created enterprise created for the benefit of its participants and as a public service to interested persons. DISSEMINATION Over the World Wide Web. CMC Studies Center URL: http://www.rpi.edu/~decemj/cmc/center.html CMC Magazine URL: http://www.rpi.edu/~decemj/cmc/mag/current/toc.html NAVIGATING Sections linked by hypertext LINKING TO The intent of the development efforts for this center is to involve many people in working on various web pages. This will mean that links to some of the pages will change to allow for distributed development and maintenance. You should consider linking to the home page (http://www.rpi.edu/~decemj/cmc/center.html) or index (http://www.rpi.edu/~decemj/cmc/index.html) as a "front door" to the center, as these links should remain stable for a while. Links on these pages (and the footers of other pages) will be updated to reflect changes in links. John December/decemj@rpi.edu/Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute/Troy NY PhD Candidate/Department of Language, Literature, and Communication John December ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 May 1994 21:20:33 -0400 (edt) From: John Higgins Subject: File 8--Net-Letter Guide 5/05 NET-LETTER GUIDE A newshound's guide to newsy periodicals available through the Internet. Compiled by John M. Higgins (higgins@dorsai.dorsai.org) Updated May 5, 1994 Introduction: My favorite things on the Internet are informative, high- quality newsletters. The quality of info contributed to what Mitch Kapor describes as the Net's "gift economy" is amazing. Despite some excellent e-pub guides, tracking down good NEWSY letters can be frustrating, partly because they get lost in the flood of zines and very technical pubs. So this list aims to point people to the news-oriented net-letters with somewhat broader appeal. It's not intended to be as comprehensive as other guides, but helpful nevertheless. Very technical and fanzine newsletters are not included because they are well covered by other guides. GIMME FEEDBACK!! This is just an initial stab, just a dozen or so I've seen and like (including one I edit!). Some are well-known, others are not. Send me your favorite net-letters, particularly if you're the editor. Include any subscription information plus a copy. HOW TO GET THE NET-LETTER GUIDE: For now, it will be available by e-mailing higgins@dorsai.dorsai.org, plus Usenet groups alt.zines, alt.etext, misc.writing, rec.mag, alt.internet.services, alt.answers, misc.answers, rec.answers, news.answers. If folks like it, other arrangements will be made. (Far more exhaustive lists of electronic publications include John Labovitz's e-zine-list {FTP to ftp.netcom.com:/pub/johnl/zines/e-zine-list or http //www.ora.com:8080/johnl/e-zine-list/} or the giant e-pub archive, by FTP and Gopher {etext.archive.umich.edu}) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- EDUPAGE: Tip sheet on information technology and media issued three times weekly. Quickie summaries primarily of newspaper articles, primarily from the majors. How to get it. E-Mail (listproc@educom.edu, SUB EDUPAGE YOUR NAME). FITZ'S SHOPTALK: Daily dispatches on the TV business, both networks and local stations by media headhunter Don FitzPatrick. Primarily summaries of wire-service and major newspapers, but also includes some full-text reprints. How to get it: E-mail (shoptalk-request@gremlin.clark.net, SUBSCRIBE YOUR@ADDRESS). LATE SHOW NEWS: A guy who obviously stays up way too late puts out a weekly newsletter on the late-night talk show wars. It's biased toward Letterman but contains surprisingly good industry dirt on Leno, Conan, etc. (even for those of us writing about television for a living). How to get it: E-mail (letterman@mcs.net), Usenet (alt.fan.letterman and rec.arts.tv), FTP (ftp.mcs.net:/mcsnet.users/barnhart/letterman). HICNet MEDICAL NEWS DIGEST: Something painless from a dentist. Broad bi-weekly newsletter on medicine by Health Info-Com Network, put together by dentist David Dodell. One week featured sleep apnea and snoring plus hemlock! Also carries excerpts of the Center for Disease Control's AIDS Daily Summary. The downside is conference announcements (OK, on things like techniques for identifying corpses, but they're still conference announcements!). How To Get It: E-Mail (mednews@asuvm.inre.asu.edu); FTP:(vm1.nodak.edu) NETWORKS & COMMUNITY: The emphasis here is on "community" in Internet-land. Less techie than you might expect. How To Get It: E-Mail (rre-request@weber.ucsd.edu; SUBSCRIBE YOUR NAME) Gopher: (gopher.well.sf.ca.us or gopher.nlc-bnc.ca) CABLE REGULATION DIGEST: Weekly summary of news on cable regulation published by Multichannel News. How to get it: E-Mail, distributed to the TELECOMREG mailing list. (listserver@relay.adp.wisc.edu, SUBSCRIBE TELECOMREG); FTP (ftp.vortex.com:pub/tv-film-video/cable-reg); Gopher (gopher.vortex.com) SCIENCE BEAT: A tip sheet for science journalists from the National Institute for Standards and Technologies. Maybe not too newsy, but short, sweet and interesting. How to get it: GOPHER (gopher-server.nist.gov). HOTT: HOTT -- Hot Off The Tree -- has re-emerged as a giant pub culling the latest advances in computer, communications, and electronics technologies from over trade magazines, newspapers and net resources. Great stuff, but why they're gathering so much material for a huge monthly rather than a smaller weekly or something is beyond me. How to get it: E-mail (listserv@ucsd.edu,SUBSCRIBE HOTT-LIST) PRIVACY Forum: Tidbits about threats to privacy from government snoops to credit agencies. How to get it: E-Mail(privacy-request@vortex.com); FTP (ftp.vortex.com); Gopher (gopher.vortex.com). ALAWON: An electronic newsletter distributed by the Washington Office of the American Library Association that covers federal legislation, regulations, policy, and grant opportunities of interest to libraries. How to get it: E-mail: (listserv@uicvm {Bitnet} or listserv@uicvm.uic.edu {Internet} SUBSCRIBE ALA-WOFirstName LastName). CURRENT CITES: A monthly letter for library technology, composed of pointers from magazine articles. A little on the dry side, partly because of its format. How to get it: E-mail (listserv@library.berkeley.edu; SUB CITES YOUR NAME); FTP: (ftp.lib.berkeley.edu:/pub/Current.Cites) COMPUTER UNDERGROUND DIGEST: The latest news on cyberspace issues. CUD's coolest when screaming about the latest hacker or BBS raid, good when picking apart government policy issues. But CUD will occasionally reprint the ENTIRE AGENDA for some upcoming computer conference. (YAWN!!!) How to get it: E-Mail (listserv@uiucvmd.bitnet or listserv@vmd.cso.uiuc.edu, SUB CUDIGEST YOUR NAME); Usenet (comp.society.cu-digest); FTP (etext.archive.umich.edu:/pub/eff) plus lots of other places. EFFECTOR: The Electronic Frontier Foundation's membership newsletter, great for telecom policy updates. How to get it: E-mail: send request to brown@eff.org; FTP (ftp.eff.org); Usenet: {preferred!~} (comp.org.eff); Gopher (gopher.eff.org) RISKS Forum: Tidbits about the risks computers present in society. One edition touched on industrial espionage, data escape from prison, and a strange tale of e-mail stalking. How to get it: E-mail (risks-request@csl.sri.com); Usenet {preferred!} (comp.risks); FTP (crvax.sri.com). ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 30 Apr 1994 22:12:01 EDT From: Anonymous Subject: File 9--RSA-1,600 number Encryption Code Broken "1,600 Computers Help Break 129-Digit Code" (From: Chicago Tribune, 27 April, 1994 (Sect 1, p. 3) Reuters NEW YORK--The world's ultimate secret code--a 129 digit combination billed as impossible to break--has finally been cracked. The article explains how 600 people using 1,600 computers linked together via the internet over five continents cracked the code in about eight months. Dr. Arjen Lenstra of Bellcore compares the feat to finding 8.5 million needles in a haystack. Lenstra coordinated the breaking of the encryption, "names RSA for the first letters of its three inventors' surnames." The story explains that the code was devised 17 years ago by computer scientists adn mathematicians Ronald Rivest, Adi Shamir, and Leonard Adleman. "This discovery is important if you want to protect the code guarding something like the secret formula for Coca-Cola or nuclear weapons," rivest said at a press conference. He suggested the encoders would have to use much longer numbers in the future. The article explains that numerical codes such as RSA 129 are based on the difficulty of breaking down long numbers into two sets of prime number (numbers divisible only by itself and "1"). Lenstra is quoted as saying the breaking of the code required the longest mathematical computation ever performed. The secret message that they successfully decrypted was "The magic words are squeamish ossifrage." The words were chosen randomly, according to Lenstra. Rivest presented Lenstra with a $100 check, the prize he and his two colleagues offered when they first presented the code to readers of Margin Gardiner's "Mathematical Games" column in Scientific American magazine to solve. While they billed it as being so hard that it would take 40 quadrillion years to do, they did not count on the power of modern-day computers. ------------------------------ End of Computer Underground Digest #6.40 ************************************

---

E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank