Computer underground Digest Sun Oct 2, 1994 Volume 6 : Issue 86 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 Oct 2, 1994 Volume 6 : Issue 86 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 Urban Legend Editor: E. Greg Shrdlugold CONTENTS, #6.86 (Sun, Oct 2, 1994) File 1--GPO Puts Congressional Bills Online File 2--A Summary of Electronic Gov't Info for California File 3--LA Daily News article on "Outlaw Hackers" File 4--Response to LA Daily News Article File 5--Three More (of 100) Reasons to Oppose Wiretap Proposal File 6--Cu Digest Header Information (unchanged since 10 Sept 1994) CuD ADMINISTRATIVE, EDITORIAL, AND SUBSCRIPTION INFORMATION APPEARS IN THE CONCLUDING FILE AT THE END OF EACH ISSUE. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 30 Sep 1994 17:42:21 CDT From: Policy Subject: File 1--GPO Puts Congressional Bills Online NEWS RELEASE - U.S. Government Printing Office - no. 94-9 For release: immediate Contact: John Berger September 27, 1994 202-512-1525 Internet e-mail GPO PUTS CONGRESSIONAL BILLS ONLINE The U.S Government Printing Office (GPO) now has all Congressional Bills available online. The Congressional Bills database contains all published versions of House and Senate bills introduced since the start of the 103d Congress. The Congressional Bills database joins the official Government versions of the Congressional Record and the Federal Register that have been offered in electronic format over the Internet through the GPO Access service since June 1994. The Bills database is updated by 6 a.m. each day bills are published. Bills are available as ASCII text files and in Adobe Acrobat Portable Document Format (PDF) file format. Users with Acrobat viewers will be able to display and print typeset page facsimiles. The Federal Register and the Congressional Record are available online by 6 a.m. and by 11 a.m. e.s.t. daily, respectively. Documents in the Register and Record databases are available as ASCII text files with all graphics in TIFF file format. Organizations or individuals may subscribe directly from GPO for each of the three databases for $35 per month, $200 for 6 months, or $375 for 1 year for a single workstation. Special 2rates are available for multiple workstations. Information about how to subscribe to the Congressional Bills, Record, or Register databases is available by calling GPO at 202-512-1530 or by fax at 202-512-1262. Internet E-mail should be sent to Users with full Internet access and local WAIS client software will be able to receive both ASCII text and all graphics as individual TIFF files or PDF files in the Congressional Record, Congressional Bills, and Federal Register databases. This is the first time that both text and graphics have been made available electronically via an online service. GPO's customized WAIS client software, a user-interface program specifically designed for GPO's application, is available from GPO for $15. Those who do not have full Internet connections can access ASCII text files, but not the PDF files or graphics, by using a phone modem to dial directly into GPO without additional software. These subscriptions provide for unlimited use for a stand alone workstation or an individual SWAIS user ID. The Congressional Bills and the Record and Register databases are also available for free electronic searches to walk-in patrons of many of the Nation's 1,400 depository libraries under a "GPO Access" program authorized by law and launched in June 1994. The Depository Library System includes academic, public, law, and Federal libraries. There is at least one Federal depository library in every Congressional district. The Superintendent of Documents is the official source for the sale of information published by more than 100 Federal agencies. Approximately 12,000 books or documents, 600 periodicals, and a growing number of CD-ROMS, diskettes, and online services are available. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 01 Oct 1994 07:24:26 -0700 (MST) From: Where's that dongle? Subject: File 2--A Summary of Electronic Gov't Info for California The California Senate is undoubtedly the most advanced legislature in the United States in the range of services it provides to Internet-connected users. I've seen a number of fragmented messages come out over a variety of lists and thought people might be interested in seeing the whole breadth of services they offer. Using the services at this site, you can correspond with Senators and their staffs, find out about pending legislation, subscribe to information services (including the capability to follow a bill), do full-text searches on legislative information and more. 1) Incoming Email. All Senate staffers and Senators are on an internal email system. For those people to receive email, they have to complete a simple enrollment process; most folks have done that. You can try and guess someone's name by using this formula: First.Last@SEN.CA.GOV. For example, if you wanted to send to Linda Ronstadt, you would send to Linda.Ronstadt@SEN.CA.GOV. 2) Directory Services. You can look up email addresses by using the white pages server they've set up. NOTE: Every user has the option of NOT being listed in this server! To get to the server, you can: - use your finger command - send mail to - use your WWW browser to The server accepts the usual sort of fuzzy strings you'd expect a good server to handle, as well as the following special cases: - "help" (finger - "senator" - gives you a list of real live senators who want to receive email addressed to them directly (as opposed to their staff members) 3) Senator Information Files If you don't know who your senator is, you can always look it up by FINGERing your ZIP code. For example, if you lived in Beverly Hills, you could: finger to see who your Senator is. This server also returns lots of information about each Senator, including addresses, biography, committees, etc. 4) FTP Server An FTP server (at FTP.SEN.CA.GOV) is available with information on the Senate, Senators, and various senate committees and offices (including the Senate Office of Research, which does a lot of cool reports). 5) Gopher Server The Gopher server (at Gopher.SEN.CA.GOV) lets you access everything on the FTP server plus the entire California code and statutes and constitution, all pending Bills before the legislature, and other Senate and Legislative information. This server maintains the most comprehensive set of links to other State legislatures available in GopherSpace. You can also do full-text searches of the pending bill files to find bills which might be of interest to you. 6) Senate News service (and mail server) Senate News is a mail-based service which lets you subscribe to topics of interest (such as bulletins from senators, committee reports, etc) and be emailed information (or simply notifications about information) whenever the system changes. You can also use the mail server to do bill topic searches and to retrieve bill files. Send an email message to with a text of "help" to get the help file for this. A new service in Senate News lets you follow a bill as it passes through the legislature. Once you've identified a bill you're interested in, you can subscribe to it (through senate-news) and anytime the bill changes, is analyzed, or has a status change (e.g., voting, vetoes, etc), you'll get mailed the changes (or a notification of the changes). 7) WWW Server The WWW server (at WWW.SEN.CA.GOV) is a new service which lets you do full text searches of bills pending before the legislature, access all the information available in the Gopher server, and other tasks (such as white pages lookups). This is slowly being expanded. There are other services available to internal users, such as a full USENET news feed and Clarinet news service, but these are not available to external users. IMPORTANT DISCLAIMERS: I speak in no way, shape, or form for the California Senate Rules Committee. They reserve the right to call me a lyin' bastard anytime they want. None of this represents a commitment to continue service from that site. SEN.CA.GOV site does not operate to satisfy the requirements of any law or budget item. If you want to see what AB 1624 requires, FTP to If you want this project to be continued, call your Senator and tell him or her how cool you think SEN.CA.GOV is! If you want any advice on the technology or tools used to implement this service, I'd be happy to talk to you about it (since I did most of the implementation). If you want to congratulate the person who thought this up, got the funding, ran the political hurdles, and continues to do the real hard work, write to Dennis.Miller@SEN.CA.GOV (or call the pro tem in charge of Senate Rules, Senator Bill Lockyer at 916-445-6671 or c/o State Capitol Rm. 205, Sacto, 95814). If you have questions about the legislative process or want to know something about a bill or whatever ... we don't have anyone to answer those questions; call your Senator (see (2) above). jms Joel M Snyder, 1404 East Lind Road, Tucson, AZ, 85719 Phone: +1 602 324 0494 (voice) +1 602 324 0495 (FAX) jms@Opus1.COM Opus One ------------------------------ From: CuD Moderators Date: Thu, 29 Sep 1994 21:43:12 CDT Subject: File 3--LA Daily News article on "Outlaw Hackers" ((MODERATORS' NOTE: The following article first appeared in the Los Angeles Daily News in early September. Thanks to the LADN for allowing us to reprint it in its entirety. The following version is as it was reprinted in the San Francisco Examiner, p. B-12, on Sept 4, 1994. (Thanks also to person who provided the article)). COPS, OUTLAWS GO ON-LINE: CRIME RISES IN CYBERSPACE: Spies and thieves prey on national security, public safety with only a few keystrokes (c) LA Daily News/By Keith Stone Los Angeles--"Agent Steal" was captured last week in Westwood, but computer crime cop Scott Charney knows cyberspace is crawling with other criminals and spies, some more dangerous. "The threat is an increasing threat," said Charney, chief of the computer crime unit for the U.S. Department of Justice. "It could be a 16-year old kid out for fun -- or it could be someone who is actively working to get information from the United States." "Agent Steal," the computer alias for Justin Tanner Peterson, belongs to the growing new breed of digital outlaws who threaten national security and public safety, Charney said. In Los Angeles alone, Peterson is one of at least four outlaw computer hackers who in recent years have demonstrated they can seize control of telephones and break into government computers. "We are out of the realm of the theoretical," Charney said. FOREIGN OPERATIVES' HACKING Government reports further reveal that foreign intelligence agencies and mercenary computer hackers have been sneaking through telephone lines into military and commercial computers. In Petersen's case, he pleaded guilty to cracking credit bureau telephones and computers for get-rich schemes. But FBI agents say they believe he also broke into a computer used to conduct legal wiretaps. During a telephone interview several weeks before his arrest, Petersen alluded to the destruction that hackers like himself can cause with a few keystrokes. "I wouldn't want the powers I have to be in the wrong hands --someone with malicious intentions," he said. Top government officials say it is too late. Former North Hollywood resident Kevin Lee Poulsen -- known as the "Dark Dante" -- is awaiting trial in San Francisco on espionage charges for cracking an Army computer and snooping into an FBI investigation of former Phillipines President Ferdinand Marcos. The cases of Poulsen, Petersen and others illustrate how the stereotypical hacker driven by intellectual challenge and curiosity is now being replaced by technically sophisticated criminals driven by greed. A TERRORIST WEAPON? "The nature of this changing motivation makes computer intruders' skills high-interest targets for criminal elements and hostile adversaries," according to a publicly released version of a Department of Defense report, "An Awareness Document." Hired by terrorists, these hackers could cripple the country's telephone system, "create significant public health and safety problems, and cause serious economic shocks," the September 1993 Pentagon report adds. Further, as the world becomes wired for computer networks, the report says there is a greater threat the networks will be used for spying and terrorism. "At least one foreign intelligence service is believed to be actively engaged in the collection of intelligence through computer intrusion," the report says, but does not identify the service. EXTENT OF THREAT QUESTIONED Some argue the hacker danger is overstated, and that the nation's telephone system is in more jeopardy from drunken drivers who take out utility poles or someone who breaks into a switching station. They say perhaps a greater risk lies in government agencies exaggerating the hacker problem to justify the creation of overly restrictive laws. "Of course there are people who can screw up the networks, and people who will sell themselves for a packet of comic books --but I think (the government) greatly overstate the threat," said Northern Illinois University criminologist Jim Thomas. "Where I see the danger is when the goals become hysteria, and the answer, I would argue, is not tighter laws but educating the public that there are some dangers," Thomas said. But the government reports give more weight to the potential for destruction. The President's National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee warned in a 1992 report that "known individuals in the hacker community have ties with adversary organizations. Hackers frequently have international ties." They include some members of the Chaos Computer Club in Germany, who the Pentagon report says have demonstrated their willingness to work with foreign governments. The Chaos Computer Club is believed to have cracked a National Aeronautics and Space Administration computer and supplied the Soviet Union's KGB with information obtained from Western military systems, the Nationwide, telephone companies and government agencies are designing new ways to defend against hackers and track down criminals who do breach the networks. The FBI recently opened its second computer crime unit in San Jose. And the Department of Justice in Washington, D.C., is adding two more computer crime specialists to its staff of four, to guide local federal prosecutors in the war on digital crime. Pacific Bell spokeswoman Linda Bonniksen said the battle with hackers is never ending, but with each attack, the company learns and strengthens the system. "It is a big house, and we close as many doors as we can, and new ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 2 Oct, 1994 17:22:43 CDT From: CuD Moderators Subject: File 4--Response to LA Daily News Article A few weeks ago, I was contacted by Keith Stone, a reporter for the LA Daily News. Stone was writing a story on the potential of "hackers" to threaten national security through spying or espionage activities. It was clear that Stone intended to push the angle of the threat, because both his questions and his recalcitrance in having some of his erroneous factual and conceptual errors challenged suggested that he preferred drama to accuracy. Stone seemed to be over-inclined to seek out those facts that corroborated his view of dangerous hackers lurking amongst us, and less inclined to accept opposing views. For example, he seemed convinced that the Legion of Doom was plotting circa 1989-1990 to bring down the nation's E-911 system. A law enforcement agent, he said, told him so. He insisted on arguing the point, and seemed impervious to suggestions that either he check his facts or his sources. Here's why we object to Stone's story and others like it that sensationalize the dangers of "computer hackers." State and federal legislators are gradually introducing legislation based on an exaggerated threat of computer technology. The Digital Telephony (FBI Wiretap) Bill (HR 4922) is but one example of how the fear of technologically sophisticated criminals generates hyperbole to justify laws and policies that some critics argue reduces Constitutional protections in cyberspace. We have also noted in past issues of CuD that such hyperbole finds it way into exaggerated indictments and other documents in criminal proceedings. Such stories, we judge, irresponsibly contribute to bad law and judicial injustice. We also object to such stories because they are simply poor reporting. Most of the U.S. population has little experience with cyberspace and the computer culture. When the public obtains its images of cyberspace from the whatever "Threat of the Month Club" is current, communicating the benefits (and *legitimate* dangers) of computer technology becomes more difficult. Whether addressing the dangers of files on anarchy and explosives, graphic sexual images, pedophilia, hackers, pirates, or similar topics, most media reflect a tendency toward misrepresenting the character of participants and inflating the threat to the public. Although some stories, such as Stone's, often contain an obligatory dissenting quote, the thrust of the stories remains unbalanced. It is not that such stories do not conform to some ideal image we'd like to see, but that they consistently conform to an image that seems "sexy" or that corresponds more closely to law enforcement views than any accurate reflection of the topic. More simply, such stories deceive the reader. What, specifically, do we object to in the Stone story? First, the story exaggerates the exploits of such "hackers" as "Agent Steal" and Kevin Poulsen. There is no evidence we have seen that either posed any significant threat to U.S. security or public safety. Nor does Stone report the contents of the indictments, but relies instead on the self-serving summary of law enforcement personnel. In fact, one Bay Area reporter chided Stone in print for making a fundamental error in reporting the charges against Poulsen as pending, which were dropped (the story will be excerpted in next week's CuD). In short, Stone typifies that breed of reporters who know little about the issues underlying many of these cases, and seems to use them instead as a convenient hook to spin a yarn of their own. Second, Stone, like some other reporters, raises the spectre of the "hacker as spy." There has been no evidence that either Poulsen or "Agent Steal" were involved in espionage, despite the easy transition Stone makes between it and hacking. It would hardly be a surprise if computer-wise techies found that espionage pays. No news there. If phone technicians, CIA insiders, and journalists sell their integrity along with their expertise, where's the story when somebody else does it? The story actually would seem that--as far as is publicly known--this hasn't yet occurred in the U.S. Notice how easily Stone's prose slides through innuendo: Government reports further reveal that foreign intelligence agencies a mercenary computer hackers have been sneaking through telephone lines military and commercial computers. In Petersen's case, he pleaded guilty to cracking credit bureau telephones and computers for get-rich schemes. But FBI agents say they believe he also broke into a computer used to conduct legal wiretaps. During a telephone interview several weeks before his arrest, Petersen alluded to the destruction that hackers like himself can cause with a few keystrokes. "I wouldn't want the powers I have to be in the wrong hands -- someone with malicious intentions," he said. Now, one could say the same thing about a karate expert, the owner of an Uzi, or a night-action photographer. Misused skills are, by definition, potentially destructive. The novelty of potential abuse may strike some as worthy of hyperbole, but the reality is more mundane. In fact, Stone provides no evidence that there is a growing cadre of sophisticated "hackers." The bulk of the serious computer crimes that we have followed in fact aren't the product of "hackers," but of computer-literate folk who use the computer (instead of lockpicks, guns, or fountain pens) to rip-off their victims. It's possible, of course, that Stone follows the school of thought that conflates "computer criminal" with "hacker." If so, then it's odd that he chose two "underground" computer wizards instead of focusing on some of the more serious computer crime that has occurred in recent years. We also wonder where Stone obtained his quote from "Agent Steal." First person? If so, the quote seems deceptively self-serving to Stone's slant. Because Stone seems willing to rely on information from Phrack, we wonder why Stone didn't allude to the Phrack interview in which Agent Steal condemned maliciousness (Phrack 44, File 16). We also wonder why Stone also failed to include the allegations that Agent Steal was also employed by the FBI. Given the tenor of the story, it's unlikely that such an exclusion was impelled by a commitment to reporting only verifiable facts. Third, Stone re-discovers the wheel: The cases of Poulsen, Petersen and others illustrate how the stereotypical hacker driven by intellectual challenge and curiosity is now being replaced by technically sophisticated criminals driven by greed. It's old news that computer-literate youth violate the law for avaricious reasons. Computer afficianados, like others, are little different than anybody else. How about an alternative headline: "Journalist Cheats on income taxes," with an accompanying story about how some reporters illustrate how literacy leads to greed-impelled law breaking? It's a minor point, I suppose, but there's simply nothing new that these two cases illustrate. My sense in talking with Stone is that he was relatively unfamiliar with the issues of either case. He also indicated that he was not on-line, he showed virtually no knowledge of events or issues that one would expect from a competent reporter writing on such a topic, and he expressed little desire to learn. The result is old news wrapped in current hyperbole. Fourth, the terrorist/espionage threat seems closer to science fiction than reality. Stone cites several sources for his claim that there is considerable potential for destruction. The President's National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee warned in a 1992 report that "known individuals in the hacker community have ties with adversary organizations. Hackers frequently have international ties." They include some members of the Chaos Computer Club in Germany, who the Pentagon report says have demonstrated their willingness to work with foreign governments. The Chaos Computer Club is believed to have cracked a National Aeronautics and Space Administration computer and supplied the Soviet Union's KGB with information obtained from Western military systems.... We're not familar with the report cited, be we are familiar with the example adduced. Presumably, it refers to Pengo, et. al., the central characters of Cliff Stoll's _The Cuckoo's Egg_. Had Stone bothered to read this classic, an inconceivable lapse for somebody writing on these issues, or had he read the Hafner and Markoff tome (Cyberpunks, Outlaws, and Hackers), he would likely have had a better grasp than citing a third-hand source that derived its information from an old issue of Phrack. Are we over-reacting to what, is arguably, just another unsurprisingly simplistic and inconsequential media distortion of the relationship between computer technology and crime? Perhaps. But the issues such stories raise are not without consequence. If reporters were to write about the law, baseball, or the stock market with the same degree of cluelessness that some approach issues of computer culture, they would likely be quickly unemployed. There is more accountability for some topics than others, and stories of cyberspace do not seem to be among those with high accountability. Several issues are at stake here. First, cyberstories, because of their importance in educating the public, providing information for lawmakers, policy makers, and criminal justice personnel, and contributing to the shared stock of social knowledge on which the public comes to understand and adapt to a new technology and its social implications, should be accurate. Instead, too many seem relegated to a status somewhere between op-ed and creative writing. Second, it is not unreasonable to expect reporters who write on substantive topics to exhibit at least minimal knowledge of their subject, or to at least be willing to demonstrate that they have done their homework before writing a story. Some nationally-known media reporters have been criticized for their work, and made a demonstrable effort to educate themselves to the relevant issues. Our hope is that Keith Stone will spend a bit more time researching if he writes on similar topics in the future. It is worth noting that Stone, to his credit, faithfully quoted my comments both accurately and in context. Unfortunately, they seemed irrelevant to his story. Third, the media seem to repeat a pattern of recursive reporting: One medium will pick up a story, then others follow, either with tortured rewrites from the original or with follow-ups that look for a new and dramatic angle to emphasize. This is hardly unique to cyberspace stories, as followers of the OJ Simpson coverage might notice. But, it does represent a style of journalism that seems to more inclined toward marketing than toward providing substantive information. Finally, there are legitimate threats posed by the computer technology. As with any technology, predators will find a way to abuse it, and reasoned discussion of these threats is necessary. Conversely, social accommodation to new technologies, whether in the form of responses to unacceptable behaviors or in inculcating appropriate norms and values for accommodating accompanying changes require accuracy. When the media cry "wolf" too many times, or when they distort the facts and present skewed images, adapting to cultural change becomes more difficult. The intent here is not to single out a single reporter, but rather to use that reporter as an icon (in the same way that he used his own subjects) to raise the issue of media coverage. After nearly a half-decade of highly visible issues, it doesn't seem unreasonable to expect more reason and less hyperbole in the coverage. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Sep 1994 09:04:55 -0700 From: email list server Subject: File 5--Three More (of 100) Reasons to Oppose Wiretap Proposal REASON 9: Privacy is a Basic Concept in Business REASON 9: The last time such a sweeping change in wiretap law was considered, AT&T recommended *a ban on all eavesdropping* except in national security cases. In 1967, when the federal wiretap law was first debated, a vice president of AT&T said that the Bell System favored a ban on all eavesdropping except in national security cases: "Privacy of communications is a basic concept in our busines. We believe the public has an inherent right to feel that they can use the telephone with confidence, just as they talk face to face. Any undermining of this confidence would seriously impair the usefulness and value of telephone communications." (Lapidus, Eavesdropping on Trial). Reason 12- Classification REASON 12: The FBI has hidden behind claims of classification rather than disclose information that would allow the public to determine whether the wiretap plan is needed. Throughout the debate on the wiretap bill, the FBI has been unwilling to describe incidents where technology has frustrated a court ordered wiretap. FOIA requests are routinely denied. Even those agencies charged with independent assessment cannot speak openly about the plan. (The General Accounting Office testified at an August hearing in the Senate: "Because the details of law enforcement agencies' problems and the specific technological challenges are classified, I cannot elaborate on them in this hearing"). Secrecy may be appropriate for military networks and classified systems, it is hardly well suited to the nation's public communications network. REASON 24- "Capacity Requirements" REASON 24:The FBI Wiretap bill allows the Attorney General to develop monitoring specs The proposed wiretap law says that the Attorney General will provide to telecommunications carrier associations and and standard-setting organizations a notice of "maximum capacity" required to accommodate all of the communication interceptions, pen registers, and trap and trace devices that the Attorney General estimates that government agencies may "use simultaneously." Telecommunications carriers will then be required to ensure that systems are capable of "expanding to the maximum capacity." (Proposed section 2603(a))("legal code") REASON 43:The development of the Digitial Signature Standard (DSS) suggests that standards developed to facilitate wiretapping are less robust, and are costly to American business and individual privacy. The recent development of the Digital Signature Standard provides a case study of what happens when an agency with legal authority to conduct wire surveillance is also given authority to set technical standards for communications networks. Viewing the role of the National Security Agency in the development of the DSS, MIT's Ronald Rivest said "It is my belief that the NIST proposals [for DSS] represent an attempt to install weak cryptography as a national standard, and that NIST is doing so in order to please the NSA and federal law enforcement agencies." Stanford's Martin Hellman concluded that "NIST's action give strong indication of favoring NSA's espionage mission at the expense of American business and individual privacy." (Communications of the ACM, July 1992) ------------------------------------------ What To Do: Fax Rep. Jack Brooks (202-225-1584). Express your concerns about the FBI Wiretap proposal. ----------------------------------------------------- 100 Reasons is a project of the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) in Washington, DC. For more information: ------------------------------ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1994 22:51:01 CDT From: CuD Moderators Subject: File 6--Cu Digest Header Information (unchanged since 10 Sept 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: from the ComNet in LUXEMBOURG BBS (++352) 466893; In ITALY: Bits against the Empire BBS: +39-461-980493 In BELGIUM: Virtual Access BBS: + (ringdown) 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/ 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 #6.86 ************************************


E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank