Computer underground Digest Wed May 3, 1995 Volume 7 : Issue 35 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 Wed May 3, 1995 Volume 7 : Issue 35 ISSN 1004-042X Editors: Jim Thomas and Gordon Meyer (TK0JUT2@NIU.BITNET) Archivist: Brendan Kehoe Shadow Master: Stanton McCandlish Field Agent Extraordinaire: David Smith Shadow-Archivists: Dan Carosone / Paul Southworth Ralph Sims / Jyrki Kuoppala Ian Dickinson Emo X-editor: Judy Tenuta CONTENTS, #7.35 (Wed, May 3, 1995) File 1--CuD WWW additions and a one-week break File 2--SB 314 -- _The_Criminalization_of_Free_Speech File 3--SotMESC Announcement File 4--CFP - Advanced Surveillance File 5--Cu Digest Header Info (unchanged since 19 Apr, 1995) CuD ADMINISTRATIVE, EDITORIAL, AND SUBSCRIPTION INFORMATION APPEARS IN THE CONCLUDING FILE AT THE END OF EACH ISSUE. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 3 May 1995 22:32:21 CDT From: Jim Thomas Subject: File 1--CuD WWW additions and a one-week break A few additional 'Zines have been added to the CuD www site. Phracks (thru #46) and Crypt Newsletter are now available, as well as a few additional pointers to other cyber-related homepages. The CuD URL IS: http://www.soci.niu.edu/~cudigest/ CuD will likely not come out for another week to ten days. For some unknown reason, I assigned 10 page term papers to a class of 300 students, and will be spending the next week or so grading, giving exams, and dealing with the end of the term. But, keep the articles comin, and #735 should be out on either May 10 or 14. jt ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Apr 1995 18:59:40 GMT From: kurz4768@ELAN.ROWAN.EDU(BRIAN KURZYNOWSKI) Subject: File 2--SB 314 -- _The_Criminalization_of_Free_Speech _Outline_ I. The provisions set forth in S.314 that will become law if passed. A. "Sexually explicit material" is no longer allowed to be transmitted from telecommunications devices, and doing so is punishable by law. B. Harassment over telecommunications media is illegal, and punishable by law. C. Telecommunications service providers whose customers violate the law will also be held responsible. D. Violators of this law will be punished with 1. up to two years in prison. 2. up to $100,000 in fines. II. Senator Exon, the creator of the legistation, gives the purpose in his introduction speech, and in his editorial. III.There are problems with S.314. A. There are legal problems. 1. Anything that violated the Constitution of the United States is unconstitutional. a. S.314 violates the First Amendment. b. S.314 violates the Fourth Amendment. c. S.314 is unconstitutional. 2. There are legal questions that have yet to be answered by the courts. B. There are practical problems with S.314. 1. The Internet is too big to impose laws on because it is global. 2. Service providers would be forced to screen messages for sexual content before they are sent, and such a huge amount of information is sent through the National Information Infrastructure daily that checking every bit of data is all but impossible. IV. The possible effects of passing S.314 are negative. A. The violation of any constitutional guarantee weakens the document. B. There would be a decline in the popularity of the Internet. C. The free-speech and democracy represented by the Internet would come to a halt. D. It would put a damper on the economy. V. There are possible alternatives to S.314 A. The monitoring of public forums as opposed to invading privacy. B. Narrowing down sexually explicit material to something like child porn. C. Removing the threat of prosecution from service providers, and limiting it to violators. D. The investigation of technology for parents to restrict their children's Internet access, thereby leaving the decision of what is fit for minors up to the parent's, and not up to the government. E. Let the citizens of the Internet take care of themselves, and decide what is fit and what is not. Thesis: S.314 has legal problem, practical problems, and poses some negative all around effects, and therefore should not be passed into law. The Communications Decency Act of 1995, aka The Cyberspace Bill, aka S.314 is a bill recently introduced to the Congress of The United States. It is intended to curb sexually explicit materials being sent from one place to another electronically, or through telecommunications media. This includes such forms of communication as telephone systems, computer "nets," and even private electronic mail systems. However, the provisions set forth in S.314 pose problems. S.314 is unconstitutional, impractical, and has some possible negative side effects, and therefore should not be allowed to pass into law. S.314 is not a law onto itself. It edits currently standing legislature, particularly the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C.), even more particularly, section 223. After the current law is edited, the provisions are the following. Any communications that are "obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, or indecent" are prohibited from being transferred over any telecommunications device. Any communications which are intended to harass, threaten, or annoy are prohibited as well. Anybody who transmits over a telecommunications device any of the prohibited material above shall be fined up to $100,000, or spend up to two years in prison. Whoever "permits any telecommunications faculty under their control to be used for any purpose prohibited in this section (223) shall be fined" up to $100,000, or spend up to two years in prison (47 U.S.C. 223 (a)). These are the basic provisions set up S.314. Before the problems with the legislation are discussed, let us look at the purpose of the bill. Senator Exon, the creator of the bill, states his purpose in several places. In his introduction speech, according to Pfohl, Exon states "I want to keep the Information Superhighway from resembling a red-light district (1)." Exon also wrote an editorial to the Washington Post explaining himself and his legislature. He says that the Communications Decency act "modernizes" current laws against harassment, indecency, and obscenity for computer users. He says that S.314 is intended to make the Internet safer for all users. According to Exon, The Communications Decency Act offers the same protection to computer users that has been offered to telephone users for years. It is supposed to curb the fear, harm and annoyance associated with the obscene computer message. He ends the article with a question. Should we give up, let Americans be subjected to pornography and smut on the Internet, and blame it on the First Amendment (A 20)? While his intentions are noble, what he's doing is reducing all of the information on the Internet to information suitable for children. There are many problems with his plan. The first problem with S.314 is the most obvious. It has to do with whether or not the bill is even legal. The Constitution of the United States is the backbone of our legal structure. If a law goes against the Constitution, it is unconstitutional, and is therefore invalid. S.314 violates at least two of the Constitutional Amendments. According to Crowley, "Civil rights groups say legislation would create enormous new intrusion of privacy and free speech (A1)." The amendments that deal with these rights are the First and Fourth Amendments. The First Amendment states the "Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech . . .." And, it is a Constitutional requirement that any free-speech censorship be as unrestrictive as possible ("On-line Censorship" 2). Exon's amendment clearly places limits on free-speech. Also, it is very broad in that it bars the use of any sexually explicit language. This law forbids too much free speech to be considered even close to legal. It is definitely not as unrestrictive as possible, and it violates the First Amendment. Holding service providers responsible for the actions of their customers also violates the Constitution. Holding them responsible would force service providers to screen all messages before they were sent. This would be to protect themselves against prosecution. Forcing them to do this violates the Fourth Amendment, which is "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures . . .." The Fourth is our guarantee to the right of privacy, which S.314 clearly goes against. Forcing service providers may, in fact, violate the Eighth Amendment, which is that no excessive bail or fines be imposed, or cruel and unusual punishment inflicted. Isn't it excessive to fine someone for a crime they didn't commit, or even know about? I feel that this would be an unusual punishment. There aren't only legal problems with S.314, but there are practical problems with the bill as well. One problem is that our government is trying to put restrictions on an information infrastructure that doesn't only exist in the United States, but is global. To an internet user, it is not hard to set up an internet account overseas, where pornography is legal, fill it with sexually explicit and obscene materials, and leave it open to the public. Because of today's technology, this is a piece of cake. It isn't practical to have a law that can be circumnavigated without blinking an eye. Another practical problem is the sheer volume of messages sent through the Internet daily. According to Seiger, service providers would have to closely look at every private communication, E-mail message, public forum post, mailing list document, and file archive carried by its network (1). On Prodigy, just one of at least a dozen commercial service providers, approximately 75,000 messages are transmitted daily (Yang 71). The number of transmitions in the Unites States daily is so high that nobody even wants to speculate on the number. Just who is going to do all of this reading of messages? It's just not practical to censor 75,000 multiplied by 12 messages every day. And that is only commercial access providers. There are many private service providers as well. According to Seiger, bulletin board services account for one-third of all netizens (internet citizens) (2). File archives in the United Stated contain billions of files, all of which would have to be gone through, piece by piece, to eliminate any prohibited material. The amount of information available on, and sent through the National Information Infrastructure is too enormous to be controlled. In addition to legal problems, S.314 could create some other negative results. The first problem that could be created is, in fact, because of the legal problems that are present. If this bill is allowed into law, although it completely violates two amendments and may violate a third, it would weaken the Constitution. Each time the Constitution is violated, it is easier and easier to violate it again. That is a bad thing. The Constitution is the main piece of paper that upholds our legal system. The rights granted to us in the Constitution are ours as Americans, and should be protected to the fullest. The Constitution is for the people, and the government is by the people, and therefore, the people should get the rights guaranteed them. Our rights are precious, and nobody has the right to take them away. According to a poll I took of Internet users, there would also be a decline in the popularity on the Internet. I put out a poll, and the results showed that 76% of people in various Usenet News discussion groups said that if S.314 is passed, they would either use the Internet less, or stop using it altogether. Further, 42 out of the 60 bulletin board operators and system operators that responded to the on-line questionaire said that they would have to severely restrict their internet access, or cut it out completely. That is a big cut in the population of the Internet. Because of such a decline in Internet popularity, A variety of other problems are possible. The free-speech and democracy represented in the Internet would come to a halt. One of the features that makes the Internet so popular is that it puts people around the world in touch. One example of how the Internet was used in democracy is a nationwide protest against the bill. Through discussion groups and E-mail, organizers of the protest reached students on over 100 campuses. Because of the speed and ease with which the protest was started, and because of the "broad coalitions of student groups" reached, are evidence, organizers say, of how the Internet has changed communication and democracy. Without the number of people currently on the Internet, (which would drop) this type of speed isn't possible (Herszenhorn A 29). Another example of the democracy available on the Internet is the petition against S.314 that can be signed through electronic mail. If this bill is passed, the Internet as we know it would not be the same. The Internet, as it stands now is a powerful democratic force, and most of the people who use it do not want to see it change. One other possible change that would be brought about by S.314 is negative on the economy. All of the people that use the Internet pay for the service. Wether they pay for it in tuition, pay per hour, or pay a once a month fee, they pay. It would make sense that if fewer people are on the Internet, there would be less spending on the Internet, and the less money people spend, the worse it is for the economy. With such a decrease in the popularity of the Internet (a major advertising strategies of computer vendors), there would also be less spending on computers and high-tech equipment. Thirty-eight percent of all economic growth in the U.S. since 1990 has been due to business and consumer spending on high-tech equipment (Mandel 22). While there are no estimates on how badly the economy would be affected by the passing of the bill, clearly the effects would be negative. There are, however possible alternatives to S.314. The government could re-draft the bill, which they are considering, to fit within First and Fourth Amendment guidelines. To do this, the speech regulated would have to be significantly narrowed. For example, child pornography and such materials that are currently illegal to sell and possess in the U.S. would be prohibited. To fit within Fourth Amendment rights, only public forums such as the Usenet Newsgroups would be monitored for illegal materials. The Fourth Amendment would have to be protected, and public forums are fair game to prosecutors. Another piece that would need to be taken care of is the provision that calls for the prosecution of service providers. You can't hold one person responsible for the actions of another. Another alternative to the bill would be to drop it altogether. Then the government could invest in technology that would let parents control what kind of material is available to their children. Electronic lockout devices would be feasible for this type of control. One other possible alternative would be to let the Internet Users, being that the Internet is worldwide, govern themselves. It is working so-far. I have seen at least 25 people already turn in fellow Internet users for hate-mail and child pornography. Internet users do not want to see the Information Superhighway turned into a red-light district, just as much as Exon doesn't want to see it. Let us set the standards for what is suitable for our net. With all of the problems related to S.314, it would not be a good idea for it to become law. The bill's language is too restrictive, and the language restricted is too broad. It isn't practical to regulate a world wide computer net, and the sheer volume of notes transmitted daily in the U.S. makes it ridiculous to control. Furthermore, the provisions of S.314 are not in accordance with the Constitution. And to top off all of that, there are some very possible, and very real, negative side effects that could come from the passing of S.314. While the bill is intended to protect children and adults from being harassed and being offended, there must be another way to do it. Evidently S.314 is not the route to clean up the Information Superhighway. _Works Cited_ Bruce, James and Richard Pfhol. "Analysis-S.314, The Communications Decency Act of 1995." INTERNET. Electronic Messaging Association. 2/7/95. Crowley, Stephen. "Senate Panel Backs Smut Ban on Internet." _The_New_York_Times_. 24 March, 1995. A1+. Exon, James. "We Can't Allow Smut on the Internet." Editorial. _The_Washington_Post_. 9 March, 1995. A20. "Fight Online Censorship." _ACLU_CyberLiberties_Alert_. INTERNET. ACLU Information. 2/23/95. Herszenhorn, David. "Students Turn to Internet for Nationwide Protest Planning." _The_New_York_Times_. 29 March, 1995. A29. Mandel, Michael. "The Digital Juggernaut." _BusinessWeek_. The Information Revolution. 22+. Seiger, John. "Senator Exon Introduces Online Indecency Legislation." _CDT_Policy_Post. INTERNET. News: alt.talk.EFF. 2/9/95. United States Congress. "Communications Act of 1934." U.S.C. 223. Washington, DC: GOP, 1934. United Stated Congress. Senate. "Communications Decency Act of 1995." 104th Congress. S.314 Washington, DC: GOP, 1995. _United_States_Constitution_. Amendment One. _United_States_Constitution_. Amendment Four. _United_States_Constitution_. Amendment Eight. Written By, Brian Kurzynowski kurz4768@elan.rowan.edu ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 May 1995 18:56:47 -0500 From: Robert E. Jones Subject: File 3--SotMESC Announcement SotMESC P.O. Box 573 Long Beach, Ms 39560 http://www.mindvox.com/~king Founded in 1989, this organization is dedicated to preserving the integrity and cohesion of the computing society. By promoting computer education, liberties and efficiency, we believe we can secure freedoms for all computer users while retaining privacy. Every month more services, networks, countries and facilities are integrated into the world-wide networks than ever before. The demand is increasing. Future network implementations and schemes need to be formulated and put into place to meet this demand so that everyone can be online throughout the world. Let us be united together in information and communication. Join Today !!! Name: Address: Student/Military: $20+ Citizens: $40+ Corporations: $1,000+ Overseas: add $10 All memberships will receive the SotMESC Newsletter to keep informed. Projects ::: Providing scholarships to promote educated users. Keeping members informed via the newsletter on events. Providing Legal commentary to those members with such needs. Working towards being able to provide a machine to members to gain -accounts on and Internet services. Attending conventions and providing reports to the members -of the SotMESC via the newsletter. Attending debates to dispute computer roles and cultures. Providing and conducting panels and debates at conventions. Recycling used computers and reintroducing them to a societies' needs. The SotMESC NewsLetter ::: A most informative array of articles and notices. Convention topics and dates, along with ongoing activities. Computer news on the Network community. Advice on preventing Government intervention and infiltration. Networking information and sites. BBS prospects. Monthly mailings. Internet applications and sites to utilize, free programs listed. A -MUST- for anyone with a Modem !!! Etc . . . The SotMESC is a network/bbs/computer affectionado group of people that wish to protect their services they freely enjoy. This involves goals along the line of keeping the Internet open to the public and encouraging a wide range of applications for it, promoting BBS services, protecting privacy, watching the government and private business to ensure no foul-play, and the like. Our scholaraship is open to those with interests in the computer realm to get a chance to broaden their horizons and get an opportunity to apply themselves by going to college. We are promoting this to the users in the hacker community who do not get such a chance as often as their intelligence would dispute. Our notable members include: Pentagon personnel, Hacker convention organizers, Members of various hacker organizations, Security consultants, International representatives and others associated with these fields, Commercial owners, legal representatives, and site Administrators. I hope this helps explain some things we do . . And what we are. SotMESC P.O. Box 573 Long Beach, Ms 39560 Anyone on the networks, bulletin boards or familiar with the issues of the computer realm can now get more information in an up-to-date format by joining the SotMESC. Our newsletters come out on a monthly basis and feature articles about current computer legislation, conventions, Internet sites and information, bulletin board numbers of value, and details of the activities we are conducting to promote computer usage over the lines, networks and courts. Getting this newsletter is conditional to joining the SotMESC in helping us provide programs and funding for projects to secure computer usage and education. These projects include our scholarship fund, computer relocation program for discarded systems, counseling, promoting responsible laws for computer usage, and associated activities. To get this information, and your membership in the SotMESC, send your contributions to the address above. Students - $20 Citizen - $40 Corporate - $1,000 If you are interested in keeping up with what is happening on the Internet, and the multitudes of networks incorporated, you need to join the SotMESC. Our newsletter is packed with information on a monthly basis full of FTP Sites, Gopher information, Telnet access, mosaic, other services and applications, and many events occurring. This service is a virtual history of who is doing what when and where. Never be lost again on finding applications, programs or help. And the best part is, a portion of all proceeds put into our organization goes back into the Internet. We have hosted conferences at conventions, on networks and in work groups. For students, we have initiated a scholarship program to promote the literacy of network cooperation. And as we grow, we hope that one day we can provide a free server on the Internet to all members to utilize to its fullest extent. As the Internet grows, grow with it. Subscribe today. SotMESC P.O. Box 573 Long Beach, Ms 39560 F R E E D O M P R I V A C Y Beliefs ::: We oppose the Clipper Chip and secret encryption techniques. We believe in Freedom on the networks for public access. We believe in Privacy for every individual on the networks. We oppose the restriction of information on the networks. We approve of the advancement of technology and intelligence. We strive for a higher education for all via the networks. We work to integrate the world in cooperation on the networks. --Distribute to those that wish to know more about the Internet-- The SotMESC scholarship fund is to advance those that wish to learn more about the computer sciences, their applications and cultures. The qualifications are for the person desiring such a scholarship to print a 15-20 page report in APA 4.0 detail an aspect of computing culture. All entries will be judged and measured by the SotMESC Scholarship committee. Those that are accepted will be summarily reviewed by a second group from the SotMESC and those that are deemed of quality will receive scholarships based on their weighted averages. This scholarship is open to anyone. All submissions will become the property of the SotMESC. All authors will be recognized for their submissions. Any and all references should be cited. This fund is open and applicable to all accredited colleges and universities. The amount of the scholarship and terms will vary accordingly. SotMESC P.O. Box 573 Long Beach, Ms 39560 -- Distribute this document freely as you see fit -- ------------------------------ Date: 29 Apr 1995 13:22:30 -0400 From: "Dave Banisar" Subject: File 4--CFP - Advanced Surveillance CALL FOR PAPERS Advanced Surveillance Technologies Sponsored by Privacy International, and Electronic Privacy Information Center 4 September 1995 Copenhagen, Denmark Overview Over the past decade, fundamental changes have taken place in the nature and the environment of surveillance. New information systems offer an unprecedented ability to identify, monitor and track a virtually limitless number of individuals. Some leading-edge technologies are likely to revolutionize the practice of surveillance. The factors of cost, scale, size, location and distance have, in many instances, become largely irrelevant. The impact of political and economic change throughout the world has also created unforeseen dimensions to surveillance. The evolution of a Global Information Infrastructure will have a profound impact on the scope of potential surveillance of individuals. The end of the cold war and the privatization of public sector activities has magnified the impact of change. The merging of technologies has also created new opportunities for wide-scale surveillance. The nature of surveillance has changed to the extent that modern information systems involve a pre-requisite of general surveillance of populations. The pursuit of perfect identity has created a rush to develop systems which create an intimacy between people and technology. Advanced biometric identification and sophisticated ID card systems combine with geographic tracking to create the potential to pinpoint the location of any individual. The use of distributed databases and data matching programs makes such tracking economically feasible on a large scale. Extraordinary advances have recently been made in the field of visual surveillance. Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) systems can digitally scan, record, reconfigure and identify human faces, even in very poor light conditions. Remote sensing through advanced satellite systems can combine with ground databases and geodemographic systems to create mass surveillance of human activity. The globalization of information systems will take information once and for all away from the protection and jurisdiction of national boundaries. The development of data havens and rogue data states is allowing highly sensitive personal information to be processed outside any legal protection. At a more intimate level, research is underway in more than a dozen countries with the aim of implanting microchip technology directly into the human brain. US and European medical institutes have already conducted many such operations. The creation of a direct link between the human brain and computer technology is at an advanced stage. Such procedures are initially aimed at stimulating dead senses and paralyzed limbs. Within two decades, it is possible that such implants will be at a sufficiently advanced stage to enable complex interaction between the brain and external technology. The science of nanotechnology, which involves the re-configuration of individual atoms and molecules, will present the potential for virtually undetectable covert surveillance. These and other developments are changing the nature and meaning of surveillance. Law has scarcely had time to address even the most visible of these changes. Public policy lags behind the technology by many years. The repercussions for privacy and for numerous other aspects of law and human rights need to be considered sooner rather than later. This one day conference will present an overview of these leading-edge technologies, and will assess the impact that they may have in the immediate future. Experts and analysts will discuss the nature and application of the new technologies, and the public policy that should be developed to cope with their use. The conference theme is unique, and interest in the event has already been expressed from throughout the world. Program contents The first session will assess new dimensions in current surveillance technologies. The remainder of the day will be devoted to exploring technologies which are in the formative stage of development. Preliminary List of Topics: o Advanced Satellite Surveillance o Microchip Implants o Nanotechnology o Biometrics and perfect identity o Advanced Geodemographic Systems o Data Havens and Rogue Data States o Information Warfare o Cryptography The conference will be held in Copenhagen, and is timed to coincide with the 17th annual international meeting of privacy and data protection commissioners. Number of participants : approximately one hundred Cost: US $75 - Individuals/non-profit organizations $175 - Commercial organizations Privacy International and the Electronic Privacy Information Center are now requesting abstracts for papers. Papers should be directed at a general audience, and should either present an overview of an aspect of advanced surveillance technology, or they should discuss the likely use and impact of the technology. Abstracts or papers can be emailed to Privacy International at: pi@privacy.org Alternatively, they can be sent to : Privacy International Washington Office 666 Pennsylvania Ave, SE, Suite 301 Washington, DC 20003 USA 1-202-544-9240 (phone) 1-202-547-5482 (fax) Web address: http://privacy.org/pi/ gopher/ftp cpsr.org /cpsr/privacy/privacy_international/ ================================================================== David Banisar (Banisar@epic.org) * 202-544-9240 (tel) Electronic Privacy Information Center * 202-547-5482 (fax) 666 Pennsylvania Ave, SE, Suite 301 * ftp/gopher/wais cpsr.org Washington, DC 20003 * HTTP://epic.digicash.com/epic ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Apr 1995 22:51:01 CDT From: CuD Moderators Subject: File 5--Cu Digest Header Info (unchanged since 19 Apr, 1995) 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@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. To UNSUB, send a one-line message: UNSUB CUDIGEST Send it to LISTSERV@VMD.CSO.UIUC.EDU (NOTE: The address you unsub must correspond to your From: line) 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: In BELGIUM: Virtual Access BBS: +32-69-844-019 (ringdown) Brussels: STRATOMIC BBS +32-2-5383119 2:291/759@fidonet.org In ITALY: Bits against the Empire BBS: +39-464-435189 In LUXEMBOURG: ComNet BBS: +352-466893 UNITED STATES: etext.archive.umich.edu (192.131.22.8) in /pub/CuD/ ftp.eff.org (192.88.144.4) in /pub/Publications/CuD/ aql.gatech.edu (128.61.10.53) in /pub/eff/cud/ world.std.com in /src/wuarchive/doc/EFF/Publications/CuD/ uceng.uc.edu in /pub/wuarchive/doc/EFF/Publications/CuD/ wuarchive.wustl.edu in /doc/EFF/Publications/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/Publications/CuD ftp://www.rcac.tdi.co.jp/pub/mirror/CuD The most recent issues of CuD can be obtained from the Cu Digest WWW site at: URL: http://www.soci.niu.edu:80/~cudigest/ 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 #7.35 ************************************

---

E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank