Computer underground Digest Wed Jan 24, 1996 Volume 8 : Issue 07 ISSN 1004-042X Editors: J

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 Jan 24, 1996 Volume 8 : Issue 07 ISSN 1004-042X Editors: Jim Thomas and Gordon Meyer (TK0JUT2@MVS.CSO.NIU.EDU Archivist: Brendan Kehoe Shadow Master: Stanton McCandlish Field Agent Extraordinaire: David Smith Shadow-Archivists: Dan Carosone / Paul Southworth Ralph Sims / Jyrki Kuoppala Ian Dickinson Cu Digest Homepage: CONTENTS, #8.07 (Wed, Jan 24, 1996) File 1-- From TIME: Quittner on hate groups (fwd) File 2--ALERT - Bernie S. Sentencing Friday File 3--Response to the Simon Wiesenthal Center File 4--CompuServe and "pornography" File 5--CompuServe and "pornography" File 6--MCI to ban Spammers FIle 6--Re: Letter from Simon Wiesenthal Center to ISPs File 7--ACLU Cyber-Liberties Update 1/10/96 File 8--Re: Cu Digest, #8.01 - CI$ case File 9--Re: Notifcation Letter AOL.COM (fwd) File 10--EFF 96 Pioneer Awards - nominations due Feb. 15 File 11--Cu Digest Header Info (unchanged since 16 Dec, 1995) CuD ADMINISTRATIVE, EDITORIAL, AND SUBSCRIPTION INFORMATION APPEARS IN THE CONCLUDING FILE AT THE END OF EACH ISSUE. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 18 Jan 1996 18:16:40 -0600 (CST) From: David Smith Subject: File 1-- From TIME: Quittner on hate groups (fwd) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- (Philip Elmer-DeWitt) Date--Mon, 15 Jan 1996 12:17:14 -0500 The following is copyright material from the 1/22/96 issue of TIME, posted by permission. HOME PAGES FOR HATE A campaign to limit the voices of white supremacists on the Internet has defenders of the First Amendment worried By Joshua Quittner On the Internet, when people want to chat about the bleaker side of life, they often find their way to The forum, a Usenet newsgroup, is open 24 hours a day for anyone who wants to post messages lamenting a breakup with a spouse, or how tough it is to meet people or find true love or even a true date. It s a moderately popular group. Or it was, before the Carolinian Lords of the Caucasus showed up. The CLOC, an unabashedly white-supremacist organization based in Columbia, South Carolina, takes pride in running locals off of certain innocuous parts of Usenet with its race baiting. Members claim to have emptied out half a dozen forums already, including, improbably, and If you want an organization which makes things happen, visit our victims and learn first-hand what kind of a group we are, they boast at their World Wide Web site, which features an image of a burning cross. CLOC is clearly on the forefront of the great war for Aryan domination of the Internet. This virtual hooliganism may sound absurd. For people who rely on the Internet to communicate, though, it s a real and growing problem. Like more conventional groups, racists have discovered that the Net is a marvelous way to get their message out to a huge audience at low cost. Last week, the Simon Wiesenthal Center, the world s largest Jewish human rights organization, decided that enough is enough. Citing the rapidly expanding presence of organized hate groups on the Internet, Rabbi Abraham Cooper, the center s associate dean, sent letters to hundreds of Internet access providers, asking them to help draft a code of ethics that would squelch Websites that promote bigotry and violence. Predictably, civil libertarians are uneasy about the proposal, seeing it as yet another assault on free speech in cyberspace. Congress has already signaled its intent to enact legislation that would criminalize indecent= speech online, rather than adopting the less onerous restriction against obscene speech that is the print standard. Yet Cooper claims that his letter is very much in keeping with the Constitution and with traditional media practice. He argues that the First Amendment also protects publishers who choose not to disseminate materials they find offensive. Most mainstream newspapers and magazines, for example, won t run ads from racist or hate groups. The people who sell access to the Internet, he believes, should start behaving the same way. In effect, says Cooper, this is a recognition that the Internet has come of age. We re not looking for prior restraint or to keep these guys off the Internet. We re saying adopt the same approach to the First Amendment that your brothers have done in traditional media. Among purists, though, the whole point of the Internet is that it isn t like traditional media. A wide spectrum of viewpoints is tolerated and even encouraged online, especially on the freewheeling, anarchistic Usenet.. The notion is that, for the first time in history, anyone can express his or her views to a mass audience. As a result, Cooper s proposal is stirring up opposition from cyberspace denizens on both the left and the right. It s gotten a cold reception from Internet access providers too. The answer to hateful speech is more speech, says Sameer Parekh, president of Community ConneXion, a popular provider in Berkeley, California. By banning hate groups from the Net, he says, you are promoting the idea that they might actually have something valuable to say. The campaign has given even the hate-mongers a chance to sound civic-minded. Says Milton John Kleim Jr., a self-described white nationalist Usenet Viking whose writings also appear on many racist Web pages: What Mr. Cooper doesn t understand is the fact that there are a lot of people in our society who are very angry--the angry white male theme. A lot of these angry white males, if they re prohibited from venting their views, might actually come forward and do something. But what if freedom of speech destroys an environment, as victims of the Carolinian Lords of the Caucasus know it can? They re real idiots, says Jay D. Dyson, who used to post messages to the group until the invasion by CLOC. Dysonexplains that at first CLOC members used the forum to troll for new members. It s frightening because these [lonely] people at are the lowest point in their lives and a drowning man will grasp at anything to keep from going under. Later, though, the postings turned nasty and even threatening. A CLOC leader, who uses the screen name Racial Theorist, says his organization doesn t mean anyreal harm: What this thing is about is having fun. And shock value. Perhaps. But it s finished as far as Dyson and his friends are concerned. Last week the lonely folks decided to deal with the racists in their own way. They voted to create a special kind of newsgroup where unruly intruders can be evicted. No one should be forced to tolerate intolerance, even in cyberspace. With reporting by Chris Stamper/New York Copyright 1996 Time Inc. --Philip Elmer-DeWitt TIME Magazine ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Jan 1996 06:48:44 -0500 (EST) From: Emmanuel Goldstein Subject: File 2--ALERT - Bernie S. Sentencing Friday I just found out that Bernie S. will be sentenced this Friday morning at 9 am in Easton, PA for the crime of removing batteries from a tone dialer several years ago. This is defined as a victimless misdemeanor for which the judge in this small town (under considerable influence from the Secret Service) set bail at $250,000. He could get two years in prison at sentencing. Press attention could be very helpful in avoiding a sentence as irrational as the bail setting - right now the only influence these people are getting is from the Secret Service and they want to put Bernie S away for as long as they can. If you're not entirely up to date on this story, finger for all of the details. If you know of anyone who will cover this story, please get ahold of them right away so they can plan on being there. If anyone is interested in going, let me know so we can hopefully fill some cars from NYC. Sentencing is scheduled for Friday, January 26 at 9 am Courtroom 5 Northampton County Government Center 7th and Washington Street Easton, PA 18042-7492 (610) 559-3020 (district attorney) case # 2173-1993 The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania vs. Edward E. Cummings Misdemeanor 2 - tampering with physical evidence Please help spread the word. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 Jan 1996 18:46:24 -0600 (CST) From: David Smith Subject: File 3--Response to the Simon Wiesenthal Center In response to recent efforts by the Simon Wiesenthal Center to request that ISPs voluntarily create acceptable use policies that prohibit hate speech, one of my recommendations to CuD readers is to fill out the online survey at their web site, Particularly if you believe, like I do, that the remedy of choice for bad speech is more speech, not enforced silence. The survey asks questions about your thoughts on hate speech, freedom of speech, the First Amendment, what are the best measures to restrict racism online, whether you think the SWC is being productive or not, etc. FWIW, I agree with the SWC's assertion that internet service providers have the legal right to dictate terms of service to include acceptable use guidelines prohibiting hate speech. Where I disagree is the assertion that ISPs have a moral obligation to excercise those rights. The free speech model is preferable. I also disagree with the metaphor comparing an ISP to a media outlet like CNN. The telephone company is a more apt comparison. If I commit a crime using my phone, no one threatens to drag Southwestern Bell into court, yet somehow Real/Time Systems, my ISP, would be. David Smith * dp : 304-6308 * Ask me about * * fighting censorship President, EFF-Austin * * of the Internet Board of Directors, CTCLU * * ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 Jan 1996 06:39:50 -0800 (PST) From: steve@AWWWSOME.COM(M. Steven McClanahan) Subject: File 4--CompuServe and "pornography" >Thomas Wulfing, a spokesman at the German Embassy, London, told > d.Comm, "There have been no comments on the situation from the German > national or the Bavarian governments. My latest information is that it > was the Munich prosecutor who authorised this action. It's good that > we clarify this thing. As far as I know the prosecutor has taken up > that issue. He wants a way of banning the free access to pornography > on the Internet and within that plan has informed CIS. And CIS as far > as I know has agreed because it has no interest whatsoever in > promoting pornography." This is, as is much of the material surrounding this controversy, self-aggrandinzing rhetoric. Although, the seeming alliance between CIS management and the Bavarian prosecutor is rather interesting. CompuServe is not interested in promoting pornography _from which it does not profit directly_. Look in many of the graphics forums and you will see things that would make Senator Exon's blood boil, (although I imagine that wouldn't be too hard). When it comes to selling things in the "Electronic Mall," and their classifieds, CompuServe seems to have lost sight of their desire not to promote pornography. The German's may being trying to save the world, but, as always, CIS is trying to keep you buying from their advertisers, instead of from the Internet. Prior to becoming and ISP, I shopped three times a week in CompuServe's Electronic Mall. Now, with the web and T1 accesss, why should I both to put up with CompuServe's "Electronic Mall," which pales in comparison to the WWW. The real issue, as I see it, is how much money CompuServe can make. Not that they have a particular concern for, or against, pornography and/or being prosecuted for distributing it. The traditional online services are dinosaurs sinking the proverbial ooze of the swamp and will do anything to survive, even through their time is long since past. > > For the service provider, the whole process of providing access is > becoming far too complex. The service provider is simply the > messenger, not the provider of content, and as such there is no reason > why the messenger should be shot. As an ISP, I say "here, here" to that. If it is true that those you don't remember history are doomed to repeat it, then it is important to remember that in 1913, at a beer hall in Munich, Bavaria, a German fascist totalitarian regime was born. It is also interesting to note that Adolf Hitler spent less than 2 years locked up in a castle, (which was supposedly a "prison"), for attempting to overthrow the duly constituted, government, because he, (an Austrian, no less), didn't like the terms of the Treaty of Versailles the government was enforcing. One wonders how long the Germans will put so-called "cyber-criminals" in jail for distributing a photograph of a naked person, (even if that person isn't extremely seditious). /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/ M. STEVEN McCLANAHAN, MICP aWWWsome NET SERVICES ( "YOUR BUSINESS ON-RAMP TO THE INTERNET" Internet Presence, Technical Support & Training, Computer Consulting via: MEDLaw Consulting & Silicon Alchemy Computer Systems UNLTD ( (pending) (916) 226-WEBB (voice) / (916) 226-9300 (fax) /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/ Entire contents of message, copyright 1995, M. Steven McClanahan, MICP customers who use its Internet service to persistently send unsolicited electronic mail for mass distribution - a practice called spamming in Internet slang. The prohibitions include sending e-mail to more than 25 users if complaints are received, posting articles to Usenet or newsgroups that fall outside their subject charter, and posting an identical article or advertisement to multiple Usenet or newsgroups. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Jan 1996 22:49:20 -0600 (CST) From: David Smith Subject: FIle 6--Re: Letter from Simon Wiesenthal Center to ISPs Here is the letter that one ISP wrote in response to Rabbi Cooper's request to deny service to people who engage in hate speech. David Smith * dp : 304-6308 * Ask me about * * fighting censorship President, EFF-Austin * * of the Internet Board of Directors, CTCLU * * ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date--Thu, 18 Jan 1996 09:48:33 -0900 From--Sky Dayton David, Follows is our letter to the SWC. I didn't have a chance to post it to the newsgroup. The noise/bandwidth ratio there looks really bad, and it'll probably just get drowned out. Sky -- Rabbi Abraham Cooper Simon Wiesenthal Center 9760 West Pico Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90035-4792 Dear Rabbi Cooper: Thank you for your letter of January 9th. I though I would take the opportunity to respond to your concerns directly. EarthLink Network views the Internet as an incredible new communications medium, with the potential of creating a global community in a way never before seen. Through a heightened interaction among peoples, we hope the Internet will help to help break down geographic, economic, political, religious and other barriers. On the Internet, there is no "people over there". On the Internet, everyone is right here. The Internet today reflects our society in every way. All ends of the spectrum utilize it to communicate their message. Thus, it's no surprise to find hate groups on the Internet. The Internet is a perfect reflection of information available in the analog world. While we personally abhor discrimination and bigotry based on sex, race, creed or any other reason, we will not censor communications sent through our network. Our subscriber agreement requires legal use, but our policing stops there. As a principle, Internet access companies are not concerned with the qualities of content that travel over their networks. We are "common carriers" of information. Content providers such as America Online and Compuserve are a different story. They manufacture and control information. We merely route information, in the form of bits, to people who use our service. Online services are analogous to newspapers and magazines. Internet access companies are analogous to postal services and phone companies. For as long as we provide access, EarthLink Network will work to ensure the legal and free use of the Internet. I urge you to take part in this activism. But I caution you that the Internet will reject any form of censorship. Rather than try to enforce a code as you propose, I suggest you let the Internet community make its own judgment about content. You may be surprised at what you find. Sincerely, Sky Dayton CEO & Chairman -- Sky Dayton, CEO | Voice: 213-644-9500 EarthLink Network, Inc. | Fax: 213-644-9510 | 3171 Los Feliz Blvd. | Los Angeles, CA 90039 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Jan 1996 16:54:49 -0500 From: Subject: File 7--ACLU Cyber-Liberties Update 1/10/96 ---------------------------------------------------------------- January 10, 1996 ACLU CYBER-LIBERTIES UPDATE A bi-weekly e-zine on cyber-liberties cases and controversies at the state and federal level. ---------------------------------------------------------------- IN THIS ISSUE: * The Fourth Horseman of the Internet -- Hate Mongers -- Rears Its Ugly Head Again * German News Magazine "Der Spiegel" Tells the Real Story About CompuServe's Ban of Sex-Related Newsgroups * Virginia Legislature Considers Strict Labeling Requirements for Online Content * ACLU of Washington Settles Internet Parody Case; Student Gets Second Chance at National Merit Scholarship * Where Oh Where is the Telco Bill? * ACLU Speaks on Cyber-Liberties ---------------------------------------------------------------- STATE PAGE (Legislation/Agency/Court Cases) ---------------------------------------------------------------- * The Fourth Horseman of the Internet -- Hate Mongers -- Rears Its Ugly Head Again Just in case the Pornographers, Hackers, and Pedophiles didn't scare you away from the Internet, the Simon Wiesenthal Center raised another spectre for you to fear -- the Neo-Nazis and other Hateful Undesirables on the Net. The Simon Wiesenthal Center has been trying for almost two years to rid the Internet of hate speech, and one of their techniques is commendable and appropriate -- the use of more speech to expose and humiliate these intolerant groups. The Center has an excellent web page that tracks the online activities of hate groups and urges online users to post other accounts of online hate. See Unfortunately, rather than simply exercising their own First Amendment right to protest such groups, the Center has waged an all-out war to deny such groups of their equivalent free speech rights. The war has fueled an already hysterical rush by both private business and government to censor the Net unnecessarily. It is particularly troublesome that an organization like the Wiesenthal Center that is dedicated to promoting tolerance would seek to erode the liberty most necessary for a free and tolerant society -- free speech. In August 1994, the Wiesenthal Center waged its first campaign by presenting a dossier to the Federal Communications Commission that documented hate speech on online networks. (While the Center has never attempted to define just what it means by "hate speech," it appears to be referring primarily to anti-black, anti-gay and anti-Semitic speech.) The FCC turned the dossier over to the U.S. Justice Department, who knows better than to pursue any hate groups on the basis of their speech alone. (See US News and World Report, 9/8/94.) In fact, when the Senate subcommittee on terrorism held hearings in May 1995 on the use of online services by terrorist and anti-government groups, DOJ's Deputy Assistant Attorney General Robert Litt testified that the government must be careful not to "trade off the guarantees of the Bill of Rights in order to uphold our duty to ensure domestic tranquillity." See "Hate Speech on Internet Called Protected by Constitution," New York Times, 5/12/95. Shortly after the Oklahoma City bombing, the Wiesenthal Center was again successful in fueling the mainstream press hysteria about hate groups organizing through online media. See, e.g., "The Internet: Far-Right Groups Get Mainstream Access," San Francisco Chronicle, 4/22/95. Yet while no evidence ever conclusively linked the Internet with the plotting of the Oklahoma bombing, the press ignored the incredible array of online resources that were devoted to assisting citizens in the aftermath of the tragedy. Within hours after the bombing, Internet users could find up-to-date information about the rescue effort, learn how to send money or provide other assistance to victims and their families, and provide tips in the search for suspects. This week, the Wiesenthal Center launched the latest weapon in its battle to rid online networks of hate groups -- it issued a plea to Internet Service Providers to pledge "to refuse or terminate service to any individual or group that exploits our services to promote an agenda of hate or violence." See "Group Urges an Internet Ban on Hate Groups' Messages," New York Times, 1/10/96. The Center's letter shows both a lack of understanding of online technology and a lack of respect for a truly democratic communications medium. In both the New York Times story and in a radio talk show debate with the ACLU's Ann Beeson, Rabbi Abraham Cooper, Associate Dean of the Center, suggested that it wasn't targeting online discussion forums like Usenet, but rather was targeting the Internet's World Wide Web. That would imply that a service provider who adopted the code of ethics would have to censor a message posted to a hate group's web page but could let slide the same message if posted to a Usenet newsgroup -- a nonsensical result. The Rabbi's rationale for applying different standards to Usenet and the Web was that individuals "don't have a chance to respond to hate speech on the Web." That is simply incorrect -- almost all web pages include e-mail addresses that allow anyone who comes across the site to communicate with the site's creators. The distinction also ignores the fact that most online users initially encounter particular web sites by using search engines like Yahoo. Any search for "White Supremacy" or "Aryan Nation" brings up not only those sites that support such ideas, but also many sites (including the Simon Wiesenthal web page!) that denounce hate speech and provide information on how to oppose hate groups. The Wiesenthal Center's answer to hate speech gives no credit to the growing number of Internet sites created specifically to track and expose hate groups. For example, "The Hate Page of the Week" provides a link to a different hate group each week and encourages users to flame the site. See "The Net Hate Page" also provides links to hateful web sites, tracks the activities of hate groups, and discusses ways to fight them. See The Wiesenthal Center has also suggested that it is merely asking online providers to act like other "publishers" of information, like newspapers and radio broadcasters, who traditionally refuse to provide a platform for hate speech. But that's a bad idea for several reasons. First, as Prodigy and other large commercial providers know, choosing to edit online information is a two-edged sword that can make online providers liable for the libelous acts of its users. See _Stratton-Oakmont Inc. v. Prodigy Services Co._, No. 31063/94 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., 5/24/95). Second, many small Internet Service Providers just don't have the resources to monitor all the web sites housed on their systems. Finally, and most importantly, service providers have already proved woefully inept at determining just what speech is "offensive" -- whether it is sexually explicit or hateful. A few examples include America Online's hilarious censorship of gay video titles (see Cyber-Liberties Update 12/6/95), CompuServe's ban of newsgroups on disability and gay issues in an effort to satisfy a German prosecutor (see article later in this issue), and AOL's short-lived screening of the word "breast" from online educational materials on breast cancer. Because online providers are not government entities, there is currently no constitutional remedy against online providers who decide to censor. But it is in the providers' own best interest _not_ to censor but rather to follow Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis' advice regarding speech that offends: "[T]he remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence." _Whitney v. California_, 274 U.S. 357, 377 (1927). The ACLU calls on all service providers to reject the Wiesenthal Center's code of ethics for online hate speech. We urge all online users to write to their service providers and urge them to respect their free speech right to respond openly and publicly to online speech that is offensive or disagreeable. A copy of the letter that the Wiesenthal Center sent to hundreds of Internet service providers is available on their web site at ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Jan 1996 00:58:37 +0100 (GMT+0100) From: Steffan Henke Subject: File 8--Re: Cu Digest, #8.01 - CI$ case Hello, just a quick reply to the CI$ case: > One way to prevent such things from happening again is to make sure that > this censorship is not in the economic best interest of Compuserve, and > Germany. If they want to interfere with First Amendment rights, then we > should exercise our First Amendment rights to not communicate with them. Who is "them" in that case ? Germans ? All the CI$ users ? > then do not accept their standards. If you are a Compuserve subscriber > then cancel your account. That decision would make sense, indeed. But other providers (AOL, eg. do also censor) > Germany and Compuserve have chosen to selectively cut themselves off > from the rest of the internet community, let's make it a complete These are very bad prejudices. I'm German, but I have not chosen to cut myself off from the rest of the internet community. Not at all. On the contrary, we have many progressive powers who are strongly against censorship. I count myself as one of these. > separation. Do not send any E-mail to Compuserve or Germany. Do not > reply to any newsgroup posts, and do not access any of their web pages. What about the case when Italian Fido BBS were raided by the Italian police ? What do you suggest ? Ignore all the Italian sysops and BBS ? BTW, my homepage is Too sad you won't have a look at it. But I'll never know because you'll never answer this email. YOU stop communication, not German users who are strongly against censorship. > If you receive E-mail, then simply ignore it, send a copy of this > letter, or your own explanation that you will no longer use a system Are you really honestly suggesting this ? > that censorship of the 'net is not acceptable and will only succeed in > destroying the 'net. That is true indeed. > The World Wide Web should allow the exchange of any ideas around the > world. It should not be limited to the minimum acceptable ideas that You're drifting away from the CI$ case. What does the WWW have to do with the censorship of newsgroups ? Anyway, happy new year to CUD... 1996 does not start that good. Steffan ... Our continuing mission: To seek out knowledge of C, to explore strange UNIX commands, and to boldly code where no one has man page 4. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Jan 1996 14:01:15 -0600 (CST) From: Carlton Hogan Subject: File 10--EFF 96 Pioneer Awards - nominations due Feb. 15 THE FIFTH ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL EFF PIONEER AWARDS: CALL FOR NOMINATIONS Deadline: February 15, 1996 In every field of human endeavor,there are those dedicated to expanding knowledge,freedom,efficiency and utility. Along the electronic frontier, this is especially true. To recognize this, the Electronic Frontier Foundation established the Pioneer Awards for deserving individuals and organizations. The Pioneer Awards are international and nominations are open to all. In March of 1992, the first EFF Pioneer Awards were given in Washington D.C. The winners were: Douglas C. Engelbart, Robert Kahn, Jim Warren, Tom Jennings, and Andrzej Smereczynski. The 1993 Pioneer Award recipients were Paul Baran, Vinton Cerf, Ward Christensen, Dave Hughes and the USENET software developers, represented by the software's originators Tom Truscott and Jim Ellis. The 1994 Pioneer Award winners were Ivan Sutherland, Whitfield Diffie and Martin Hellman, Murray Turoff and Starr Roxanne Hiltz, Lee Felsenstein, Bill Atkinson, and the WELL. The 1995 Pioneer Award winners were Philip Zimmermann, Anita Borg, and Willis Ware. The Fifth Annual Pioneer Awards will be given in Boston, Massachusetts, at the 6th Conference on Computers, Freedom, and Privacy in March of 1996. All valid nominations will be reviewed by a panel of judges chosen for their knowledge of computer-based communications and the technical, legal, and social issues involved in computer technology and computer communications. There are no specific categories for the Pioneer Awards, but the following guidelines apply: 1) The nominees must have made a substantial contribution to the health, growth, accessibility, or freedom of computer-based communications. 2) The contribution may be technical, social, economic or cultural. 3) Nominations may be of individuals, systems, or organizations in the private or public sectors. 4) Nominations are open to all, and you may nominate more than one recipient. You may nominate yourself or your organization. 5) All nominations, to be valid, must contain your reasons, however brief, for nominating the individual or organization, along with a means of contacting the nominee, and your own contact number. Anonymous nominations will be allowed, but we prefer to be able to contact the nominating parties in the event that we need more information.. 6) Every person or organization, with the single exception of EFF staff members, are eligible for Pioneer Awards. 7) Persons or representatives of organizations receiving a Pioneer Award will be invited to attend the ceremony at the Foundation's expense. You may nominate as many as you wish, but please use one form per nomination. You may return the forms to us via email to You may mail them to us at: Pioneer Awards c/o Mike Godwin 2163-A North Valley St. Berkeley, CA 94702 Just tell us the name of the nominee, the phone number or email address at which the nominee can be reached, and, most important, why you feel the nominee deserves the award. You may attach supporting documentation. Please include your own name, address, and phone number. We're looking for the Pioneers of the Electronic Frontier that have made and are making a difference. Thanks for helping us find them, The Electronic Frontier Foundation -------EFF Pioneer Awards Nomination Form------ Please return to the Electronic Frontier Foundation the following information about your nominee for the Pioneer Awards: Nominee's name: Title: Company/Organization: Contact number or email address: Reason for nomination: Your name and contact information: Extra documentation attached: DEADLINE: ALL NOMINATIONS MUST BE RECEIVED BY THE ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION BY MIDNIGHT, EASTERN STANDARD TIME U.S., February 15, 1996. ------------------------------ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Dec 1995 22:51:01 CDT From: CuD Moderators Subject: File 11--Cu Digest Header Info (unchanged since 16 Dec, 1995) 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 post with this in the "Subject:: line: SUBSCRIBE CU-DIGEST Send the message to: DO NOT SEND SUBSCRIPTIONS TO THE MODERATORS. 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 CU-DIGEST Send it to CU-DIGEST-REQUEST@WEBER.UCSD.EDU (NOTE: The address you unsub must correspond to your From: line) Issues of CuD can also be found in the Usenet news group; on CompuServe in DL0 and DL4 of the IBMBBS SIG, DL1 of LAWSIG, and DL1 of TELECOM; on GEnie in the PF*NPC RT libraries and in the VIRUS/SECURITY library; from America Online in the PC Telecom forum under "computing newsletters;" On Delphi in the General Discussion database of the Internet SIG; on RIPCO BBS (312) 528-5020 (and via Ripco on internet); and on Rune Stone BBS (IIRGWHQ) (203) 832-8441. CuD is also available via Fidonet File Request from 1:11/70; unlisted nodes and points welcome. EUROPE: In BELGIUM: Virtual Access BBS: +32-69-844-019 (ringdown) Brussels: STRATOMIC BBS +32-2-5383119 2:291/ In ITALY: ZERO! BBS: +39-11-6507540 In LUXEMBOURG: ComNet BBS: +352-466893 UNITED STATES: ( in /pub/CuD/ ( in /pub/Publications/CuD/ ( in /pub/eff/cud/ in /src/wuarchive/doc/EFF/Publications/CuD/ in /doc/EFF/Publications/CuD/ EUROPE: in pub/doc/cud/ (Finland) in pub/cud/ (United Kingdom) The most recent issues of CuD can be obtained from the Cu Digest WWW site at: URL: 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 #8.07 ************************************


E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank