Date: Mon, 15 Jun 92 17:59:56 EST
Errors-To: Comp-privacy Error Handler <comp-privacy-request@PICA.ARMY.MIL>
From: Computer Privacy Digest Moderator <comp-privacy@PICA.ARMY.MIL>
To: Comp-privacy@PICA.ARMY.MIL
Subject: Computer Privacy Digest V1#049
Computer Privacy Digest Mon, 15 Jun 92 Volume 1 : Issue: 049
Today's Topics: Moderator: Dennis G. Rears
Re: Privacy and blood
Re: Another side of privacy
Re: Concerns About New Phone Service
Re: Drivers Licenses w/photos and SSNs
Fundamentals of a Legal System
Re: is personal privacy overrated ?
Re: is personal privacy overrated ?
Is there an archive for privacy materials?
Re: Photo-Credit Cards
The Computer Privacy Digest is a forum for discussion on the
effect of technology on privacy. The digest is moderated and
gatewayed into the USENET newsgroup comp.society.privacy
(Moderated). Submissions should be sent to
comp-privacy@pica.army.mil and administrative requests to
comp-privacy-request@pica.army.mil.
Back issues are available via anonymous ftp on ftp.pica.army.mil
[129.139.160.200].
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: hibbert@xanadu.com (Chris Hibbert)
Subject: Re: Privacy and blood
Organization: Xanadu Operating Company
References: <comp-privacy1.48.4@pica.army.mil>
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 92 20:06:13 GMT
G. Wolfe Woodbury writes:
>The risk to privacy here is that those who have opinions and
lifestyles
>that are less tolerated than others are perceived as having less of a
>right to privacy than others.
Note that this really means that noone gets any privacy!
"WE need to be able to monitor everyone's behavior in order to know
who we should expose to public ridicule. Don't worry if you haven't
done anything wrong. We only reveal information about people who
aren't living the way we think they should. YOU don't have anything
to hide, do you?"
Chris
--
hibbert@xanadu.com AMIX: CHibbert
uunet!xanadu!hibbert MCIMail: CHibbert
------------------------------
From: bear@tigger.cs.Colorado.EDU (Bear Giles)
Subject: Re: Another side of privacy
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1992 02:26:55 GMT
I don't think the example you give qualifies as 'privacy.'
Privacy is simply restricting the level of interaction to a level
acceptable to all parties involved. To use the example of my magazine
publisher friend, he is more than willing to accept written correspondence
but does not wish to have a (possibly) hostile stranger greet him as he
returns home from work. At the same time, he doesn't harass people with
subscription requests (like _Byte_ did to me for several years).
Privacy is _not_ hiding from creditors or others with a legitimate
interest in contacting you.
I can legitimately use a fake name when subscribing to a magazine
since the only 'level of interaction' I want is to receive periodic
copies of the magazine, nothing more. I _cannot_ legitimately use
a fake name when ordering a credit card because they have their own
legitimate interest in finding me to ensure payment.
Calling a company running from its responsibility an example of
privacy run amok breaks the second rule. It is an example of _abuse_
of the privacy laws, not an example of excessive 'privacy.'
(Also, it illustrates how private individuals are becoming second-
class citizens. XYZ company can request information on Joe Smith
without explanation (and I have a credit report which clearly shows
inquiries made without my knowledge or consent) but individuals do
not have reciprocal rights, even in clearly justified circumstances).
Bear Giles
bear@fsl.noaa.gov
------------------------------
From: Barry Margolin <barmar@think.com>
Subject: Re: Concerns About New Phone Service
Date: 12 Jun 92 22:37:26 GMT
In article <comp-privacy1.48.1@pica.army.mil> NIEBUHR@bnlcl6.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr, BNL CCD, 516-282-3093) writes:
>In today's {Newsday} there's an article about a concern from the head of the
>State Consumer Protection Board regarding Call Return. The intro goes into
>a scenario where the phone is ringing while the homeowner is bringing in a
>bag or bags of groceries and misses the call (the radio ad is even better
>with the sound of breaking glass).
>
>This scenario was provided by a psychologist who described another scene
>that affected him where he called a "highly disturbed individual, a convicted
>felon" calling him back via *69 after the psychologist had called him.
>
>I quote here: "To my astonishment, this individual was on the line ... He
>was able to access my private unlisted phone in my home by pressing a code
>furnished by ... the telephone company."
I don't understand the psychologist's concern. He wanted to talk to th
disturbed individual, and succeeded. Why is he now bothered that "this
individual was on the line"?
It's not the case that the disturbed individual now knows the doctor's home
phone number (that's a concern with Caller ID, which is why people are
calling for the ability to prevent your number from being delivered) and
can call him night and day. He can only call the doctor right after the
failed call. (Does the Call Return information ever time out? Perhaps it
should.)
--
Barry Margolin
System Manager, Thinking Machines Corp.
barmar@think.com {uunet,harvard}!think!barmar
------------------------------
From: "Life..." <gberigan@cse.unl.edu>
Subject: Re: Drivers Licenses w/photos and SSNs
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1992 03:24:47 GMT
So far, I don't have my SSN on my driver's licence. When I got mine
updated (4/10/91) it changed slightly. They gave me the same number in
the License No. box, except that the hyphen I had was replaced with a
pair of zeros. That changes it from an Alpha-2digit-hyphen-4digit
number to an Alpha-8digit number.
What I noticed was the first letter was also the first letter of my
first name, then the two digits which is the county number where I got
my first licence, and then an xyxy digit sequence, which also happens to
match the pattern of the last 4 digits of my SSN, but not the same
numbers.
However, the total length of the lic.# is now the same as a SSN,
possibly in forseeing the use of SSN as lic.#. I don't drive but
occasionally, when necessary. I mainly use it as a photo I.D.,
especially as the other photo I.D. I have is my University I.D., which
_does_ include my SSN, plus a prefixed letter and suffixed 3 digits.
From the last time I saw an I.D. booth for new students, I looked at the
form you fill in. The 9 boxes to fill in with digits doesn't say
anything about it being your SSN. It looks like it would be easy for me
to go to a booth, fill in a different number, and get a new I.D. to
replace the one I have.
Nebraska has another I.D. that one can get, less cost (free? dunno),
that businesses are obligated to accept in lieu of a driver's licence.
I don't know if they require SSN on that one, or indeed on the driver's
licence yet, although the change in lic.# leads me to that conclusion.
I don't know if this alternate I.D. is available in other states.
--
/// ____ \\\ | CAUTION:
| |/ / \ \| | | Avoid eye contact. In case of contact, flush
\\_|\____/|_// | mind for 15 minutes. See a psychiatrist if
\_)\\/ | irritation persists. Not to be taken
gberigan `-' cse.unl.edu | seriously. Keep out of sight of children.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1992 17:07:56 GMT
From: Mark P. Neely <NEELY_MP@darwin.ntu.edu.au>
Subject: Fundamentals of a Legal System
I came across an article which I thought Usenet readers (especially those in
the US) might find of interest!
It is extracted from the August 1989 edition of _Australian Law News_, with the
quotes taken from an article printed on pp13-15. The article is based on a
speech given by US Supreme Court Justice Anthony M. Kennedy:
Title: Lawyers must Understand Fundamentals of the Law, Judge Says.
The essense of the speech was Justice Kennedy urging lawyers to look beyong the
more immediate aspects of delivering legal services to understand and protect
the philosophical and ethical precepts on which the law rests.
To quote:
"Justice Kennedy said the four elements on which the law and a legal system
rested were:
. that government rested on the consent of the people
. that government protected a core of personal rights - today called human
rights
. that there must be an enduring structure which guaranteed the first two
elements
. that there be an obligation on each citizen to obey the law and to transmit
the rule of law to a subsequent generation.
"Justice Kennedy outlined the historical background to the concept of rule by
consent and said: 'The consent of which we speak is a very ancient one. It is a
consent to a system, it is a consent to a social order.'
He continued: "It does not derive from any contract that was created at some
particular historic time; it does not involve a contract at all, because in
American constitutional theory and in constitutional theories of most western
democracies, government does not exist as a party to make a contract with the
people; it is created by the people".
"So this consent is fundamental and it may not be withdrawn unless the
Government is not preserving the other elements of the rule of law...All of us
can identify laws that we dislike. This does not give us the right to withdraw
consent".
Kennedy discussed several truisms as he saw them surrounding the upholding of
the rule of law, one of which was that personal rights must be guaranteed
by the Government
He notes that it is dangerous for any one person or generation to compile an
exhaustive list of human rights. But nevertheless, the basics are as follows:
(a) There must be, at a minimum, protection for the rights of expression, of
conscience, of speech and belief, in all their forms.
(b) There must be freedom from arbitrary and evasive physical restraint by the
Government
(c) There must be freedom from classification based on race, creed,
colour, sex, national origin and religion
(d) There must be the right to own and acquire property.
He then goes on to comment that the Constitution of the United States was
written in the same style - it talks about life liberty and property.
Any comments?
------------------------------
From: bear@tigger.cs.Colorado.EDU (Bear Giles)
Subject: Re: is personal privacy overrated ?
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1992 01:57:01 GMT
Someone asked for clarification, and return e-mail bounced....
There is a form you can fill out to request a P.O. Box holder's name
and street address. I have heard it is supposed to only be used for
P.O. Boxes used for business purposes, but my friend said he checked
into it and discovered it could be used for personal boxes as well.
(He falls under the 'business' category anyway).
If you stop and think about it, this makes sense. It's very hard
to file legal papers on a P.O. Box -- their is a huge potential for
fraud here.
BTW, I have used this form when responding to help-wanted ad's in
the paper. I do _not_ like sending my resume to a POB without a
company name or phone number.
There is another form for requesting the last-known-(mailing)-address
of _anyone_. I suspect they require a reasonable starting address
(e.g., city of residence within last 12-18 months), but they'll
track down the forwarding addresses.
Bear Giles
bear@fsl.noaa.gov
[Moderator's Note: I have had a PO Box (P.O Box 210, Wharton, NJ 07885)
for about 6 years. I have also moved 5 times in that time period. I
have never notified the Post Office of my change of address. Moral of
story is that you can count on the Post Office having a good street
address for a Box holder. _Dennis ]
------------------------------
From: John Artz <jartz@bassoon.mitre.org>
Subject: Re: is personal privacy overrated ?
Reply-To: jartz@mitre.org
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1992 12:38:16 GMT
In article <comp-privacy1.45.4@pica.army.mil>, pw@panix.com (Paul Wallich) writes:
[stuff deleted here]
|> Just what _are_ the benefits to individuals of the unrestricted flow
|> of information about them?
Clearly that is the heart of the issue. I think there are many benefits to the
individual of unrestricted information flows. I will give one example and then
generalize the point I am trying to make.
If I join a grocery store shoppers club that collects data on all my purchases,
I might be reluctant to have that information dissemminated because it may
reflect badly on me or I might be damaged in some way. For example if I
buy two bottles of wine every day and every girlie magazine on the shelf,
I might be reluctant to have that information shared with my friends, neighbors,
and prospective employers. Clearly I would fear being exposed as a drunken
pervert, etc, etc. However, I claim that it is restricted information flows that
leads to this problem. If everybody's purchases were know, we might find
out that 20 million people have purchasing habits just like mine. If I am in
the company of 20 million other people I might be less afraid of being
exposed.
My point here is that lack of information leads to supposition, inuendo (sp?),
even superstition and prejudice. We always see people on the television
comming forward to announce their problems to the world in case somebody
else is in a similar situation. Not knowing about other people leads us to feel
isolated and often unintegrated into the fabric of society. Thus, I believe
that free flowing information does provide potentially large benefits to
the individual.
Before anyone dismisses this as laize faire lunacy, let me add that I initially
compared free flowing information as a philosophical goal to the
individual's right to vote. Without boring you with the history of the
right to vote, let me say that it has not come easily to everyone and
still many people in our society don't have the right to vote (young people
and felons come to mind). This is a philosophical direction not a social
imperative that should be adopted or rejected in the next two weeks.
John M. Artz, Ph.D.
jartz@mitre.org
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
A crisis is just the end of an illusion. -- Gerald Weinberg
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
------------------------------
From: Michael Hart <mhart@blackjack.dt.navy.mil>
Subject: Is there an archive for privacy materials?
Date: 15 Jun 92 16:30:48 GMT
Distribution: na
I'd like to know if there is an archive for privacy/computer
related materials available, and if so, it's name/IP address?
thanx
[Moderator's Note: Yes. It is updated about every month. The name of
the machine is ftp.pica.army.mil [129.139.160.200]. FTP in with a
username of anonymous and password=your_email_address. CD into
pub/privacy. This directory also contains the old telecom-privacy
digests. I have just updated it. _Dennis ]
--
| Michael G. Hart mhart@blackjack.dt.navy.mil |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------|
| You think _I_ speak for the government or the navy? HAH! |
| Aviation, computers, quality improvement, Northern Exposure, money |
------------------------------
From: "Jolly C. Pancakes" <jcp@islay.dco.dec.com>
Subject: Re: Photo-Credit Cards
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1992 02:18:24 GMT
In article <comp-privacy1.47.6@pica.army.mil> ranck@vtvm1.cc.vt.edu (Wm. L. Ranck) writes:
>Well, they probably figure that it will cut down on card fraud. People
>who deal in stolen cards won't be able to get as much out of a card with
>the owner's picture on it. Of course this sort of depends on how hard
>it will be to remove/replace the picture on the card.
Having the picture on the card might not mean a thing, either.
We had a case here recently where a field service engineer from HP was
murdered in a downtown parking garage by a couple of fine youths,
who then high-tailed it to the DMV where an accomplice (read:
girlfriend) issued a new license in the murdered man's name - reporting
his as "lost". The murderer was actually stopped by state police for
speeding the next day and no one questioned why a 17 yr old black guy's
picture was on the license of a man described as white and 35 yrs old,
with a Lithuanian name.
(The saddest thing is that the engineer might have survived if he had
had a car with a trunk, instead of the typical field service station
wagon with a back end full of equipment. The same gang grabbed two other
guys, including a doctor from Hopkins and stuffed them in their trunks.)
--
jcpatilla jcp@islay.dco.dec.com
My otter is sleek and fat, he wears a bowler hat. His tailor in Savile
Row can fit him with style. He likes champagne and eels, keeps them in
wicker creels - he's THE finest fellow you have seen in a while!
------------------------------
End of Computer Privacy Digest V1 #049
******************************