Date: Tue, 04 Aug 92 11:45:42 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#069
Computer Privacy Digest Tue, 04 Aug 92 Volume 1 : Issue: 069
Today's Topics: Moderator: Dennis G. Rears
Computer Privacy Digest V1#068
Re: Cellular phone scanners
Re: Cellular phone scanners
SSNs and Southern California
police files
Interesting Scientific American article
Re: Cellular phone scanners
Re: Emerging Privacy Issues in Libraries
Re: IRS: ssn for my kids ?
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].
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 92 18:21:57 EDT
From: Glen Foster <gfoster@darpa.mil>
Subject: Computer Privacy Digest V1#068
In Computer Privacy Digest, Volume 1 : Issue: 068, Willis H. Ware
<willis@iris.rand.org> says, "...Virginia makes it illegal to OWN,
much less operate, a radar detector..."
This is no longer true and has not been for at least five years. This
statute was challenged and thrown out (I do not remember on what
basis).
Unfortunately it happened when the House of Delegates was in session
and radar detectors were declared "illegal equipment" within a couple
of weeks. Of course it is illegal to operate a vehicle upon which
illegal equipment is mounted but the police no longer confiscate your
fuzz buster when they find one in your car and they have to be able to
prove that it was mounted on your car rather than simply being
transported. (Powered up counts as mounted, even battery powered with
no connection to the car.) In fact, the standard police procedure is
to not even "hold it for evidence until trial" and just take down the
serial number instead. A side effect: the fine for "possession of a
radar detector" was $25 under the old law. "Illegal equipment" fines
range from $100 to $250, not much solace for leadfoots!
Glen Foster
------------------------------
From: "D. K. Fields" <dkf8117@tamsun.tamu.edu>
Subject: Re: Cellular phone scanners
Date: 31 Jul 1992 11:28:00 -0500
Organization: Texas A&M University, College Station
It is illegal to listen to cellular conversations. The equipment
necessary to do so is LEGAL. Many mfg have blocked out cellular, just to
avoid any potential problems.
--
Duane Fields Friends don't Work# (409) 845-6904
Box 1315 let friends use Home# (409) 847-6760
College Station, Tx 77841 MS-DOS. dkf8117@tamsun.tamu.edu
------------------------------
From: RICHARD HOFFBECK <plains!moose.cccs.umn.edu!rwh@uunet.uu.net>
Subject: Re: Cellular phone scanners
Reply-To: plains!moose.cccs.umn.edu!rwh@uunet.uu.net
Organization: Colon Cancer Control Study, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 17:02:00 GMT
In article <comp-privacy1.68.1@pica.army.mil>, willis@iris.rand.org (Willis H. Ware) writes:
> RE: Mark Bell <idela!bell@uunet.uu.net>
>
> >>Cellular phone scanners: Are they illegal? I don't believe so. One
> >>can buy a nice Bearcat scanner from DAK in Canoga Park , California,
> >>for a little over $200. They put a message in the box that it is
> >>"ILLEGAL to use the scanner over the range of 845-860 MhZ according
> >>to Congressional law..."
>
> Yes, I know about DAK, its catalog, the publisher's story about tuning
> into illicit conversation [at one time advertising copy said that he had
> stumbled onto a call-girl ring operating via cellulars], and the slip in
> the box.
1. It is not illegal to own a radio that receives the cellular frequencies.
In fact, tunable TVs that cover UHF channels 76-83 will do quite nicely
since this is the frequency range (869 MHz - 894 MHz) where the cellular
service came from originally.
2. If you are looking for out of the box cellular coverage, try ICOM R1,
ICOM 2SRA, ICOM 7000/7100 ICOM R-100, ICOM 24AT, AOR AR-1000, BEARCAT 210,
and so on. Relatively easy mods are available for the BEARCAT 200/205 XLT,
Radio Shack PRO-34/37, Radio Shack 2004/2005/2006.
3. The Communciations Act of 1934 makes it a crime to disclose what you hear
on non-commercial frequencies.
The ECPA makes it illegal to produce a receiver for the SOLE purpose of
intercepting cellular calls, and makes it illegal to listen to cellular
conversations. However, the FBI has basically said that they have better
things to do than round up scanner buffs unless there is a significant
sum of money changing hands.
Recently, the FCC funding legislation had a provision requiring the FCC
to develop rules that would deny type acceptance for receivers capable of
receiving cellular frequencies, or being easy modified to do the same. It
did not make it illegal to own a receiver but would effectively limit
the stock to what was in place when the rules take effect. Again the
FCC has pretty much said that they have bigger fish to fry. I recently
heard that some similar Congressional requirements imposed on EPA during
passed during the Carter have yet to make their way through the rule
making process, i.e. I won't lose any sleep over the matter.
administration
> If anyone can lay hands on the exact law, we could have a look.
If someone feels like logging on to CI$, there is a copy in one of the
libraries in the HAMNET forum. Search for the keyword ECPA.
--rick
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
| Richard Hoffbeck INTERNET: rwh@moose.cccs.umn.edu |
| Colon Cancer Control Study ATT : (612) 627-4151 |
| University of Minnesota CIS : 72406,521 |
| Minneapolis, MN 55455 |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 92 16:54:59 -0400
From: Susanna Elaine Johnson <sej3e@kelvin.seas.virginia.edu>
Subject: SSNs and Southern California
The plot thickens. I was required to give my SSN to PURCHASE
(with cash) a television, and there was much wailing and gnashing
of teeth when I explained that, as a foreign national, I do not
have one.
I also very nearly went to jail last week when I tried to use a
Chevron CANADA card at a Chevron USA gas bar.
I have noticed that in SC it has to be exactly by the book, no
exceptions, or the transaction is disallowed. I am thinking of
writing a monogtaph on the subject, entitled "Ritual-Taboo
Behaviour in a Technological Society". The above does not appear
to be true in other parts of the US.
Anna Johnson (sej3e@virginia.edu)
------------------------------
From: Nigel Allen <nigel.allen@canrem.com>
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 20:00:00 -0400
Subject: police files
New York Awarded Funds to Improve Criminal History Records
To: State and City Desks
Contact: Stu Smith of the Office of Justice Programs,
U.S. Department of Justice, 202-307-0784 or
301-983-9354 (after hours)
WASHINGTON, July 30 /U.S. Newswire/ -- The U.S. Department of
Justice has awarded the state of New York $381,512 to continue its
program of improving the quality of the state's criminal history
recordkeeping, the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) announced
today.
The project, administered by BJS in the Office of Justice Programs
(OJP), is part of a three-year, $27 million program established by
the Attorney General to help states upgrade current systems used to
maintain records of arrests, prosecutions, convictions and sentences.
The Bureau of Justice Assistance is providing the funding through the
Edward Byrne Memorial State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance
Program.
"The major objective of this cooperative agreement is to improve
the overall quality of the state's criminal history record
information by improving disposition reporting, " said BJS Director
Steven D. Dillingham. "This administration is making every effort
to assure the highest standards of accuracy and timeliness in
criminal history record information across the country.
"It is critical that law enforcement officers, prosecutors,
judges and corrections officials have access to complete and accurate
information on each individual within the purview of the criminal
justice system," Dillingham commented.
The New York Division of Criminal Justice Services will use the
assistance to correct database problems identified during the first
phase of the program and complete a study to determine if problems
related to disposition collection can be systematically resolved.
"The program emphasizes the recording of arrest, conviction and
sentencing information in a form that will make felony history
information more reliable and complete," Dillingham commented.
"This is a crucial component of the overall objective of insuring
that state criminal history records are up-to-date and available to
all criminal justice agencies." Additional information about this
program is available from BJS. Publications and statistical and
research data may be obtained from the National Criminal Justice
Reference Service, Box 6000, Rockville, Md. 20850. The telephone
number is 301-251-5500. The toll-free number is 800-732-3277.
-30-
--
Canada Remote Systems - Toronto, Ontario/Detroit, MI
World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044
------------------------------
From: Eugen Raicu <raicu@netcom.com>
Subject: Interesting Scientific American article
Date: Sat, 01 Aug 92 18:54:46 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
David Chaum, "Achieving Electronic Privacy," Scientific American
volume 267 number 2 pp 96-101, August 1992.
Table of contents blurb:
All of your electronic transactions, from credit card purchases to bank
widthrawals, are creating a digital dossier of your life. The author
proposes an encryption system that would allow individuals and institutions
to take advantage of the benefits of computer communications while
protecting privacy.
Abstract:
A cryptographic invention known as a blind signature permits numbers
to serve as electronic cash or to replace conventional identification.
The author hopes it may return control of personal information to the
individual.
--
Eugen Raicu
raicu@netcom.com
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 2 Aug 1992 23:51:06 -0500
From: David Lemson <lemson@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>
Subject: Re: Cellular phone scanners
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 1992 04:51:01 GMT
willis@iris.rand.org (Willis H. Ware) writes:
>RE: Mark Bell <idela!bell@uunet.uu.net>
>>>"ILLEGAL to use the scanner over the range of 845-860 MhZ according
>>>to Congressional law..."
>But do remember that Virginia makes it illegal to OWN, much less operate,
>a radar detector so such laws are possible -- at least until challenged in
>court.
If you open up most any scanner listing-type book, including the
POLICE CALL series from Radio Shack, you will see references to the
relevant laws here. It is actually a Federal Crime to listen to
cellular conversations (I presume without a warrant). Of course,
the fact that most TV's with UHF antennas can get them between
channels 81-82-83 is beside the point. I don't believe it's illegal
to 'own' such a scanner, just to use it for that purpose.
Another interesting point is that it is not illegal to listen to
cordless phones (46 MHz range), but it is illegal to divulge what
you hear to anyone else. This same law is referenced in those
books.
--
David Lemson (217) 244-1205
University of Illinois NeXT Campus Consultant / CCSO NeXT Lab System Admin
Internet : lemson@uiuc.edu UUCP :...!uiucuxc!uiucux1!lemson
NeXTMail accepted BITNET : LEMSON@UIUCVMD
------------------------------
From: "Otto J. Makela" <otto@jyu.fi>
Subject: Re: Emerging Privacy Issues in Libraries
Organization: The Crimson Permanent Assurance Company
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 1992 11:40:39 GMT
In article <comp-privacy1.68.7@pica.army.mil> keelings@wl.aecl.ca writes:
My only comment would be "What the heck does all this bureaucratic
mumbo-jumbo mean in English?!?" "...commoditizing information..."?!?
"commoditizing" = "flushing down the toilet".
(Sorry, I just couldn't resist it...)
--
/* * * Otto J. Makela <otto@jyu.fi> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * */
/* Phone: +358 41 613 847, BBS: +358 41 211 562 (V.32bis/USR-HST,24h/d) */
/* Mail: Kauppakatu 1B18/SF-40100 Jyvaskyla/Finland, ICBM: 62.14N25.44E */
/* * * Computers Rule 01001111 01001011 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * */
------------------------------
From: Stewart Rowe <bg055@cleveland.freenet.edu>
Subject: Re: IRS: ssn for my kids ?
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, (USA)
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 92 21:54:06 GMT
If you wish to claim a deduction for a child or other dependent, you
must include the dependent's SSN if over _ONE_ year of age at the
end of the tax year.
------------------------------
End of Computer Privacy Digest V1 #069
******************************