Date: Mon, 18 Oct 93 14:15:49 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 V3#059
Computer Privacy Digest Mon, 18 Oct 93 Volume 3 : Issue: 059
Today's Topics: Moderator: Dennis G. Rears
Drop/Add requests
Re: Digital Detective At Your Service
Re: Digital Detective At Your Service
Re: Digital Detective At Your Service
Re: Digital Detective At Your Service
Re: Digital Detective At Your Service
Re: Clinton Health Care Plan
Notice, Advisory and Disclaimer on Lists and Groups
Re: Notice, Advisory and Disclaimer on Lists and Groups
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
[129.139.160.133].
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 93 12:55:33 EDT
From: Computer Privacy List Moderator <comp-privacy@Pica.Army.Mil>
Subject: Drop/Add requests
Recently I have received a number of drop/add requests that have been
sent to <comp-privacy> as opposed to <comp-privacy-request>. There is
is a major difference on where the two aliases are sent to and processed.
It is extremely difficult for me to handle drop/add requests sent to the
<comp-privacy> address. As such I will no longer handle change/drop
requests sent to the comp-privacy address. They will go to the bit
bucket. Any add requests will be returned to the sender requesting they
send to the right address.
dennis
------------------------------
From: Mike Brokowski <brokowski@nwu.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.society.privacy
Subject: Re: Digital Detective At Your Service
Date: 14 Oct 1993 21:55:08 GMT
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston IL USA
Originator: brokow@merle.acns.nwu.edu
In article <comp-privacy3.55.2@pica.army.mil>,
<ptownson@telecom.chi.il.us> wrote:
> DIGITAL DETECTIVE
[...]
>
>If you want a credit bureau report on someone, I repeat: you must
>send a signed statement (by fax is okay) stating that you have a
>bonafide, legal reason for this information. Spouses are *not*
>legally entitled to the credit bureau file of their 'other half'
>without permission.
Is faxing a signature really okay? I am certain that I have seen
multiple statements (here and elsewhere) to the effect that
signatures sent by facsimile are not legally binding. Does this
vary by state or something?
Mike Brokowski
brokowski@nwu.edu
------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.society.privacy,alt.privacy,misc.consumers,misc.legal,misc.misc
From: Richard Roda <rerodd@eos.ncsu.edu>
Subject: Re: Digital Detective At Your Service
Organization: North Carolina State University, Project Eos
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1993 04:26:05 GMT
In article <comp-privacy3.57.2@pica.army.mil> CHRISTIAN S MORLEY <csmorley@titan.ucs.umass.edu> writes:
>Is it just me or does anyone else find this service a tad frightening?
The only reason that I don't find it frightening is that I already know that
privacy is a sad joke with the current databases floating around...
One of the reasons I support unbreakable crypto: it isn't very useful for a
database if it is intercepted.
--
--
Richard E. Roda <rerodd@eos.ncsu.edu> | PGP 2.3 Public key by mail
Disclaimer:------------------------------------------------------------
| The opinons expressed above are those of a green alien who spoke to |
| me in a vision. They do not necessarly represent the views of NCSU |
| or any other person, dead or alive, or of any entity on Earth. |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.society.privacy,alt.privacy,misc.consumers,misc.legal,misc.misc
From: Bernie Cosell <cosell@world.std.com>
Subject: Re: Digital Detective At Your Service
Reply-To: cosell@world.std.com
Organization: Fantasy Farm Fibers
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1993 05:04:32 GMT
In article <comp-privacy3.57.2@pica.army.mil>, CHRISTIAN S MORLEY writes:
} Is it just me or does anyone else find this service a tad frightening?
Might just be you, but it depends on what you find frightening. Is it:
1) that there is *that*much* information about you floating around
in the publicly accessible records,
2) that there are services that will collect that information and
make it available to others, or
3) that there is a service that'll make the information available to
*you*.
Pat's notice is only of the existence of a (3). Several people have
pointed out that there are lots of similar services [under item (2)]
and that all only begins to scratch the surface of the truly astounding
amount of "public" information about you that is available for someone
willing to look hard enough.
I find (1) a bit frightening [it is the grist for the alt.privacy
and comp.society.privacy mills]. As for Pat's service, why do you
find it frightening? Denying the existence of the information
won't make it go away.
/Bernie\
--
Bernie Cosell cosell@world.std.com
Fantasy Farm Fibers, Pearisburg, VA (703) 921-2358
------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.society.privacy,alt.privacy,misc.consumers,misc.legal,misc.misc
From: Ron Mura <rmura@world.std.com>
Subject: Re: Digital Detective At Your Service
Organization: The World
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1993 14:01:21 GMT
In article <comp-privacy3.57.1@pica.army.mil> Larry Kolodney <lkk@panix.com> writes:
>
> >These databases are being made available to anyone who wishes to have
> >access to them. The charges are simply being passed along, 'at cost'
> >based on what I am paying.
>
> I find this hard to believe. The costs that were posted in the rest
> of this article were far in excess to what I pay for similar services
> from a commercial vendor. In particular, my vendor does nationwide
> SS# searches for $10-15 a shot, not the $60 this guy is asking.
Besides the cost, I'm curious about the availability of the data. If
this information is so readily available (at least to those who know
how to get it), why hasn't some enterprising outfit exploited it more
to make money? Why doesn't America OnLine or some such service let
you type in an SSN and get a report right back to the screen?
--
- Ron Mura, Boston, Massachusetts rmura@world.std.com
------------------------------
From: Charles W Van Keuren <cwvst+@pitt.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.society.privacy,alt.privacy,misc.consumers,misc.legal,misc.misc
Subject: Re: Digital Detective At Your Service
Date: 15 Oct 93 18:54:31 GMT
Followup-To: comp.society.privacy
Organization: University of Pittsburgh
While we're discussing the cost of finding info...
In the summer of '92 I was watching one of the 10 bazillion AM TV talk shows.
The topic was one of those "long lost sisters (brothers, parent and kid) are
reunited" things. Then a guest came out who ran a detective service which
specialized in finding "lost" people. He almost spoke with amusement at how
easy most of his cases were. Most usually involved making a few phone calls,
often to driver registration. (I didn't know this was legal...anyone?)
Anyway, he said that as long as you know where to look, it shouldn't take
more than a day and a very small amount of resources to find out someone's
address in the US. He wrote a book telling of his techniques. I think it
mighta just had a name like "How to Find Anybody".
Anybody know the book of which I speak? Regardless, before you cough up
$$$ to pay for a person-finding service, look for the book or a similar
source.
-chuck
------------------------------
From: cscott@NeoSoft.com (Clint Scott)
Subject: Re: Clinton Health Care Plan
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1993 16:28:31 GMT
Worse than not knowing your allergies is the possibility of not being
able to obtain medical care. Think of this as as back door approach to
the illegal alien getting taxpayer funded health care. I suspect that
the "card" is the first step. When fraud is rampant, a more secure
method must be devised. This method cannot require the individual to
use a password because the time when medical care is ESSENTIAL is when
the person is unconscienous (or something of that spelling). This
would negate the effectiveness of a password known only to the
individual.
In this case, the light at the end of the tunnel is indeed a train.
clint
cscott@sugar.neosoft.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1993 01:12:58 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Tansin A. Darcos & Company" <0005066432@mcimail.com>
Subject: Notice, Advisory and Disclaimer on Lists and Groups
Notice, Advisory and Disclaimer:
Be advised that when you subscribe to a Bitnet or in some cases,
Internet mailing list, if the list is public, unless you say otherwise,
anyone on Internet can find out who subscribes to that list. If
the mailing software makes a mistake, it may hand someone the entire
list of all subscribers even if your identity is not supposed to
be disclosed.
If you send ('post') a message (or a reply to an earlier message)
to the mailing list's publication address (or post a message to a
newsgroup), you are consenting to give your message (and with your
Personal Name and E-Mail address) publicly to everyone who subscribes
to it. This may include remailing services that "explode" a message,
news group exchangers that post messages to or from Usenet News Groups
to/from mailing lists, archivers that store messages, and even to
processors that copy all public messages to CD-ROM. Rumor has it
the U.S. National Security Agency has computers that monitor
Internet mailing lists and news groups looking for "suspicious
messages" as well.
By posting a message to a list, the chances are good to excellent
that your message will be stored permanently. Readers may copy your
message to their own disk storage for reference or sites may archive
messages posted to newsgroups and mailing lists, and some sites route
Internet messages to printers or fax machines. Some people may repost
your message to a different group even despite any request on your part
or without your consent, if they think more (other) people should see
it. While under most countries laws copyright exists from the moment of
creation, assume anything you post on a news group or mailing list
will be treated as if it is in the public domain.
The managers and operators of a list or newsgroup have no capability
to control this and by posting a message you are essentially consenting
to having your message be around potentially forever. Be advised also
that under both major international copyright treaties (Universal and
Berne) someone may copy your message as part of theirs in order to quote
it to respond to it; this is legal, is an integral part of the Internet
culture, and there is no right under law you can have to prevent it even
if you were to explicitly claim copyright on your message.
Also, any claims or statements made in a message should be taken only
as the personal opinion of the writer (without regard to the organization
their messages come from) unless they explicitly declare this to be the
position of a company or organization.
If you have something personal to say in response to someone, be
absolutely certain your message is sent only in private mail to them.
You should assume that anything you write in a public message should
be considered in the same light as if it was going to be printed on the
front page of the {International Herald Tribune}, {New York Times} or
{Jerusalem Post}.
Please Feel Free to recirculate this notice.
Paul Robinson, Tansin A. Darcos & Company <TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM>
October 18, 1993
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 93 12:59:33 EDT
From: Computer Privacy List Moderator <comp-privacy@Pica.Army.Mil>
Subject: Re: Notice, Advisory and Disclaimer on Lists and Groups
Paul Robinson writes:
>Notice, Advisory and Disclaimer:
>
> Be advised that when you subscribe to a Bitnet or in some cases,
>Internet mailing list, if the list is public, unless you say otherwise,
>anyone on Internet can find out who subscribes to that list. If
>the mailing software makes a mistake, it may hand someone the entire
>list of all subscribers even if your identity is not supposed to
>be disclosed.
This is not true for the comp-privacy email list. The only people
who can find out who is on this list are those people who have an
account on fender.pica.army.mil. The real list name for comp-privacy
is not comp-privacy and is not publicized. Even if people know what
the real alias was it would not help them find out who is on this.
I would agree with everything else he wrote. I just think it is common
knowledge.
dennis
End of Computer Privacy Digest V3 #059
******************************