Date: Wed, 25 May 94 14:54:33 EST
Errors-To: Comp-privacy Error Handler <owner-comp-privacy@uwm.edu>
From: Computer Privacy Digest Moderator <comp-privacy@uwm.edu>
To: Comp-privacy@uwm.edu
Subject: Computer Privacy Digest V4#071
Computer Privacy Digest Wed, 25 May 94 Volume 4 : Issue: 071
Today's Topics: Moderator: Leonard P. Levine
Canada, The Internet, and the Homolka trial
Re: SSN & Auto registration
Re: Privacy at the Jiffy Lube!
Re: Info On Clipper Chip Needed Urgently .. Please
Re: Employee looking up your license plate number
Re: Employee looking up your license plate number
Re: Employee looking up your license plate number
Re: Employee looking up your license plate number
Re: Employee looking up your license plate number
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@uwm.edu and administrative requests
to comp-privacy-request@uwm.edu. Back issues are available via
anonymous ftp on ftp.cs.uwm.edu [129.89.9.18]. Login as "ftp"
with password "yourid@yoursite". The archives are in the directory
"pub/comp-privacy". Archives are also held at ftp.pica.army.mil
[129.139.160.133].
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Prof. L. P. Levine" <levine@blatz.cs.uwm.edu>
Date: 25 May 1994 14:35:38 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Canada, The Internet, and the Homolka trial
Organization: University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
Taken from Risks-List: Risks-Forum Digest Weds 25 May 1994 (16:09)
As reported in Toronto's EYE Newspaper [eye@io.org] (similar to New
York's Village Voice) dated 19 May 1994:
The London Ontario detachment of the Ontario Provincial Police have
begun a campaign of harassment against local University Internet users
who are attempting to use the net to gain information on the Karla
Homolka trial. A University of Western Ontario (London) student had his
Internet account frozen by the university computer staff when requested
by the Police. The reason for this lay in the student's name being left
on the text of a FAQ of the details of the trial. Another student in
Toronto had Faxed this material (which had been Emailed to him) to the
Toronto media, and the offices of the Premier of Ontario and the
Attorney-General as an act of provocation against the Ban (his regular
anonymous forwarding site was not working). The problem was that he had
forgotten to remove the other persons name and account number from the
original E-mail that was sent out.
The police action against the student's account was done without a
warrant, and also involved the questioning of the student at the local
police station. Likewise the students home computer was searched
without a warrant by using the threat of criminal charges. The
Student's computer account was reinstated, but he was required to turn
over all incoming Email to the police under the threat of criminal
charges if he did not cooperate. A list of about 50 people who had
received Homolka FAQ's were passed on to the police. The important
part of this entire situation is that no one, including the Ontario
Attorney-General office is certain that the ban applies to the
Internet. The ban states that details of the trial cannot be published
in the print media but there is no ban on possession of information.
There is no mention of the Internet, nor the use of computer systems in
the ban. Further, there is no official investigation of the Internet
on the part of the Ontario Provincial Police, except for this one
detachment.
One of the questions raised is the ethics of the University of Western
Ontario's computer department. Their cooperation with the police was
based on a fear of having their computer equipment confiscated (similar
to the case of the University of Cambridge in England). If the
situation had taken place with in the library system of the university,
it would not have been tolerated by the library staff due to the long
held tradition in that profession of the defence of freedom of speech.
If the Internet is to remain open this set of values will have to
become part of the professional commitment of the MIS staff of
universities as well.
------------------------------
From: hibbert@netcom.com (Chris Hibbert)
Date: 25 May 1994 01:06:33 GMT
Subject: Re: SSN & Auto registration
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
I recently received my New Jersey auto registration renewal form
and noticed the following note attached to a request for my Social
Security Number: "Submission of the Social Security Numbers is
required pursuant to N.J.A.C. 13:21-1.3. The number will serve as
an internal secondary-identifier to prevent errors, to enforce
interstate motor vehicle laws, and to assist in collecting motor
vehicle fees."
This seems to be a blatant misuse of the SSN. Is it legal? Has
anyone every challenged it? If so, with what result?
Seems likely to be valid. From the "Short History" section of the
Social Security Number FAQ:
The Tax Reform Act of 1976 gave authority to state or local tax,
welfare, driver's license, or motor vehicle registration
authorities to use the number in order to establish identities.
The words you quoted above seem to be in partial compliance with the
requirements of the Privacy Act of 1974.
The Privacy Act of 1974 (Pub. L. 93-579) requires that any federal,
state, or local government agency that requests your Social
Security Number has to tell you four things:
1: Whether disclosure of your Social Security Number is
required or optional,
2: What statute or other authority they have for asking
for your number,
3: How your Social Security Number will be used if you
give it to them, and
4: The consequences of failure to provide an SSN.
California has a similar requirement now, and its passage seems to have
been completely legal. Complain to a state legislator. Tell them how much
you trust your DMV to keep the SSN confidential.
--
Chris Hibbert protecting privacy in the computer age is
hibbert@netcom.com like trying to change a tire on a moving car.
------------------------------
From: bcn@world.std.com (Barry C Nelson)
Date: 25 May 1994 06:00:13 GMT
Subject: Re: Privacy at the Jiffy Lube!
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
sutter@verisoft.com (Paul Sutter) writes: Here in California, when
you sell a car the license plate is generally transferred with the
car. [...] "Is your license really 2PKY595?" and i looked out at my
car and said "Yes".
"Well we have on file that that car is owned by John Q. Public, who
lives at..."
I bet if you call Jiffy Lube, they will tell you that the files are
confidential.
In Massachusetts you can call the Registry with a VIN or a plate number
and they'll tell you the name, address, phone number, insurance
company, and lots of other interesting things about the registered
owner (such as any outstanding tickets, suspensions, etc).
I gave them the plate number of an abandoned car and they gave me a
whole page printout of the registration history and driving record of
the registered owner (a neighbor). How thoughtful of them. "Hey, Joe,
How come you never told me about that DWI conviction you had?"
-BCNelson
------------------------------
From: glr@rci.ripco.com (Glen Roberts)
Date: 25 May 1994 17:00:37 GMT
Subject: Re: Info On Clipper Chip Needed Urgently .. Please
Organization: RCI, Chicago, IL
Rick Lawless (rlawless@iol.ie) wrote: I have seen references to the
clipper chip on this newsgroup and I urgently need some information
on same please. The problem is I need it within 24 hrs. I jjust
want a brief description i.e. what it does, where it came from,
etc...
Full Disclosure No. 31 has an article written by Ted Bettwy, President
of Mykotronx, the only company authorized to produce the Clipper Chip.
--
Glen L. Roberts, author, How To Spy On Anyone Without Getting Caught
Host Full Disclosure Live (WWCR 5,810 khz - Sundays 7pm central)
Box 734, Antioch, Illinois 60002 Fax: (708) 838-0316
Surveillance Hotline: (708) 356-9646 Bust the Bureaucrats: (708) 356-6726
------------------------------
From: oppedahl@panix.com (Carl Oppedahl)
Date: 24 May 1994 12:14:12 -0400
Subject: Re: Employee looking up your license plate number
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC
swarnerr@mexico.bettis.gov (Bob Swarner) writes: I recently got a
parking "violation" from by employer for not parking exactly where
they wanted me to. They put a slip on the windshield, which I
figured they kept a record of to look for repeat offenders. >Well,
it turns out they also, via my license plate number, got my name
and sent a copy to my supervisor. While this is not a big deal (my
bosses comment was "Who cares?"), was this a proper use of the
license plate?
All the more reason to register the car in the name of a corporation or
DBA. From your posting I gather you ... registered the car in your own
name?
--
Carl Oppedahl AA2KW
Oppedahl & Larson (patent lawyers)
Yorktown Heights, NY
voice 212-777-1330
------------------------------
From: "/DD.ID=AHIPC1J.RCARLS01/G=RICHARD/S=CARLSON/"@EDS.DIAMONDNET.sprint.com
Date: 24 May 1994 13:40:57 -0400
Subject: Re: Employee looking up your license plate number
Bob Swarner in V4#70 wrote about having his license plate used to send
a "parking violation" notification to his supervisor. I have a friend
who also had this happen recently. How does an employer get access to
the driver information from the DMV? I knew that insurance companies
have dialup access into the system, when I recently bought car
insurance the carrier looked up my driving record in the state's
records. Is it common for employers to have this access?
Rick Carlson 300 E. Big Beaver Troy, MI 48083 (810) 524-3989 (8-224)
------------------------------
From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr)
Date: 24 May 94 14:32:04 EDT
Subject: Re: Employee looking up your license plate number
swarnerr@mexico.bettis.gov (Bob Swarner) wrote: I recently got a
parking "violation" from by employer for not parking exactly where
they wanted me to. They put a slip on the windshield, which I
figured they kept a record of to look for repeat offenders. >Well,
it turns out they also, via my license plate number, got my name
and sent a copy to my supervisor. While this is not a big deal (my
bosses comment was "Who cares?"), was this a proper use of the
license plate?
Are you sure it was from the plate? Most government agencies that I
know of routinely issue a sticker to facilitate entrance and exit from
the site. This is also true for my daughter's truck that she uses to
go back and forth from college.
I'd suspect that the sticker was used.
If there wasn't a sticker then I say the employer queried a DMV databse
but I rather doubt it.
Dave Niebuhr Internet: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (preferred)
niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
Senior Technical Specialist, Scientific Computing Facility
Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 1+(516) 282-3093
FAX 1+(516) 282-7688
------------------------------
From: "Prof. L. P. Levine" <levine@blatz.cs.uwm.edu>
Date: 24 May 1994 13:57:44 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: Employee looking up your license plate number
Organization: University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
swarnerr@mexico.bettis.gov (Bob Swarner) stated: Well, it turns
out they also, via my license plate number, got my name and sent a
copy to my supervisor. While this is not a big deal (my bosses
comment was "Who cares?"), was this a proper use of the license
plate?
In Wisconsin the entire list of name and address vs licence plate list
is for sale by the State as a computer tape for $2,200.
When an order comes in for a car registration and plate number tape,
the purchaser gets the plate number followed by the owner's name and
address and registration information on the vehicle except for those
who have submitted a privacy form, in which case that line gives only
the plate number and a 5-digit zip code.
A purchaser can also order, for a fee of about $30, a list of ten or
fewer names, licenses, or plate numbers with full addresses regardless
of whether or not a privacy form has been submitted.
Good or bad, this is a sincere effort on the part of the State of
Wisconsin to provide its legal data to those who need it, while
maintaining some privacy for those who want it. This is a new law in
the state, and is much better than nothing.
--
Leonard P. Levine e-mail levine@cs.uwm.edu
Professor, Computer Science Office 1-414-229-5170
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Fax 1-414-229-6958
Box 784, Milwaukee, WI 53201
------------------------------
From: Rob.Aronson@dss.fw.gs.com (Rob Aronson)
Date: 25 May 1994 07:13:50 -0400
Subject: Re: Employee looking up your license plate number
Apparently in New York State you can pay a yearly fee to DMV and get
access to their computers so that you can do plate checks (get
registered owners, etc.)
The security department at the university I attended made use of this
for parking violation notices. If you didn't pay the ticket that they
placed on your windshield they'd mail a notice to your home address.
A friend of mine once worked for a towing company and they had this
access also. He always offered to run plates for me as long as I was
reasonably sure that they weren't stolen vehicles. He said that if a
vehicle was stolen they would be questioned about why they were running
that plate.
I'm not sure if the DMV places any restrictions on this service, i.e.
I don't know if it's open to any individual.
------------------------------
End of Computer Privacy Digest V4 #071
******************************
.