Date: Wed, 04 Jan 95 08:46:56 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 V6#002
Computer Privacy Digest Wed, 04 Jan 95 Volume 6 : Issue: 002
Today's Topics: Moderator: Leonard P. Levine
False Data
Re: Ohio Supreme Court Upholds Cordless Phone Privacy
Re: Social Security and the Green Card
Re: Social Security and the Green Card
Re: School Monitoring
Postal Inspection
Re: 3 Hits and You're Out
Digital Cash and Security of the Net
Info on CPD [unchanged since 12/29/94]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Prof. L. P. Levine" <levine@blatz.cs.uwm.edu>
Date: 02 Jan 1995 09:53:18 -0600 (CST)
Subject: False Data
Organization: University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
This was taken from the newsgroup alt.privacy:
It has been said that: People frequently post articles in this
newsgroup suggesting a tactic of giving false information about
one's identity. Apparently many poor souls are unaware of just how
far systematic intrusion and the legally-enforced loss of one's
privacy have actually progressed:
WOMAN JAILED FOR GIVING STORE FALSE ADDRESS
TIFTON, Ga. -- A 69-year-old woman spent 44 days in jail for
giving a Wal-Mart store a false address when she sought a $13
refund for nail-clippers and a disposable razor.... It is
illegal in Georgia to give a false name or address when seeking
a refund.
Judge R.R. Buckley [had] imposed a year's sentence ... Mrs.
Waire was released Tuesday after paying part of the [$300]
fine....
- Washington Times April 2, 1993 B6
whmurray@aol.com (WHMurray) stated: Even in the absence of such a
specific provision, it is illegal in all states to give false
information in an attempt to get money. It is called "fraud." One
need not seek the money or not provide any information at all.
However, if one elects to do both, the information must be correct
to the best of one's knowledge.
jeffl10593@aol.com (JeffL10593) stated: It is my understanding from
a RS manager, that employees are expected to produce a specific
percentage of names and addresses for their sales slips, and also
are downrated if they do not have more than one item on a sales
slip, even if that item is a $1,000 computer.
gfarobin@aol.com (GFA Robin) writes: Yes, we are asked to get a
certain percentage, 85% to be exact. If the salesperson asks every
customer, they will get 85%. Most folks don't object to giving the
information and we have several folks under the numbers 1111, 2222,
3333 etc....
On Dec 30 I went to the Radio Shack at 807 E. Capital Drive in
Milwaukee Wisconsin and purchased an adapter plug (part 274-325) for
$1.59.
When asked for my phone number I gave them the random string 4234 and
when I was asked if my name was Maldonaldo, I said "sure". So now I
have a receipt with a copy of Mr Maldonaldo's address, phone number and
zip and area codes. I sure hope they were as phoney as what I would
have given them for this essentially cash, no warantee transaction.
The problem is that there are some items that I WANT Radio Shack to
know my address about. When I purchase something worth more than $100,
I expect a warantee and the Shack has stood behind their warantees for
me in the past. Why should some reasonable person who guesses my 4
digit phone number to avoid bother get the rest of my vitals? It is,
for Radio Shack, a stupid, self damaging way of collecting bad data.
Their management must be aware by now of just how ineffective it is. I
cannot imagine why they continue it.
--
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
PGP Public Key: finger llevine@blatz.cs.uwm.edu
------------------------------
From: eck@panix.com (Mark Eckenwiler)
Date: 02 Jan 1995 15:07:20 -0500
Subject: Re: Ohio Supreme Court Upholds Cordless Phone Privacy
Organization: Saltieri, Poore, Nash, deBrutus & Short, Attorneys at Law
jeffn@meaddata.com sez: The Ohio Supreme Court, in a recent 7-0
decision to uphold the 1991 conviction of Ivo Bidinost Jr. for
child-rape, said that the recordings of cordless telephone
conversations used in the 1991 case are illegal. According to the
Dayton Daily News of 01 Jan 95 the Court went further to say that
privacy is a right no matter the technology.
Of course, the recent federal Digital Telephony legislation amended
Title III to make it a federal felony to intercept cordless phone
communications.
--
Qbrf Xvob purpx sbe EBG13 ersreraprf gbb?
Mark Eckenwiler eck@panix.com
------------------------------
From: jimfranklin@BIX.com (Jim Franklin)
Date: 02 Jan 1995 14:48:58
Subject: Re: Social Security and the Green Card
Organization: Jim Franklin jimfranklin@bix.com
I am an legal immigrant with 20 years in USA (Texas) and I have
paid the full amount in SS every year for the last 20 years. Where
can I find information what will happen to this money and the money
my employer has paid in my SS acount. Is this money lost if I
return to my home country (Denmark) or is it paid to me when I
leave. Can I get my SS paid to me if I take residence in Denmark.
I have tried to ask the SS office in Houston they told me Uncle Sam
will get the money when I leave, I do not think this is right!!! I
appriciate any answer.
Jannick,
The US Social Security system is not a pension plan but a pay-as-you-go
social insurance plan. Your current contribution pays current
benefits. If there are enough Americans working when you and I are old
enough to be eligible for benefits, we will have a right to then
current benefits.
If you have paid SS tax over the 20 years, under the same account
number, then you will have the right to apply for benefits at the
appropriate age. But there is no separate fund for you to draw out and
take with you if you decide to leave the US.
I do believe that you would be able to have those benefits paid to you
in Denmark when you are eligible, but you would do well to seek an
opinion from a competent authority. Perhaps the nearest Danish
consulate can help, or point you to resources. Organizations like the
American Association of Retired Persons do great work with this kind of
issue, or even the offices of the member of Congress representing the
district in which you reside.
I hope you won't think it arrogant but I would like to say thank you
for the contributions that you and millions of other immigrants make to
our nation. I hope you will feel comfortable enough to stay or revisit
the United States if you are weighing options.
--
Jim Franklin jimfranklin@bix.com CompuServe:74431,236
------------------------------
From: jmcging@access.digex.net (John McGing)
Date: 02 Jan 1995 15:57:49 -0500
Subject: Re: Social Security and the Green Card
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Jannick Johnsson <wiking@neosoft.com> writes: I am an legal
immigrant with 20 years in USA (Texas) and I have paid the full
amount in SS every year for the last 20 years. Where can I find
information what will happen to this money and the money my
employer has paid in my SS acount. Is this money lost if I return
to my home country (Denmark) or is it paid to me when I leave. Can
I get my SS paid to me if I take residence in Denmark. I have
tried to ask the SS office in Houston they told me Uncle Sam will
get the money when I leave, I do not think this is right!!! I
appriciate any answer.
Jannick,
At age 62 or above you can file for Social Security retirement here in
the US at at the US Embassy in Denmark, if you live there. You will be
entitled to a pensin based on your contributions into the system.
If Denmark has a treaty with the US, it is possible that your work in
the US could instead be used to qualify you for a pension under the
Danish pension system. Details vary by country. Check your embassy
for better details.
Bottom line is that unless you reside in a country where payment is
barred via US law (North Korea, for example) US Residence is not
required to get a Social Security pension.
(Explains why so many retirees live in Mexico; they (anglos) move there
after retirement)
--
jmcging@access.digex.net Nobody knows the troubles I've seen
jmcging@ssa.gov .... and nobody cares!
J.MCGING on GEnie 70142,1357 on Compuserve Team OS/2
------------------------------
From: Kajae@aol.com
Date: 03 Jan 1995 02:48:25 -0500
Subject: Re: School Monitoring
I believe sometimes that with our attention focused on our own rights
to privacy, we can forget the fact that it becomes necessary to give up
a certain level of privacy in order to interact with other human
beings.
As it happens, I was skimming my latest copy of CP Digest while on the
phone with my girlfriend. In the background I could hear her little
brother yelling, screaming and making a general pest of himself. I
(jokingly) made some offhand remark to her about how I wished that we
both had video phones so I could see just what was going on over
there. She replied that she was glad we didn't because she was laying
in bed in her pajamas with her hair up, etc., and was glad that I
couldn't see her like that. I laughed, but what she said made me
think. If we *did* have video phones, and I called her, and she
answered in her current state of dress, *knowing* that I could see her,
she *would* be implicitly consenting to my seeing her in whatever state
of dress she was in. (She also ran the risk of me talking about this
in a forum available to just about anyone, but I don't make a habit of
this - and when it happens for the sake of our own *privacy* I skimp on
the details). And in the course of participating in this forum, others
have shared some snippets of their personal lives with the general
public for the sake of interaction and creating a greater social
awareness about important issues (social security, ID's, credit checks,
etc.).
Real life day to day interactions carry the same implications whether
we realize them or not. By speaking with me on the phone, my
girlfriend gave me the ability to hear not just what she wanted me to
hear, but pretty much everything that was happening in earshot.
Carrying on a conversation in a public place carries the consequence
that you might be overheard. Taking care of your normal banking lets a
total stranger (the teller) know how you're conducting that area of
your personal finances.
And the list goes on. If you're a student at a major university with
its own computer system (and I am) surely you realize it's necessary to
use a system that is being monitored to one degree or another. And I
for one welcome the degree of monitoring that you've discussed.
Imagine what it would be like if none it was there - no system
security, viruses running loose, stolen papers and the like. The
potential dangers to everyone are far greater than just the one danger
to you as an individual. Sure, it would be possible to monitor every
keystroke each user entered - but who there has that kind of time or
interest? If you *can* name someone, I guarantee that their
time-consuming activity will eventually take away from the job they're
*supposed* to be doing. And if you have something to do on a computer
that requires a higher level of privacy than you feel is being afforded
to you on your school's system, then do what I do - use your own or pay
$5-$8 per hour at a computer store to rent one.
I don't like having my privacy invaded any more than anyone else, but I
do recognize the fact that getting rid of these "violating" (?)
agencies outright
and altogether does us more harm than good. Getting rid of credit
checking opens us all up to credit fraud. Getting rid of postal
inspections opens us up to mail fraud & letter bombings. Getting rid
of the police would make us all more vulnerable to crime than we
already are. Getting rid of the government (as appealing as that
sounds) would deprive us as a society of the ability to pool our
resources and respond as a unit with other societies that *are* doing
so.
We must keep in mind that *society* is a first person and not a third
person noun, because by definition it includes everyone. In my
opinion, the best way to deal with any violations (or potential
violations) of our rights is for everyone to stay aware, stay informed,
stay educated, keep an open mind, and participate in organizations that
promote positive changes in how we interact with one another. If we
don't, we'll all just get more of the same...
------------------------------
From: ranck@earn.net (Bill Ranck)
Date: 03 Jan 1995 08:34:22 GMT
Subject: Postal Inspection
Organization: Universite Paris-Sud, France.
ranck@earn.net (Bill Ranck) wrote: Never heard of the Postal
Inspectors? They certainly can inspect mail. There just isn't a
notice on the mailboxes.
Gary McGath (gmcgath@condes.MV.COM) wrote: Two people in this
thread have made similar claims (though the other one said it
applies only to parcels). Does anyone have some real information on
this? I'm reasonably sure it's illegal for postal inspectors to
open first class mail without a warrant. I don't know what the
situation is for parcels.
To be honest, I don't know exactly what powers the Postal Inspection
Service has in this regard. They *are* federal agents, with badges and
guns. They can open mail under some circumstances. They may require a
warrant to do so, but they don't necessarily have to tell you about the
warrant ahead of time.
I'm not in the USA at the moment, but anyone should be able to go ask
at the post office. The postmaster will certainly know who and what
the Postal Inspectors are, and probably what they can/can't do.
--
* Bill Ranck +33.1.69.41.24.26 ranck@earn.net *
* Technical Staff, European Academic & Research Network (EARN) Orsay, France *
------------------------------
From: jaburns@jcpenney.com
Date: 03 Jan 95 15:49:32 CDT
Subject: Re: 3 Hits and You're Out
Organization: JCPenney Co. Inc.
<david@c-cat.PG.MD.US> writes: my concern with this issue is this:
I am planning to buy a house within the next year or two, I was
pre approved and received a free card ( 21%) from a local dept.
store, all I had to do was use it show my id and it would be
activated, ( really, get a fake id, and use it anyway) I was pre
approved for something like $2500 I am concernet when the mortgage
lender checks my credit, they will count the $2500 and "debt
available" when I tore up and threw out the card. Is this correct
to assume ?
My experience is that this is true. However if you contact the dept
store and request that the account be closed, your credit report should
show something along the line of "acct closed by customer". I believe
this takes it out of the "credit available/ debt possible"
calculations.
------------------------------
From: Andrew Grosso <agrosso@access.digex.net>
Date: 02 Jan 1995 17:58:03 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Digital Cash and Security of the Net
I would appreciate it if you could post the following:
THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ANNOUNCES A LUNCHEON CONFERENCE
on
DIGITAL CASH, SECURITY & COMMERCIALIZATION OF THE INTERNET
___________
Speakers:
Steven Walker, President, Trusted Information Systems
Edward D. Young III, Vice President External Affairs & Associate General Counsel,
Bell Atlantic Network Services, Inc.
Description:
With the expansion of our National Information Infrastructure,
providing adequate privacy and security is essential to the growth of
online commerce and critical to maintaining the global competitiveness
of US companies.
As President of Trusted Information Systems, Mr. Walker is one of the
leaders inproviding the technology to accomplish these goals. He will
address the security issues and explain some of the technology, such as
cryptography and firewalls used to provide solutions.
Ed Young, Vice President & Associate General Counsel at Bell Atlantic
will discuss the Growth of Electronic Commerce, online services and
the Commercialization of telecommunications networks.
The Panel will emphasize the political and legal issues which these
developments are raising.
Sponsored by:
The New Technology Committee of the District of Columbia Bar Association
Co-Chairs: Karen Casser and Andrew Grosso
___________________________________________________________________
Date: Thursday, February 2, 1995
Time: 12:00 noon (Deli Lunch provided)
Place: District of Columbia Bar Conference Center
1250 H Street, N.W. , B-1 level
Cost: $27.00 Members of the Computer Law Section
$32.00 Non-members
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mail To: Digital Cash, Security &
Commercialization of the Internet
Name(s): ___________________________ Bar No(s): ________________
Telephone Number: ___________________ Facsimile Number:__________________
Enclosed is $ _____ for _______ reservations.
Checks should be made payable to the "District of Columbia Bar." If you
are reserving for more than one person, please include all names. Notify
the Sections Office prior to the event if you require any special dietary
or physical accommodations to participate in the program.
------------------------------
From: "Prof. L. P. Levine" <levine@blatz.cs.uwm.edu>
Date: 29 Dec 1994 10:50:22 -0600 (CST)
Subject: Info on CPD [unchanged since 12/29/94]
Organization: University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
The Computer Privacy Digest is a forum for discussion on the effect of
technology on privacy or vice versa. 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.
This digest is a forum with information contributed via Internet
eMail. Those who understand the technology also understand the ease of
forgery in this very free medium. Statements, therefore, should be
taken with a grain of salt and it should be clear that the actual
contributor might not be the person whose email address is posted at
the top. Any user who openly wishes to post anonymously should inform
the moderator at the beginning of the posting. He will comply.
If you read this from the comp.society.privacy newsgroup and wish to
contribute a message, you should simply post your contribution. As a
moderated newsgroup, attempts to post to the group are normally turned
into eMail to the submission address below.
On the other hand, if you read the digest eMailed to you, you generally
need only use the Reply feature of your mailer to contribute. If you
do so, it is best to modify the "Subject:" line of your mailing.
Contributions to CPD should be submitted, with appropriate, substantive
SUBJECT: line, otherwise they may be ignored. They must be relevant,
sound, in good taste, objective, cogent, coherent, concise, and
nonrepetitious. Diversity is welcome, but not personal attacks. Do
not include entire previous messages in responses to them. Include
your name & legitimate Internet FROM: address, especially from
.UUCP and .BITNET folks. Anonymized mail is not accepted. All
contributions considered as personal comments; usual disclaimers
apply. All reuses of CPD material should respect stated copyright
notices, and should cite the sources explicitly; as a courtesy;
publications using CPD material should obtain permission from the
contributors.
Contributions generally are acknowledged within 24 hours
of submission. If selected, they are printed within two or three days.
The moderator reserves the right to delete extraneous quoted material.
He may change the SUBJECT: line of an article in order to make it easier
for the reader to follow a discussion. He will not, however, alter or
edit or append to the text except for purely technical reasons.
A library of back issues is available on ftp.cs.uwm.edu [129.89.9.18].
Login as "ftp" with password identifying yourid@yoursite. The archives
are in the directory "pub/comp-privacy".
People with gopher capability can most easily access the library at
gopher.cs.uwm.edu.
Mosaic users will find it at gopher://gopher.cs.uwm.edu.
Older archives are also held at ftp.pica.army.mil [129.139.160.133].
---------------------------------+-----------------------------------------
Leonard P. Levine | Moderator of: Computer Privacy Digest
Professor of Computer Science | and comp.society.privacy
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee | Post: comp-privacy@uwm.edu
Box 784, Milwaukee WI 53201 | Information: comp-privacy-request@uwm.edu
| Gopher: gopher.cs.uwm.edu
levine@cs.uwm.edu | Mosaic: gopher://gopher.cs.uwm.edu
---------------------------------+-----------------------------------------
------------------------------
End of Computer Privacy Digest V6 #002
******************************
.