Date: Fri, 28 Apr 95 06:54:00 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#041
Computer Privacy Digest Fri, 28 Apr 95 Volume 6 : Issue: 041
Today's Topics: Moderator: Leonard P. Levine
Discussion Program on Internet Security, Social, Legal Issues
NYC Event: Consumer's Fear; Tuesday, May 2, 7 P.M.
Re: Censorship and Freedom of Speech
Re: Censorship and Freedom of Speech
A Dumb Question
Re: A Dumb Question
Is PGP a Dangerous Idea?
Clipper Paper Available for Anon FTP
Privacy Rights Clearinghouse Second Annual Report Available
CPSR / Seattle Opposes WA State Bill ESSB 5466
Info on CPD [unchanged since 12/29/94]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: dilute@panix.com (Ronald Abramson)
Date: 26 Apr 1995 14:37:27 -0400
Subject: Discussion Program on Internet Security, Social, Legal Issues
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC
THE ROBERT B. MC KAY COMMUNITY LAW OUTREACH PROGRAM
OF
THE ASSOCIATION OF THE BAR OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK
PRESENTS
DISCUSSION PROGRAM - S E C U R I T Y O N T H E I N T E R N E T
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
A discussion program regarding security concerns on the Internet and the
related civil liberties, privacy and legal issues. The panelists include
Steve Cherry, a frequent speaker and authority on civil liberties
and privacy issues in the on-line world, and Ron Abramson, an
attorney who is actively involved with the legal issues in these
fields. There will be an opportunity for members of the audience
to address questions to the speakers.
Time: Tuesday May 2, 1995
6:00 to 8:00 p.m.
Place: LaGuardia Community College
31-10 Thompson Avenue, Long Island City (Queens), N.Y.
Room E242
Directions: Take the No. 7 train; get off at 33rd Street in Queens.
In Manhattan the 7 train can be transfered to at Times Square,
Grand Central, and the 42nd St/6th Ave stations.
Speakers:
STEVEN CHERRY
Executive Editor, Magazines
Association for Computing Machinery
Vice President, Society for Electronic Access
Member, Advisory Board, Voter's Telecommunications Watch
Co-Author, Citizen's Guide to the Net
(http://www.panix.com:80/vtw/citiguide/citiguide.html)
RONALD ABRAMSON
Head of the Intellectual Property and Technology Law practice
with the law firm of Hughes Hubbard & Reed, New York, NY
Chair, Committee on Computer Law, The Association of the Bar
of the City of New York
All interested persons are invited to attend. No fees or reservations
are required.
Refreshments will be provided.
------------------------------
From: bshalit1@vaxa.hofstra.edu (THE FRIENDLY DOLPHIN)
Date: 28 Apr 1995 00:25:37 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: NYC Event: Consumer's Fear; Tuesday, May 2, 7 P.M.
Organization: Hofstra University
CONSUMER'S FEAR:
Is Privacy Disappearing in the
Electronic Marketplace?
A panel discussion of important consumer privacy issues, including those
arising form credit and telemarketing practices as well as the information
superhighway. These issues will be examined from the perspectives of
consumers and business, and state and federal government officials.
Tuesday, May 2, 1995, 7:00 P.M.
House of the Association
Moderator:
NORMAN I. SILBER
Professor, Hofstra University School of Law
Keynote Address:
ALAN F. WESTIN
Professor, Columbia University; Co-Founder, Privacy and American Business
Panelists:
HON. AUDREY PHEFFER
Chair, Consumer Affairs Committee, New York State Assembly
EVAN HENDRICKS
Editor, Privacy Times
DAVID MEDINE
Associate Director for Credit Practices, Bureau of Consumer Protection, Federal
Trade Commission
RONALD PLESSER
Piper & Marbury
Co-Sponsored by:
COMMITTEE ON CONSUMER AFFAIRS, Norman I. Silber, Chair; COMMITTEE ON
COMMUNICATIONS AND MEDIA LAW, Floyd Abrams, Chair; COMMITTEE ON
COMPUTER LAW, Ronald Abramson, Chair; COMMITTEE ON ENTERTAINMENT LAW,
Alan H. Bomser, Chair; COMMITTEE ON RETAIL FINANCIAL SERVICES, Martin P. Unger,
Chair; COMMITTEE ON TECHNOLOGY AND THE PRACTICE OF LAW, John Kennedy and
Frederic Baum, Co-Chairs; COMMITTEE ON LECTURES AND CONTINUING EDUCATION,
Norman L. Greenne, Chair
Members of the Association, their guests and all other interested persons
are invited to attend. No fees or reservations are required.
--
THE ASSOCIATION OF THE BAR
OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK
42 West 44th Street
New York, N.Y. 10036-6690
Communications Office (212)382-6695
------------------------------
From: kadokev@rci.ripco.com (Kevin Kadow)
Date: 26 Apr 1995 21:49:31 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: Censorship and Freedom of Speech
Leonard A DiMenna <ldimenna@osf1.gmu.edu> said: How do you decide
which is censorship and which is freedom of speech? It is very
reasonable that certain people shouldn't have access to areas that
have adult matieral. Who descides what is moral and what isn't?
There is no black and white only shades of gray.
Simple- people that shouldn't have ccess to areas that contain adult
material should not be given unsupervised access to the internet.
It seems that many people are asking the question "HOW do we make the
internet safe for children and easily offended adults" when we should
really be asking ourselves "SHOULD we make the internet safe for
children and easily offended adults?"
--
kadokev@ripco.com Kevin Kadow
FREE Usenet/Mail, inexpensive Internet - Ripco... Wearing white hats since 1983
Dialup:(312) 665-0065 | http://www.ripco.com/ | Telnet:foley.ripco.com ('info')
------------------------------
From: cburian@ux4.cso.uiuc.edu (Christopher J Burian)
Date: 27 Apr 1995 07:08:06 GMT
Subject: Re: Censorship and Freedom of Speech
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Leonard A DiMenna <ldimenna@osf1.gmu.edu> writes: It is very
reasonable that certain people shouldn't have access to areas that
have adult matieral.
I think "tolerable" is a better way of putting it, not "very
reasonable."
Who descides what is moral and what isn't?
Whether something is "moral" or not is completely subjective and
impossible to measure. If you mean "children" by "certain people,"
then it is their own parents' responsibility and decision to regulate
the materials they see, and no one else's.
--
Chris Burian
------------------------------
From: Matt Koehler <matthew.koehler@eq.gs.com>
Date: 27 Apr 1995 08:22:05 -0400
Subject: A Dumb Question
I hate to ask a REALLY DUMB QUESTION, but... from the discussions that
I've been reading on c.a.p. (of which Mr. Yeltsin's edict is just one
example) it seems like governments are trying to enable themselves to
maintain the right to have access to all encrypted data (on demand) or
banish encryption altogether.
With this in mind...
Let me give you one example before I ask my stupid question. Using
"des" I can encrypt a data file ("matt.phone.list.data") so it's
unreadable. My boss/the government/the person in authority comes up to
me and says: "This file is encrypted and I want to know what's in it,"
or "We noticed you sent a piece of e-mail and we couldn't read it. We
think it was encrypted. Decypher it for us."
1. How do they KNOW it's encrypted? Just because it's unreadable
data doesn't mean there's significant data in the file.
2. Isn't the burden of proof on THEM to PROVE that there's readable
data in the file?
3. How do they handle (in your opinion)..."ummm...I *forgot* the key.
Unnnnlucky. Sorry."
--
Matthew C. Koehler
koehlm@eq.gs.com
------------------------------
From: "Prof. L. P. Levine" <levine@blatz.cs.uwm.edu>
Date: 27 Apr 1995 08:02:53 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: A Dumb Question
Organization: University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
I hate to ask a REALLY DUMB QUESTION, but... from the discussions
that I've been reading on c.a.p. (of which Mr. Yeltsin's edict is
just one example) it seems like governments are trying to enable
themselves to maintain the right to have access to all encrypted
data (on demand) or banish encryption altogether.
This is NOT a dumb question.
The answer depends on a few factors. One for example is the status of
the sender. If I (a university professor) encrypt mail and send it
from a UWM account my mail is public business. My masters, that is
supervisors, can ask to see what I am doing with public money and with
public authority. When asked, there are things I can do, such as bring
the case before faculty committees etc. but bye and large I work for
UWM and UWM has a right to see what I am saying in their name. If I
open a private paid-for account, for example my account on
omnifest.uwm.edu, they have no such rights.
If a student here sends the very same message, we have much less right
to examine his work. He pays tuition, and in return gets access to
services. We have to go through the same mess as we have to go through
to open his locker/room, court orders etc.
I suspect that others might have some ideas about this.
--
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: WELKER@a1.vsdec.nl.nuwc.navy.mil
Date: 27 Apr 1995 13:24:14 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Is PGP a Dangerous Idea?
Any number of citizens armed with PGP and such of its relations as
digital cash and anonymous Net remailers can simply vanish from the
governmental radar.
If this were true, we wouldn't need this forum. If you don't think NSA
performs traffic analysis on (for example) mail sent through
anon.petit.fi, you're kidding yourself. It probably doesn't matter if
you used PGP if they know who sent what to whom and can also analyze
their bank records.
They are at greater liberty than ever before to conduct any
endeavor, including something that, as Phil frankly puts it at the
beginning of this book, "shouldn't be illegal, but is." They can
exempt themselves from taxes and yet maintain precise accounting
records. In many ways, they can effectively resign from the
community of the governed and enter a condition in which their
actions ordered by conscience and culture alone.
I think not (see above). One cannot "exempt oneself from taxes" and
still participate in any national or global economy. Such a subculture
would have to be inherently self-sufficient. Even the Branch Davidians
weren't, or their stockpile of weapons would never have been detected.
If you keep financial records in a condition where you can read them,
the goverment has the option of auditing you. If you fail to provide a
decryption key, you will most likely be jailed for contempt of (tax)
court until you do -- and relying on a self- destructing key system is
a rather high risk option. You can do this for a
while, maybe long enough to detonate one bomb, but you and your
organization would be summarily and permanently compromised. If you're
willing to do that, then no amount of governmental intrusion or
surveillance can stop you anyway.
[The above are, of course, my personal opinions and not those of my
agency.]
------------------------------
From: Michael Froomkin <mfroomki@umiami.ir.miami.edu>
Date: 27 Apr 1995 15:24:59 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Clipper Paper Available for Anon FTP
My paper, "The Metaphor is the Key: Cryptography, the Clipper Chip, and
the Constitution" is now available for anonymous FTP. It is about 180pp.
long, and contains more than 800 references.
I would welcome your feedback on this paper -- even (especially?)
contributions to the inevitable errata sheet.
(Please note this docment resides at what is officially a "temporary"
site, so that if you create a web link to it, please let me know so that
I can notify you when it moves).
Contents of FTP://acr.law.miami.edu/pub/..
File Type
--------------- ----------
clipper.asc ASCII
clipper.wp WP 5.1/Dos
clipperwp.zip Pkzipped version of clipper.wp
clipper.ps My best effort at Postscript. YMMV. (approx. 7Mb.)
clipperps.zip Pkzipped version of clipper.ps
clipper.ps.gz Gzipped version of clipper.ps
Ports provided by nice people (please note I have not checked these)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
clipper.ps.Z Unix compressed version of clipper.ps with carriage
returns removed -- courtesy of Whit Diffie
clipperMSW.sea.hqx Binhexed self-extracting Microsoft Word 5.1 for
Macintosh version of clipper.wp -- courtesy
of Ted Byfield
None of these files contains correct and final page numbers, and there are
generally trivial typos that were corrected in the printed version. The
printed version appears at 143 U.Penn.L.Rev. 709 (1995).
I intend to put up a web version presently. The .index file in the above
directory will have details when a clean copy is ready for prime time. A
link to an experimental and highly buggy HTMLized version may appear at
erratic intervals at http://acr.law.miami.edu at the very bottom of the
homepage.
A.Michael Froomkin | +1 (305) 284-4285; +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax)
Associate Professor of Law |
U.Miami Law School | MFROOMKI@UMIAMI.IR.MIAMI.EDU
PO Box 248087 |
Coral Gables, FL 33146 USA | It's warm here.
------------------------------
From: Privacy Rights Clearinghouse <prc@pwa.acusd.edu>
Date: 27 Apr 1995 13:40:45 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Privacy Rights Clearinghouse Second Annual Report Available
April 24, 1995
The Second Annual Report of the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse is now
available. The 68-page report covers the time frame from October
1993 through September 1994, our second full year of hotline
operation. We discuss project usage statistics and accomplishments
as well as what we consider to be the most significant privacy
issues affecting California consumers.
This year we have reported privacy issues a little differently,
selecting some of the more troubling privacy abuses from hotline
calls and discussing them in a separate section of the report. The
Second Annual Report highlights nearly 50 such case studies. We
have made particular note of what we call invisible information
gathering; we also focus on the growing crime of identity theft. In
addition, we revisit some of the topics discussed last year, such
as "junk" mail, unwanted telemarketing sales calls, medical records
privacy and workplace monitoring.
A 15-page Executive Summary of the Annual Report can be found on
the PRC's gopher site. The Executive Summary includes all of the
case studies featured in the full report. Gopher to
gopher.acusd.edu. Go into the menu item "USD Campuswide Information
Services" to find the PRC's materials.
For a complete paper copy of the 68-page report, call the PRC at
800-773-7748 (Calif. only) or 619-298-3396.
The PRC is a nonprofit consumer education program administered by
the University of San Diego Center for Public Interest Law. It is
funded in part by the Telecommunications Education Trust, a program
of the California Public Utilities Commission.
====================================================================
Barry D. Fraser fraser@acusd.edu
Online Legal Research Associate
Privacy Rights Clearinghouse prc@acusd.edu
Center for Public Interest Law Gopher gopher.acusd.edu
University of San Diego Select "USD Campus-Wide Info"
Privacy Hotline: 619-298-3396 BBS: 619-260-4789
In California: 800-773-7748 host: teetot
login: privacy
====================================================================
------------------------------
From: Susan Evoy <evoy@pcd.Stanford.EDU>
Date: 27 Apr 1995 02:11:13 -0700
Subject: CPSR / Seattle Opposes WA State Bill ESSB 5466
Computer Professionals for Social
Responsibility / Seattle
P.O. Box 75481
Seattle, WA 98145
206-783-4821
CPSR / Seattle Opposes WA State Bill ESSB 5466
For Immediate Release
Wednesday, April 26, 1995
Contact: Eric Rehm
783-4821 (eves.)
865-8904 (days)
Seattle -- Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility /
Seattle is calling upon Washington State Governor Lowry to veto Senate
Bill 5466. "ESSB 5466 is the wrong medicine at the wrong time!", says
Eric Rehm, parent and President of the Seattle chapter of CPSR. "This
bill purports to be an 'act relating to the well-being of
children'. In fact, it takes away control from parents, unfairly
burdens on-line providers to verify the age of it's clients and the
nature of their postings. In doing so, it assaults freedom and
privacy on the information highway."
National CPSR Chair Doug Schuler, also a Seattle parent, is concerned
that the Internet and other computer networks are being unfairly
assessed for the ease at which information can be transmitted. "CPSR
views the information highway as a new medium in which First Amendment
rights must first be secured, not limited. Further, on-line services
are more akin to a bookstore than a television or radio broadcast
studio. On-line users can make choices about what to view and read,
just as in a bookstore or library.
CPSR NW Regional Director Aki Namioka is concerned about the
educational impact of complying with a law like ESSB 5466. "On-line
service system operators (sysops) in Washington will have to police
all postings, and will effectively become available only to those 18
and older. This will deprive Washington K-12 schools of access to the
Internet or other on-line services."
Background: On April 14 the Washington State Legislature passed Senate
Bill 5466 "An act relating to the well-being of children." This bill
is similar to the Exon legislation (Federal bill S. 314, co-sponsored
by WA Sen. Slade Gorton) that would restrict minors' access to
pornography.
On-line services were exempted from the bill in a Senate passed
amendment on March 11. However, when the House passed the bill on the
14th, it removed the exemption for on-line services. The bill will go
into effect immediately upon the signature of the governor.
The result will be that every delivery or display of a picture or text
viewed as obscene by community standards will subject the sysop to a
$5000 fine or year in jail. Furthermore every day that the offending
material is available on a BBS or Internet-connected-system counts as
a separate offense! Since the sysop is liable for the infraction and
not the person doing the uploading of material, all that is necessary
for someone who doesn't like a service to put that service out of
business is to upload an offending file, wait a couple of weeks, have
an accomplice "find" the file, and turn it, and the hapless sysop,
into the authorities.
Alternatives: There are other ways to address the legitimate concerns
that some Net users and parents have about material on the network
without violating the First Amendment's guarantee of free expression.
The Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT), a nonprofit public
interest organization, suggests an alternative: giving parents and
guardians the ability to screen what kids can access. A system akin
to telephone restrictions on access to 900-numbers could be created to
limit what content could come into one's home. This would not
necessarily be foolproof or easy to create, but it is much better than
attempting to police the information highway. CPSR History: Founded
in 1981 by a group of computer scientists concerned about the use of
computers in nuclear weapons systems, CPSR has grown into a national
public-interest alliance of information technology professionals and
other people. Currently, CPSR has 22 chapters in the U.S. and
contacts with similar groups worldwide. CPSR/Seattle has over 200
members, and has been active on the state, county, and local level on
computer-related issues confronting Washington's communities.
------------------------------
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 #041
******************************
.