Date: Fri, 19 May 95 06:52:46 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#046
Computer Privacy Digest Fri, 19 May 95 Volume 6 : Issue: 046
Today's Topics: Moderator: Leonard P. Levine
Anonymity on Computer Privacy Digest
CIBC and Royal Bank to do MONDEX pilot
Medical Record Privacy
Re: National Caller ID
GovAccess is Again 'Live and Kickin'
Cyber-Liberty Alert #4: State Bills to Regulate Online Content
Info on CPD [unchanged since 12/29/94]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: wmcclatc@posh.internext.com (Bill McClatchie)
Date: 15 May 1995 19:17:26 -0400
Subject: Anonymity on Computer Privacy Digest
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.
[..]
Anonymized mail is not accepted.
Has anyone else noticed the contradiction between the first paragraph
and this one line? After all, anonymized mail is a form of privacy
allowed by technology.
--
Bill McClatchie
wmcclatc@internext.com
http://nyx10.cs.du.edu:8001/~wmcclatc
[moderator: I allow people who wish to remain anonymous to request
such and post the material over my own sig. I, however, do not allow
postings sent openly from anonymizers (sp?). Should I change this
policy?]
------------------------------
From: bo774@freenet.carleton.ca (Kelly Bert Manning)
Date: 16 May 1995 06:56:39 GMT
Subject: CIBC and Royal Bank to do MONDEX pilot
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
The Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce and the Royal Bank have
announced plans to pilot a "smart" cash card. Apparently this
is based on a chip based card used in Europe.
Unlike a credit card there would be no name or other personal
data on it. Users would supposedly refill it at an ATM or by
dialing into their bank if they are unconcerned enough about
banking by phone to get it activated for their account.
The cards would have no PIN or other password and if they were
lost or stolen the user would be out of pocket unless it was
returned to the bank.
Is this one likely to take off? The bank representative I spoke
with seemed quite up front about the idea of it being a cost saving
measure for the banks(an attempt to reduce the use of cash in
ATMs) as a well as one that would let them charge new fees to
the users and merchants.
With the proliferation of debit and credit card technology this
seems like a specialty item. I've heard enough about ATM and
credit card account disputes to wonder about how easy it would
be to dispute this if the merchants deducted more from the card
than they should.
I'm not sure that users would rather pay for the privilege of
using this kind of card, or than enough businesses would get
on board to make it fly.
------------------------------
From: CPRMA@aol.com
Date: 16 May 1995 14:28:21 -0400
Subject: Medical Record Privacy
I am a physician and psychiatrist and president of the Coalition for
Patient Rights of Massachusetts. We are working exclusively in the
area of trying to establish genuine privacy of medical records in the
age of the computer. We have a lot of information about what is going
on with computerized medical records as they are getting more and more
widely accessible. Data banks and networks are springing up right and
left.
We have the opportunity to bring this to national media attention if we
collect a few patients who will be willing to tell of their
experience. Their identity will be completely shielded visually and
voice. If you can help us with this alert I will be most
appreciative.
Please contact me if you know of anyone who has experienced a violation
of their privacy because their medical records were on a computer in
their health plan, doctor's office, hospital, or Medical Information
Bureau. You can reach me at cprma@aol.com or by calling 617-433-0114
The Coalition of Patient Rights of Massachusetts.
We are a national organization interested in protecting the privacy of
medical records.
--
Denise M. Nagel, MD
------------------------------
From: joew@sunrise.stanford.edu (Joe Wagner)
Date: 17 May 1995 18:30:51 GMT
Subject: Re: National Caller ID
Organization: Stanford University
QBKY95A@prodigy.com (Charles Pinck) wrote: Two weeks ago, before
the FCC announced its approval of national caller ID (which I
presume will take some time to implement), I received a call in
Washington, DC from a friend in San Francisco and her number
appeared on my caller id unit. Has anyone else had a similiar
experience?
I remember about six months ago I called a friend in DC from out here
in Redwood City (35 minutes south of San Francisco) and got his
answering machine. When I final got ahold of him the next day, he
told me that he couldn't figure out who he knew that had a 415 area
code that he saw stored on his caller ID box.
--
Joe
------------------------------
From: jwarren@well.com (Jim Warren)
Date: 17 May 1995 14:29:21 +0800
Subject: GovAccess is Again 'Live and Kickin'
(Spread the word!)
GovAccess irregularly distributes ongoing information, action-alerts
and often flaming advocacy. It's free - worth at least every penny you
pay for it.
GovAccess concerns computer-assisted and technology-related: (1)
*effective* citizen participation in the process of our own governance,
(2) protections and implications regarding constitutional civil
liberties, (3) citizen-access to federal, state and/or local government
- access to representatives, officials, agencies and computerized
government records, (4) government access to and records about citizens
- covert and overt, and (5) federal, state and local
legislation-in-process, statutes, regulations and court cases and
decisions pertaining to these issues.
GovAccess postings come from (1) solicited and unsolicited
contributors, (2) relevant items spotted in other lists and (3)
self-generated items authored by list-owner Jim Warren.
Identity of contributors will be protected upon request, within legal
limits and at the discretion of the list-owner.
Past postings are at ftp.cpsr.org: /cpsr/states/california/govaccess
and by WWW at http://www.cpsr.org/cpsr/states/california/govaccess .
To subscribe to GovAccess, email to Majordomo@well.com ('Subject' ignored)
message: subscribe GovAccess YourEmailAddr
To UNsubscribe from GovAccess, email to Majordomo@well.com
message: unsubscribe GovAccess YourEmailAddr
Anyone can retrieve this current GovAccess information message.
Send mail to: Majordomo@well.com (the 'Subject' line is ignored)
message: info GovAccess
--
Jim Warren, GovAccess list-owner and sometimes-immoderate moderator
Advocate & columnist, MicroTimes, Government Technology, BoardWatch, etc.
345 Swett Rd., Woodside CA 94062; voice/415-851-7075; fax/<# upon request>
jwarren@well.com (well.com = well.sf.ca.us)
[puffery: James Madison Freedom-of-Information Award, Soc. of Professional
Journalists - Nor.Calif.(1994); Hugh Hefner First-Amendment Award, Playboy
Foundation (1994); Pioneer Award, Electronic Frontier Foundation (1992, its
first year); founded Computers, Freedom & Privacy confs, InfoWorld, etc.]
------------------------------
From: ACLU Information <infoaclu@aclu.org>
Date: 18 May 1995 17:43:28 -0400
Subject: Cyber-Liberty Alert #4: State Bills to Regulate Online Content
**ACLU CYBER-LIBERTIES ALERT**
STOP STATE LEGISLATORS FROM CENSORING ONLINE CONTENT!
As more and more people sign on to the Internet and commercial online
networks, there is a growing panic that online networks are being
infiltrated by pedophiles and peddlers of obscenity and child
pornography.
Legislators are proposing severe criminal laws in an effort to purge
online networks of these influences.
Many of you were first made aware of this threat to your civil
liberties by the pending federal legislation - the so-called
"Communications Decency Act of 1995", proposed by Senator Exon (D-NE)
and recently approved by the Senate Commerce Committee as an amendment
to the massive telecommunications reform act now pending in Congress.
But while online civil libertarians were distracted by their laudable
rally against the Exon Bill, state legislators were busy crafting
similar bills at home.
**These state bills, like the federal Exon Bill, raise serious First
Amendment and privacy concerns.**
Legislators are attempting to extend to the online context criminal
laws that restrict the following categories of sexually expressive
material and behavior:
-the distribution of "obscene" materials to adults -the
distribution of materials deemed "harmful to minors" -the
solicitation of children to engage in sexual conduct -the
possession and distribution of visual materials produced through
the sexual exploitation of children
Through a lack of understanding about how new interactive technologies
work, legislators have managed to craft these laws to prohibit a wide
range of constitutionally protected material.
If enacted into law, these vague and overly broad bills could have the
following draconian effects:
* Prohibit communications with sexual content through private
e-mail between consenting adults, and inhibit people from making
comments that might or might not be prohibited.
* Require service providers to act as private censors to
avoid criminal liability for prohibited material produced by
subscribers on their networks.
* Prevent health care providers from posting sex education
materials to online networks.
To date, the ACLU has located and continues to monitor bills proposed
this year in twelve states: Alabama, California, Connecticut, Florida,
Illinois, Maryland, New York, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Virginia,
and Washington. The Oklahoma and Virginia bills were both voted into
law in recent weeks. Bills in Washington, Illinois, New York, and
Pennsylvania are moving rapidly through state legislatures.
ACT NOW:
* Contact your state legislators and urge them to oppose the
state bill.
* Urge legislators to hold full public hearings to identify
the problems and to explore technological alternatives to
censorship.
* Generate online discussion about the threats to civil
liberties posed by the state bill.
* Organize an online "grass roots" effort to stop the bill.
* Ask your online service provider to publicly oppose the
state bill.
* Write a letter to the editor of your local paper in
opposition to the state bill. Discuss the liberating potential of
online technology and provide examples.
For more information on the pending state bills, visit our gopher site,
the ACLU Free Reading Room:
gopher://aclu.org:6601/1/issues/cyberspace/state
This subdirectory contains the full text of some bills, in addition to
ACLU legal analyses of, and letters written to oppose, particular
bills.
=============================================================
ACLU Free Reading Room | A publications and information resource of the
gopher://aclu.org:6601 | American Civil Liberties Union National Office
ftp://ftp.pipeline.com /aclu
mailto:infoaclu@aclu.org | "Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty"
------------------------------
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 #046
******************************
.