Date: Fri, 05 Jan 96 13:39:50 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 V8#003
Computer Privacy Digest Fri, 05 Jan 96 Volume 8 : Issue: 003
Today's Topics: Moderator: Leonard P. Levine
Breasts on AOL
Re: Compuserve Censoring USENET
Re: Compuserve Censoring USENET
Bully for US Gov't Boo to Wisconsin
Re: Racial Classification
Get Off Unwanted email Lists
Public Universities and SSNs
Checking Account Status is Public
Re: The Year We Struggled with On-line Censorship
Some Available Data Searches
Info on CPD [unchanged since 11/22/95]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: cmoore@mailbag.com (Cathy Moore)
Date: 03 Jan 1996 16:25:47 GMT
Subject: Breasts on AOL
Organization: Berbee Information Networks Corporation
References: <comp-privacy8.1.2@cs.uwm.edu>
deselms@primenet.com (Gregg L. DesElms) writes: This story, of
course, comes on the heels of the decidedly ridiculous brouhaha a
month or so earlier in which America On-line, Inc. banned (and then
nearly immediately withdrew said ban on) the use of the word
"breast(s)" in user chat rooms, posting areas and e-mail.
A minor quibble:
I was using AOL at that time (I then gleefully dumped them) and was
part of the breast cancer discussion group that brought attention to
the problem. "Breast" was banned in chat room *names* and user
profiles (self-descriptions by AOL "members"). As far as I know, AOL
wasn't censoring "breast" in private e-mail, the chats themselves, or
discussion group posts--at least none of the e-mail, chats, or
discussion groups I was in. This may have been only because they
didn't have the time and technology, and it certainly doesn't reduce
the stupidity of the act.
The story, in case no one has posted this before:
In the summer, breast cancer survivors tried to form a chat room called
"Breast cancer survivors." They were told that the chat room name was
obscene. Someone tried variations, such as "boob cancer" and "hooter
cancer." AOL accepted these--they were not "obscene." After lots of
immediate and loud noise to AOL powers that be, "breast" became
acceptable again in chat room names. (Or at least "breast cancer"
did.)
About two months later, a breast cancer survivor scanned through user
profiles to find other women who described themselves as breast cancer
survivors. She found that all these posts had been purged because of
their allegedly obscene content.
I did a similar profile search using "hooters" and all the other
creative anatomical terms. Most of these showed up, used in all the
dumb ways you would expect, in unpurged, un-"obscene" profiles.
Several of us pointed out, *again*, to AOL powers that their obscenity
filter not only was prohibiting mature discussion of a life-and-death
issue, it wasn't working against other supposedly obscene content. We
received no replies that I'm aware of. A breast cancer survivor with
ties to the press then released the story to the media.
While AOL didn't respond to my letter or to the letters from any other
women I knew, it did respond *immediately* when the story was covered
by the press. The day after media coverage began, one woman heard on
the radio that AOL had changed its anti-"breast" policy in user
profiles. She logged on and found it was true.
Cathy
------------------------------
From: gmcgath@mv.mv.com (Gary McGath)
Date: 03 Jan 1996 20:23:45 GMT
Subject: Re: Compuserve Censoring USENET
Organization: Conceptual Design
References: <comp-privacy8.2.6@cs.uwm.edu>
fyoung@oxford.net (F Young) wrote: On the other hand, any
government's attempt to block certain newsgroups would likely
backfire. I would rather have adult materials restricted to adult
newsgroups (like the current situation), rather than blocking those
newsgroups and possibily making those seeking such materials to
post randomnly to the remaining newsgroups. Of course, government
have the power to block access to the Internet, period.
One interesting fact which has come out is that three of the newsgroups
banned in Germany are ClariNet newsgroups, and contain nothing but wire
service stories, which are seldom if ever "pornographic." The groups
are clari.news.crime.sex, clari.news.gays, and clari.news.sex. It may
be that this action is more concerned with managing news than with
"protecting" anyone from pornography.
--
Gary McGath gmcgath@mv.mv.com
http://www.mv.com/users/gmcgath
One world, one vendor, one Web browser? No, thanks!
------------------------------
From: "Mich Kabay [NCSA Sys_Op]" <75300.3232@compuserve.com>
Date: 04 Jan 96 10:27:19 EST
Subject: Re: Compuserve Censoring USENET
>From the German Press Agency news wire via CompuServe's Executive News
Service; translated by MK with the help of Power Translator Deluxe 1.0 from
Globalink Inc:
Druck auf CompuServe wachst - Staatsanwaltschaft fordert Gutachten
Munchen (dpa 96.01.03) - Der Druck auf den US-Online-Dienst
CompuServe, die Zugangssperre fur 200 Dateien im
weltumspannenden Computernetz Internet wieder aufzuheben,
wachst. Nach Ermittlungen der Munchener Staatsanwaltschaft
wegen des Verdachts der Verbreitung von Kinderpornographie
hatte das Unternehmen Dateien mit angeblich illegalen Inhalten
fur seine weltweit vier Millionen Kunden blockiert.
....
Copyright German Press Agency, 1996
Pressure on CompuServe increases - office of the District
Attorney demands expert opinions
Munich (German Press Agency) - Pressure is increasing on the
US online service CompuServe to cancel the embargo on access to
200 news groups on the Internet. After inquiries of the
Munich office of the District Attorney on suspicion of
dissemination of child pornography, CompuServe had blocked the
access to the news groups containing allegedly illegal contents
for its four million customers world wide.
Key points:
o Many protests and cancellations of subscriptions.
o Blame centering on CompuServe management.
o German subsidiary of CIS does not know when the ban on the
alt.sex groups will be lifted.
o Munich District Attorney's Office Chief State Prosecutor Manfred
Wick said that Internet access providers should have the
technical expertise to control access to such groups.
o In the view of the office of the District Attorney, CompuServe
must bear some responsibility for the data carried over its
network.
o The D.A. stated that the 200 news groups in question were included
on a list submitted to CIS as part of an inquiry; CompuServe,
state the prosecutors, chose on its own to ban access.
o Protests are growing internationally, especially by civil rights
groups and homosexual associations in the USA.
o Protestors see the embargo as a restraint of free speech.
o An action-group in San Francisco has called for a boycott of
two German beer brands and plans a protest on Thursday in front
of the Goethe-Institut.
o An organization in Frankfurt is appealing to 4000 organizations
dealing with children's welfare to participate in a meeting that
they hope will include the Dept. of Justic to discuss methods of
interfering with the display of child pornography on the Internet.
o The leader of the German Association of Journalists, Hubert
Engeroff, has called on the on-line service providers to exercise
self-restraint. Managers should banish criminal materials such
as pornography from their networks.
M. E. Kabay, Ph.D. / Director of Education, National Computer Security Assn
(Carlisle, PA)
------------------------------
From: "Prof. L. P. Levine" <levine@blatz.cs.uwm.edu>
Date: 04 Jan 1996 19:17:30 -0600 (CST)
Subject: Bully for US Gov't Boo to Wisconsin
Organization: University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
I just got my new tax forms.
My Social Security Number (SSN) did not appear on the federal form
cover but was only on a label folded into the middle of the book.
The state of Wisconsin, as usual, had my (and my wife's) SSN right on
the top of the cover.
Some years ago the Post Office, speaking for the federal government at
that time, asserted that there was no reason to be concerned about the
SSN appearing on the envelope or cover, as only postal workers (all
honest) ever see the envelope before they place it into your
(presumably locked) mailbox. They have gradually moved from this
position and this year have finally fixed it, it seems.
--
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: Marshall Clow <mclow@owl.csusm.edu>
Date: 03 Jan 1996 20:06:00 -0800
Subject: Re: Racial Classification
gmcgath@mv.MV.COM (Gary McGath) writes: An issue which I haven't
seen discussed much on this forum is how to deal with requests to
categorize oneself racially. Twice in the past two years I've been
faced with such requests.
I always answer "Native American", because I was born either in North
or South America. :-)
--
Marshall Clow Aladdin Systems <mailto:mclow@mailhost2.csusm.edu>
Warning: Objects in calendar are closer than they appear.
------------------------------
From: Dave Rasmussen <dave@opus.csd.uwm.edu>
Date: 04 Jan 1996 13:51:56 -0600 (CST)
Subject: Get Off Unwanted email Lists
From: inside@insideconnect.com (Inside Connections)
Date: 05 Nov 1995 12:44:27 -0800
Subject: The Solution To Unsolicited Email
Hello Everyone:
The Direct Electronic Mail Marketing Association D.E.M.M.A. has been
created to bring structure and order to the increasing tidal wave of
commercial email on the net. Our mission is to provide an environment
where businesses and consumers can conduct business via email and
prevent the spread of unsolicited email on the net. To help bring about
this goal we have created a universal mail server for subscribing and
unsubscribing to commercial email list.
We also have a universal complaint address so victims of unsolicited
mail can seek help and report violators.
http://www.memo.net/demma/dema.html
Our web site is still in it's infancy and will benefit from the
constructive feedback of the list. We look forward to receiving your
feedback and suggestions on the site as well as your thoughts on the
mission of the D.E.M.M.A.
Thank You
Mark Eberra
President
Charter Member
http://www.memo.net/demma/dema.html
--
Dave Rasmussen - Information & Media Technologies (ex-CSD) Client Services
Internet: dave@csd.uwm.edu Phone: 414-229-5133 2m HAM Radio: N9REJ
USmail: Box 413 Bol213, Milwaukee, WI 53201
------------------------------
From: wrf@ecse.rpi.edu (Wm. Randolph U Franklin)
Date: 04 Jan 1996 22:47:20 GMT
Subject: Public Universities and SSNs
Organization: ECSE Dept, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY, 12180 USA
Here are 2 examples of public universities asking for SSNs.
UT Austin asks for the applicant's SSN on recommendation forms, and
says that it is required. There is no privacy act notice. This would
seem to be illegal. It is also intimidating since an applicant might
be scared to make a fuss since the admissions process is so vague, and
the applicant would never be able to prove that complaining was why he
was rejected.
The State University of New York at Stony Brook asks for SSNs on forms
for conference participants, such as to get dorm housing and temporary
parking permits. However, no one complained when I omitted my SSN on
the latter.
--
Wm. Randolph Franklin, wrf@ecse.rpi.edu, (518) 276-6077; Fax: -6261
ECSE Dept., 6026 JEC, Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst, Troy NY, 12180 USA
------------------------------
From: wrf@ecse.rpi.edu (Wm. Randolph U Franklin)
Date: 04 Jan 1996 22:50:57 GMT
Subject: Checking Account Status is Public
Organization: ECSE Dept, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY, 12180 USA
Every bank (and S&L etc) that I've checked with will tell you over the
phone whether a check you're holding from one of their customers would
clear if you deposited it.
This means that if you know someone's account number, perhaps because
they wrote you a check in the past, then you can call the bank, pretend
to have a check from them for $X, and determine whether their balance
is >=X.
No bank manager that I've asked sees any privacy problems with this.
--
Wm. Randolph Franklin, wrf@ecse.rpi.edu, (518) 276-6077; Fax: -6261
ECSE Dept., 6026 JEC, Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst, Troy NY, 12180 USA
------------------------------
From: bernie@fantasyfarm.com (Bernie Cosell)
Date: 05 Jan 1996 03:06:41 GMT
Subject: Re: The Year We Struggled with On-line Censorship
Organization: Fantasy Farm Fibers
References: <comp-privacy8.2.15@cs.uwm.edu>
gkastane@scsn.net (George Kastanes) wrote: ... The real issue is
whether the internet or any media should be subject to censorship
at all under any circumstances. ... ... We have laws that
preclude dissemination of pornography based on community standards.
That entire concept is in and of itself patently absurd.
This view is certainly a significant aspect of the debate. The problem
is that you are wildly out of line on the matter. There has never been
a moment, from the time the Pilgrims first set foot on the continent
throught the First Congress up to the present day, when there haven't
been laws and regulations of the type you find so "patently absurd";
there is at least 300 years of legal tradition in this country to the
contrary. Moreover, if you read the Supreme Court decisions about
Pornography matters you will see that the question has only been "what"
and "how", *never* has it been "whether".
And so the notion that the laws about Pornography are somhow contrary
to the First Amendment and are an unwarranted and unanticipated
imposition on us poor network folks is really off the mark. If you are
going to try to mount a real frontal assault on the "entire concept",
then you are pursuing the most hopeless of fool's errands. Indeed,
*every* other medium and public channel deals with these sorts of
restrictions, and so it would be naive in the extreme not to assume
that *some* sort of corresponding limitations will be imposed on the
network.
This is not to say that the Exon bill is a good thing... only that
*some*sort* of legislation of that type is truly inevitable. The
point? Well: if you want to waste your time and breath tilting at
windmills, then that's fine but you'll have essentially dealt yourself
out of the _real_ game that is going on and will mostly have to put up
with whatever the legislators throw at us. On the other hand, a
different approach is to figure out what the *right* legislation ought
to be... to try to have your expertise and knowledge help shape
_rational_ legisilation, rather than letting your ill-informedness on
the underlying legal [and social] issues condemn you to the fringes.
On the other hand, if you do want to pursue the quest, at least be
aware of how tough a row it is going to be to hoe. You'll have to make
a case that the network is a medium different from *any* other, and
that that difference should be the reason to overturn hundreds of years
of *unquestioned* legal precedent, rather than that difference meaning
that some sort of new and innovative legislation is called for. Note
that you won't find all that much support: the adult film and book
folk, the their distribution channels and the retail outlets they use
all are *already* unquestionably subject to the sort of regulations
you're claiming are "absurd".
--
Bernie Cosell Fantasy Farm Fibers
bernie@fantasyfarm.com Pearisburg, VA
--> Too many people, too few sheep <--
------------------------------
From: "Prof. L. P. Levine" <levine@blatz.cs.uwm.edu>
Date: 03 Jan 1996 20:21:17 -0600 (CST)
Subject: Some Available Data Searches
Organization: University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
The following is a coupling of two postings on alt.privacy . I am not
sure of how authentic it is but I would bet that most of the material
can be gleaned from sources like the following. It was copied from
this non-moderated group without permission.
--
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: slavisc@wizvax.net ()
Subject: SSN database searches
Date: 03 Jan 1996 10:04:37 GMT
Organization: Wizvax Communications, Troy, N.Y. 12180 USA
Newsgroups: alt.privacy
I found the following article in alt.private.investigator. The guy
that posted this seems to suggest that any of the following services
are available upon request to anyone willing to shell out the cash.
Some of the services such as finding someone's SSN by suppling thier
name and current address seem highly illegal. Can anyone tell me if
this is indeed legal and who actually has access to these services.
slavisc@wizvax.net
Electronic Services
Garland, TX 75042
EXPLANATION OF SEARCHES & PRICES
NATIONAL DATABASES
VERIFICATION/LOCATOR SEARCHES
1. SSN TRACING. Illustrates all names, current addresses, former
addresses linked with this ssn. $68.00
2. NATIONAL KRIS-CROSS PLUS. Link listed phone number back to address,
or link address back to listed phone number. $80.00
3. NATIONAL DOSSIER. This report usually will provide known addresses,
SSN, telephone numbers, vessels, aircraft and neighbors' name,
addresses and telephone numbers. $75.00
4. SURNAME SEARCHES. City search. $48.00, State Search. $55.00,
Nationwide. $80.00. Each report will provide up to 50 names.
5. FIND SSN. Need name and current address. $55.00.
6. DEATH REPORTS. Provide first name, last name, DOB or DOD etc and we
receive all of the most probable matches. Information returned is state
where ssn was issued, 5 digit zip code of last known residence, 5 digit
zip code of of last known payed benefit. $58.00.
7. VERIFY MEDICAL DOCTORS/STOCK BROKERS/SECURITY DEALERS LICENSE. Full
name, ssn and state to search. $75.00
CRIMINAL RECORDS SEARCH
1. CRIMINAL HISTORIES REPORTS. Provides any Criminal charges or
convictions from county, state or federal. Not all states provide a
statewide search Need name, DOB, ssn, city, county and state. a.
county search-$75.00, state search-$90.00, federal-$100.00
2. WORKERS COMPENSATION CLAIMS. Information usually returned accident
date, type, employer. Some states have restrictions. $80.00
MOTOR VEHICLE REPORTS
1. MVR REPORTS. Driving records, vin, tag number. Info will contain
information on DUI, DWI, reckless operation, speeding tickets,
suspensions, etc. Drivers License by DL#. $55.00, Drivers License by
DOB. $75.00. Tag #.$70.00 Alpha Search (vehicles owned). $95.00
Florida, Texas, Oregon quick turnaround. Some states have restrictions
BUSINESS/CORPORATE SEARCHES
1. COMMERCIAL CREDIT. This report provides dates of Incorporation,
historic payment guide, highest credit amount extended, payment trend,
DBT (average number of days that is takes firm to pay bills. $50.00 for
intial search fee, $95.00 if a report is returned.
2. UCC FILINGS. Filings all corporate record information filed with
the state attorneys office by the company including Uniform Commercial
code filings which is a record of a lien aganist a company. $90.00
3. TRADEMARKS SEARCH. Search by Trademark, Company name, Company by
address, or serial number of Trademark. $68.00
REAL PROPERTY ASSET SEARCHES
1. PROPERTY SEARCHES. determine ownership of property, book, parcel,
and platt number and accessed value. Not all states offer staewide
search and some have limited counties. County $75.00 State $135.00.
PUBLIC RECORDS DATABASES
1. PUBLIC RECORDS. These include judgements by state, bankruptcy by
state. This includes any action on either individual or company.
$68.00
2. FAA RECORDS. Records will identify current medical and ratings or
Tail number can identify type of plane and current owner. $85.00
TEXAS DATABASES
1. TEXAS BOAT REGISTRATIONS. Search by name, address, title number or
boat.motor ID number. Provides make, model year, serial number, title
date. $65.00
2. TEXAS CORPORATIONS. Provide corporate number, corporate name,
address. Report contains corporations status, filing date, resident
agent, officers, documented vessels, vehicles and aircraft. $75.00
3. TEXAS ALCOHOL BEVERAGE LICENSES. Provide establishment name or
license #, or owner's name and report will include owners name and
mailing address, telephone number, date of license issue and expiration
of licenses. $65.00
4. TEXAS VOTER REGISTRATION. Provide name or address, last name DOB.
This report will provide age, DOB, voter certificate number, precinct,
county, and mailing address. $65.00
DATA SEARCH SERVICES
1. 3000-A supply published or unpublished phone number and we supply
subscriber name and address. $120.00
2. 3000-B supply name, address, & residental phone #; we supply current
months IN-STATE or OUT OF STATE calls (separate searches please
specify) w\dates. supply SSN if available. $135.00.
3. 3000-BB supply same info as above and we supply 3 months IN-STATE OR
OUT OF STATE calls with dates. Current month and back. $200.00
4. 3000-C supply subjects name and current address and we supply phone
number. Please supply ssn if available. $120.00
5. 3000-D supply phone number which has been changed to a non-published
# and we will provide new phone # and current address. $128.00
6. 3000-DD supply subjects disconnected phone # and we supply last
known information or forwarding information (whichever is available)
$130.00
7. 3000-E supply subjects name, city, state and ssn# (if avaliable) and
we supply current address and phone. $125.00
8. 3000-F supply subjects pager # (beeper) and we supply subscriber
information as it appears through carrier. $140.00
9. 3000-G supply residental phone # and we supply name & address &
current months IN-STATE or OUT OF STATE calls w/dates. $175.00
10. 3000-GG supply residential phone # and we supply name & address & 3
months IN STATE OR OUT OF STATE calls w/dates. $200.00
11. 3000-H supply subjects name, city, state & ssn and we supply
address through Utilities. $135.00
12. 3000-J supply subjects name, PO Box # and ssn and we supply
physical address on file with Post Office. $155.00
13. 3000-K supply current 800 or 900 number & we supply service name
and address. $125.00
14. 3000-L supply subjects private PO Box information and we supply
name and address on file. $150.00
15. 3000-M supply subjects cellular phone# and ssn (if available) and
we supply the billing name and address. $135.00
16. 3000-N supply subjects name, address, cellular and ssn (if
available) and we supply current months calls. $275.00
17. 3000-P supply subjects address including city & state, we supply
name & phone number. $135.00
18. 3000-R supply subjects voice mail number and we supply name &
address. $130.00
19. 3000-S supply subjects name, address, phone #, SSN and we supply
ALL current Nationwide banking information. $365.00
20. 3000-Z supply name and SSN and we supply current employment.
$175.00. (subjects address and phone number will help to expedite).
******IMPORTANT , PLEASE NOTE***** The 3000 series searches require a
5-6 business day turnaround time with the exception of 3000-S &
3000-Z. These require a 10-12 business days.
All of your requests are private and held in strictest of confidence.
All 3000 searches and services are Nationwide. All 3000 series
searches are on a CONTINGENCY basis.
All other reports and searches are billed for the services provided,
not based upon the results of the information. The more information you
provide will result in what information you will recieve. Some reports
and searches require additional searches to obtain the results you are
trying to obtain.
PAYMENT POLICY. All searches and reports are NOT processed until
payment IS RECEIVED. Credit is available ONLY to established accounts
with net terms of 10 days only.
No Record, set of records, or report supplied by Electronic Services is
acceptable for use as an exhibit or as evidence. The reports supplied
by Electronic Services are supplied for information purposes only. It
is the sole responsiblity of the recipient of any information, to
obtain evidential verification of all information which is of
evidentail quality. Information is obtained from multitude databases,
record keeping systems, and other sources over which Electronic
Services and/or its suppliers have no control. These are fallible
electronic and human sources and there can absolutley no warranty
expressed or implied as to the accuracy, completeness, timeless, or
availability of the records listed, nor to the fitness for the purpose
of the recipent of such records or reports.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
From: malamb@ix.netcom.com(Michael Lamb )
Subject: SSN database searches
Date: 03 Jan 1996 20:59:19 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Newsgroups: alt.privacy
I have read this post before, and am sure that many others have as well
- so I won't quote it back.
Let me give you my background first, so you know where I come from on
this: I spent ten years as a private investigator and also have
considerable time as an active police officer. I am also concerned
about the easy violations of privacy, many of which I used to my
advantage when paid for it.
The post you referred to is a scam - but ONLY in that their rates are
about a zillion times what the service is worth. The information is in
fact accessable. Some of their services are a bit shady, perhaps
unlawful, but most are very legal. Let's drop the fact that many are
public record (driving records, criminal records, etc) and readily
accesible to any and all who know where to look.
To the SSN part:
One of my specialties as a PI was "skip/trace" - I would find people
that didn't want to be found.
I called TRW, and had them set up a terminal on my home desk. I opened
accounts with TRW, TransUnion, and CBI-Equifax. I had immediate access
to anybodys credit records.
Now, here is the kicker. Legally, I could only access a complete
credit report if I had a valid reason - i.e. was hired by a bank to
find one of their skips. Since every full report inquiry I did would
leave a "fingerprint", I didn't do this (although the temptation to
look up my friends credit ratings was strong at times).
But doing the SSN search, or name and address search, did not access
any "confidential" information. I could type in "123 Maple Ave,
yourcity, 12345-6789) and get the names and SSN's of anyone who had a
credit rating and lived at that address within the last ten years.
Quite legal.
If I had your SSN, I could enter that in a query and find out all names
and addresses associated with that SSN.
All legal.
Did you know that TransUnion also lists addresses by buying magazine
and other databases?
Even if you don't have a credit report, if you are deep underground -
all you have to do is subscribe to "Outlaws Monthly" or whatever and
your name will show up at that address.
All legal.
If I suspect you live at 123 maple, I pull a query on that address -
everything associated to that address from just about every conceivable
database is accessable.
If your creditor or ex-wife gives me your ssn, then I can come up with
a lot of legal and readily available information about you and where
you may be. If I want to bend the rules a little, I can come up with
much much more.
All legal, or most of it anyway. Is this a violation of privacy? I
think so, but I used it to my advantage. But I take precautions to
make it difficult for anyone to use the same tricks on me.
But don't even consider paying this jerks rates. A reputable local PI
will pull all that information for you for about $50.00 total (plus
expenses) - not charge you $80.00 + for a $5.00 doc and 2 minutes of
connect time.
------------------------------
From: "Prof. L. P. Levine" <levine@blatz.cs.uwm.edu>
Date: 22 Nov 1995 14:25:54 -0600 (CST)
Subject: Info on CPD [unchanged since 11/22/95]
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 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.
Web browsers will find it at gopher://gopher.cs.uwm.edu.
---------------------------------+-----------------------------------------
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 | Web: gopher://gopher.cs.uwm.edu
---------------------------------+-----------------------------------------
------------------------------
End of Computer Privacy Digest V8 #003
******************************
.