Date: Tue, 02 Jul 96 11:32:37 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 V9#001
Computer Privacy Digest Tue, 02 Jul 96 Volume 9 : Issue: 001
Today's Topics: Moderator: Leonard P. Levine
Welcome to Volume 9
Re: Cookies
Re: Cookies
Re: Cookies
Re: Cookies
Re: Cookies
Re: Cookies
California Caller ID News
INS: Security Is In Hand
Re: Privacy while Downloading from Newsgroup
HUMOR: Top Ten Industry Practices
Information Technology and Social Accountability [long]
Info on CPD [unchanged since 11/22/95]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Prof. L. P. Levine" <levine@blatz.cs.uwm.edu>
Date: 02 Jul 1996 10:35:01 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Welcome to Volume 9
Organization: University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
On April 27th 1992 Dennis G. Rears, a systems programmer at the
Picatinny Arsenal in New Jersey began CPD, the Computer Privacy Digest,
a continuation of his telecom-priv list which he had run for some time
before that.
On December 3rd 1993, I took over the running of the digest with Volume
4 when Dennis' "day job" work load became too heavy to continue the
Digest work. I have been running CPD ever since.
It has been my practice to begin a new volume with the first January
and the first July issue of each year. This is the first issue of
Volume 9.
With this issue we announce the presence of CPD on the web with a home
page located at
http://www.csd.uwm.edu/org/comp-privacy/ .
The home page is very rudamentary at the moment (I also have a day job)
consisting only of a simple descripter and some pointers to addresses
appropriate to the topic. However, I now expect to have two young
interns working with me for a part of the summer and I hope to improve
on this real soon now.
For those who are graphically impaired, the logo I have used for the
CPD home page is a rotary cardfile locked up with a padlock. It seemed
to indicate data privacy to me. I even got permission from Master Lock
to use their product in this way. If there is ANYONE who has a more
reasonable logo, or who can draw better than I can I would appreciate
an improved logo. (No logo involving an eye peeking through venetian
blinds or a hermit in front of his cave please.)
As they say in Atlanta, "Let the games begin."
---------------------------------+-----------------------------------------
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
---------------------------------+-----------------------------------------
------------------------------
From: frogfarm@yakko.cs.wmich.edu (Damaged Justice)
Date: 28 Jun 1996 12:31:56 GMT
Subject: Re: Cookies
Organization: Somewhere just far enough outside of your jurisdiction
References: <comp-privacy8.51.1@cs.uwm.edu>
Scott Wyant (scott_wyant@loop.com) allegedly wrote: Oh, and one
other thing. If you edit your cookie file BEFORE you connect to
"doubleclick," and then jump around at the site, you'll notice that
they DON'T hand you a cookie. I probed the site pretty carefully,
checking the MagiCookie file, and nothing happened. Until I closed
Netscape. The LAST thing the 'doubleclick" site did was.... You
guesed it. They handed me a cookie. So much for making the
client-server negotiation more efficient. (In fairness, that
cookie may have been in memory until I closed Netscape -- I can't
tell for sure.) Scott Wyant Spinoza Ltd.
For the uninitiated, what exactly is a cookie and what does it do? Are
they just as dangerous to someone like me, who uses Lynx, as opposed to
Netscape or another graphical browser?
--
"I *did* take a still of the placenta from Tina's birth, but when the wife
heard I was going to scan it and post it on a.b.p.t. she hid it and the
negatives. I've looked, but with no success to date."
(robnorth@freenet.edmonton.ab.ca on alt.tasteless)
------------------------------
From: dp@world.std.com (Jeff DelPapa)
Date: 28 Jun 1996 15:05:18 GMT
Subject: Re: Cookies
Organization: Chaos and Confusion
References: <comp-privacy8.51.1@cs.uwm.edu>
Scott Wyant <scott_wyant@loop.com> wrote: Until I closed
Netscape. The LAST thing the 'doubleclick" site did was.... You
guesed it. They handed me a cookie. So much for making the
client-server negotiation more efficient. (In fairness, that
cookie may have been in memory until I closed Netscape -- I can't
tell for sure.) Scott Wyant Spinoza Ltd.
There is a simple way to keep sites from leaving crumbs on your
machine: After you delete cookie.txt, create one of length 0 (touch on
unix, new folder on win95), and set it read only. Cookies cease to be
a concern. They can't leave any, and when they ask for the existing
one, they get silence. Netscape 1.x seems happy with the arrangement.
(I won't use 3.x until they ship binaries that don't contain the client
side execution mechanisims (java, javascript, I am not satisfied with a
switch), and provide for access by the disabled. (you must use a
pointing device to select a link. Tabbing between them is a pain, but
possible on MS IE and other Spry derived browsers, the Lynx numbering
system is much better))
------------------------------
From: peter@baileynm.com (Peter da Silva)
Date: 28 Jun 1996 15:38:36 GMT
Subject: Re: Cookies
Organization: Network/development platform support, NMTI
References: <comp-privacy8.39.5@cs.uwm.edu> <comp-privacy8.51.2@cs.uwm.edu>
John <jpp@netcom.com> wrote: Cookies add an important feature to
the web - state tracking - if you want to buy somthing from a site
it's important to be able to track from page to page (so the order
form can know which product you were looking at).
Funny thing, though... that sort of state tracking has always been
possible by adding a cookie to the URL presented to the client. The
whole purpose of the Netscape cookie files is precisely to add this
*state* to the system.
Isn't it funny how this keeps coming up. The security holes in Java and
Javascript are due to the ability to add *state* to the language.
Viruses are hidden *state*. Any time you you add the ability for third
parties to invisibly manage state on your system you get these security
and privacy concerns! Remember the AOL temporary file issue? Remember
the Registration Wizard?
Microsoft's doing that again, by the way... there's a new remote
administration tool in the next release of Windows 95 (Windows 96? 97?)
that will let you allow Microsoft into your system to help debug
problems. A useful idea, I hasten to add, but fraught with hazards. I
hope they've learned from the last time around.
--
Peter da Silva (NIC: PJD2) `-_-'
Bailey Network Management 'U`
+1 713 274 5180 "Har du kramat din varg idag?"
Bailey pays for my technical expertise.
------------------------------
From: Kevin McAleavey <kevinmca@wizvax.net>
Date: 29 Jun 1996 02:18:26 -0700
Subject: Re: Cookies
Organization: wizvax.net
References: <comp-privacy8.51.1@cs.uwm.edu>
Scott Wyant wrote: Until I closed Netscape. The LAST thing the
'doubleclick" site did was.... You guesed it. They handed me a
cookie. So much for making the client-server negotiation more
efficient. (In fairness, that cookie may have been in memory until
I closed Netscape -- I can't tell for sure.) Scott Wyant Spinoza
Ltd.
Please forgive me my morsel of spam here - I promise to be good about
it. I have just released a product called NSCLEAN for MS_Windoze. It
is a program which allows you to kill cookies, cache files, newsgroup
traces, the notorious Netscape "history file" (trust me, after you've
seen the history file contents, cookies are nothing) and other pieces
of Netscape which remain on your computer for no known purpose after
you've quit Netscape. It will sell by direct mail for $20.00.
Now I know mama didn't raise no suckers, so I am in the middle of
arranging with simtel.net, jumbo.com and a few other FTP locations to
make available for free a program which will be called NS-DEMO1.EXE
which will allow you to look at the contents of these various files.
Naturally I am trying to sell you the $20.00 product so the demo will
not delete any of these files. But it will let you SEE them at least.
If anyone is interested in getting a copy prior to the availability of
NS-DEMO1.EXE on FTP sites (shouldn't be more than a couple of days
depending on how fast I get permission to upload), email me and I will
tell you more about it.
Sorry if this appears to be like so much other spam you've sat through,
but NSCLEAN is a viable solution and if it makes ya feel any better, I
*hate* spam ... spam, eggs bacon and spam ... spam spam spam and spam
The ns-demo.ZIP program has been posted and I wanted to include the
locations if you wish to add the comment that the demo is now
available. You might want to examine it yourself ...
http://www.simtel.net/pub/simtelnet/win3/inet/ns-demo1.zip
ftp://ftp.simtel.net/pub/simtelnet/win3/inet/ns-demo1.zip
Thank you for your patience. Since this product is the first step in
what I hope to make available as security tools for ordinary people, I
consider the information germaine to your list and apologize once again
for "advertising" it. I'm rather proud of its capabilities and
simplicity.
------------------------------
From: ejm@sprynet.com (Eric)
Date: 29 Jun 1996 11:35:50 GMT
Subject: Re: Cookies
Organization: Netcom
References: <comp-privacy8.51.1@cs.uwm.edu>
Scott Wyant <scott_wyant@loop.com> wrote: This list has seen
discussion about the little "cookie" that a Netscape server hands
to your browser. Have you wondered how someone might use it to
make some money?
As part of my boot-up, I have a batch file that deletes whatever cookie
file is lying around. It's not fool-proof, but it cuts down on what's
in my cookie file in any session. :)
------------------------------
From: Ken Johnson <ken.johnson@phdelmac.tapestry.com>
Date: 29 Jun 1996 16:39:02 -0500
Subject: Re: Cookies
Organization: Tapestry Computing, Inc.
References: <comp-privacy8.39.5@cs.uwm.edu> <comp-privacy8.51.2@cs.uwm.edu>
John wrote: Cookies add an important feature to the web - state
tracking - if you want to buy somthing from a site it's important
to be able to track from page to page (so the order form can know
which product you were looking at). The thing that has people bent
out of shap is the option to make cookies persistant (i.e make them
live beyond one session). This is easy to fix by making your
cookies files read only.
Cookies are not the same as a membership card. When I fill out a
membership application and get a membership card, I KNOW that I just
gave someone a bunch of information about myself, and agreed to this.
With cookies (especially with inexperienced users) you don't know that
information is being tracked on you, nor do you have any control over
how this information is used.
I agree with you that the appropriate use cookies is a good thing, but
unfortunately the Internet has become innudated with marketing people
out to make a quick buck, for example:
ad.doubleclick.net FALSE / FALSE 942195540 IAF 39121a
I think the best thing to do is to set your browser to warn you before
it establishes a cookie, and only let it do so if there is a good
reason (like ordering cds at cdnow.com, etc.), not because someones web
page happended to have a doubleclick image at the top.
--
Ken Johnson
------------------------------
From: Beth Givens <bgivens@pwa.acusd.edu>
Date: 27 Jun 1996 18:51:13 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: California Caller ID News
CALLER ID: THE CASE FOR CONSUMER EDUCATION
by Beth Givens, Privacy Rights Clearinghouse
The introduction of Caller ID to California has been an enlightening
study in what happens when consumers are given adequate information to
make meaningful decisions about safeguarding their privacy. The
California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) has mandated that the
local phone companies educate consumers about the privacy implications
of Caller ID. The CPUC has also required that the phone companies make
both Complete and Selective Blocking available to consumers at no
charge (called Per Line and Per Call Blocking in other states).
Since March 1996, radio and TV spots as well as full-page newspaper ads
have repeatedly told California consumers that Caller ID is coming in
June 1996, that free blocking options are available, and that consumers
can call an 800 number to choose either Complete or Selective Blocking.
Bill inserts regarding Caller ID Blocking have appeared in customers'
monthly phone bills. Consumer organizations have been funded to educate
hard- to-reach populations. Information about blocking options has been
made available in 21 languages.
The results? The customer service phone lines of Pacific Bell and GTE
(California's major local phone companies) have been flooded with
calls. Both companies have had to hire more staff to handle the volume.
And now, the California Public Utilities Commission and the Federal
Communications Commission have agreed to allow Pacific Bell and GTE to
delay the implementation of Caller ID in order to catch up with the
onslaught. The delay will allow the phone companies to send
confirmation letters to all phone customers indicating which blocking
option they have selected, or been assigned by default (a CPUC
requirement), and will enable the phone companies to have all their
switches ready.
A recent survey of Californians found that 74% of those polled knew
about Caller ID and that 67% were aware there is a way to prevent the
delivery of their phone number to the called party. This is a
phenomenal rate of awareness for a three-month public education
campaign. Unofficial sources indicate that about 50% of households are
expected to have chosen the Complete Blocking (Per Line) option, in
other words, maximum privacy protection.
The moral of the story? The CPUC's three-part strategy has been an
effective way to mitigate the privacy impacts of a new technology. That
strategy is outlined as follows:
Step one is to conduct a privacy impact assessment of the technology
(which the CPUC did in the early 1990s). The second step is to require
the entity which introduces the technology to build in privacy
protection mechanisms (in the case of Caller ID, these are Complete and
Selective Blocking). The third step is to require that extensive
consumer education be provided to consumers to explain the privacy
implications of the technology and alert them to what they can do to
protect their privacy.
It should be pointed out that the CPUC insisted that the educational
"message" which the phone companies impart be truly educational, and
not a marketing pitch. The phone companies were not allowed to offer
Caller ID until their plans were approved by the CPUC. The CPUC
gathered together a team of consumer advocates who reviewed phone
company plans and educational materials. It also hired an outside
evaluator, Professor Brenda Dervin, an expert in public communication
campaigns from Ohio State University's Department of Communication, to
critique Pacific Bell's education plan. Many of these individuals'
suggestions were incorporated into the education campaign.
The dark cloud on the horizon of this relatively sunny scene has been
the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). The California Public
Utilities Commission had originally required the phone companies to
automatically provide Complete Blocking to all households with
unlisted/unpublished numbers -- about 50% of California households. The
CPUC reasoned that since these households were already paying a monthly
fee to keep their phone numbers private, they would no doubt want the
Complete Blocking option and should therefore not have to expressly
request it.
But the FCC pre-empted the CPUC and established the weaker privacy
measure, Selective Blocking, as the nationwide blocking standard.
(Selective Blocking is called Per Call Blocking in other states.
Callers must enter *67 before dialing each and every call in which
number blocking is desired.) Court rulings upheld the FCC's position.
The FCC's decision is unfortunate. The California Public Utilities
Commission had undergone an exhaustive technology assessment process,
spanning several years. The CPUC's analysis took into account the
unique nature of California -- for example, the fact that the state has
the highest percentage of unpublished numbers in the country, and that
the California constitution has an exceptionally strong
right-to-privacy clause. The FCC's rather weak argument, that Caller ID
with a Per Call Blocking standard is good for the economy, has
prevailed over a much stronger body of evidence.
In the absence of honoring California's technology assessment process,
the FCC would do well study the state's consumer awareness campaign and
its successful results. California has demonstrated that a proactive
consumer awareness campaign can go a long way to lessen the potentially
harmful effects of a new technology.
There have been a couple interesting sidelights to California's Caller
ID awareness campaign. The first involves the public's massive response
to the consumer awareness campaign and the apparent inability of
Pacific Bell to cope with the flood of requests for Complete Blocking.
Many consumers who had requested the maximum blocking option received
letters from the phone company stating erroneously that they had opted
for Selective Blocking, the weaker measure. Confusion reigned. As a
result, Pacific Bell decided to delay its Caller ID implementation date
until the matter is cleared up.
The second sidelight involves 800 and 900 numbers. The Caller ID
educational materials have pointed out that blocking does not work with
800 and 900 numbers because a different technology, called Automatic
Number Identification (ANI), is involved. Most consumers are not aware
that when they call 800 numbers, they are transmitting their own phone
numbers. Many contacted the phone company, CPUC, Privacy Rights
Clearinghouse and other consumer organizations to indicate their
outrage about ANI and to express frustration at not being able to block
their phone numbers on those calls.
This only goes to underscore a point made earlier: Consumer education
works. When consumers are given adequate information about the privacy
implications of a technology, they take action.
Let's hope that what California has learned from this unprecedented
consumer awareness campaign is applied to other situations where
communications technologies have the potential to threaten personal
privacy.
Beth Givens Voice: 619-260-4160
Project Director Fax: 619-298-5681
Privacy Rights Clearinghouse Hotline (Calif. only):
Center for Public Interest Law 800-773-7748
University of San Diego 619-298-3396 (elsewhere)
5998 Alcala Park e-mail: bgivens@acusd.edu
San Diego, CA 92110 http://www.acusd.edu/~prc
------------------------------
From: taxhaven@ix.netcom.com (Adam Starchild )
Date: 29 Jun 1996 04:00:50 GMT
Subject: INS: Security Is In Hand
Organization: Netcom
Taken from Business Travel News, June 24, 1996:
INS: Security Is In Hand
New York - International travelers will soon be able to clear Customs
simply by placing their hands on an electronic reader.
Long envisioned as the future of security, this (dare we say) foolproof
method of identification, called "hand geometrics," will become
familiar to travelers when the Immigration and Naturalization Service
starts rolling out INFOPASS in August.
The agency will add one U.S. city per month following a recently
completed three-year test in which over 160,000 passengers cleared the
INS based on the unique shape of their hands and a clean record.
When entering the United States and the INS facility, the traveler
simply puts the card and his hand through the readers. If clearance is
approved, a receipt is printed and the traveler moves to Customs.
The automated system will cut processing time from one to two minutes
to less than 30 seconds -- and possibly as few as 11, said Ron Hayes,
assistant chief inspector for the INS.
"We can't seem to break the floor of 11 seconds for the record," said
Hayes, who noted that "of 6,000 checks where an inspector verifies the
computer's approval of passenger clearance, we haven't found a single
error or counterfeit card."
Tests at Newark, JFK and Toronto will be expanded to Miami in August,
followed by Vancouver, Houston, LA and Honolulu.
In order to enroll, travelers must be interviewed by an inspector at
the airport's INS facility. The traveler fills out a form that is
entered into the INS database and transferred to a credit card-sized
card. The traveler then has a hand geometrics template taken, which
stores an accurate mathematical representation of the hand.
Hayes said INFOPASS service is free but might require a fee in the
future. He also suggested that it is only useful for people who travel
frequently and do not have a "look-out" record with the agency.
Hayes said INS initially planned to use fingerprints for
identification, but the airlines suggested hand geometrics. Similar
programs in place in Canada, Singapore, Holland and Germany will be
compatible with the INS system this year.
-- Jay Campbell
(I notice that this article calls it INFOPASS. Earlier articles I've
seen called it INSPass.)
--
Posted by Adam Starchild
The Offshore Entrepreneur at http://www.au.com/offshore
------------------------------
From: shh19@shell01.vivanet.com (Steve Hunter)
Date: 02 Jul 1996 05:35:18 GMT
Subject: Re: Privacy while Downloading from Newsgroup
Organization: VivaNET, Rochester, NY's Internet Provider: (716) 475-1610
References: <comp-privacy8.49.9@cs.uwm.edu> <comp-privacy8.50.3@cs.uwm.edu>
acar@vcn.bc.ca (Al Acar) wrote: I can think of 3 possibilities (And
I'm sure there're more...)
1- People hacking into your ISP from outside,
2- People who use the same ISP as you do and have found
a way to access other user's account info (internal
hackers, if you will)
3- Anyone who can use a newsgroup search engine- this will
show only those newsgroups you've been active in. But if
follows that if you've been active in those groups, you're
probably downloading them as well.
O.K. so, let's say I've downloaded the plans for a nuclear device from
my PC based system. (PC at home directly into my server account. I
don't know if that's IP, TCP, ISP, BBC or B.B. King) No shell, no
employer, just me and my faithful PC. Can I expect the FBI at my door
tomorrow morning asking to see my A-Bomb, please?"
--
Steve Hunter | We are the music makers, and
Buffalo, NY, USA | We are the dreamers of the dreams.
shh19@vivanet.com | --Willy Wonka
------------------------------
From: alfredo@crl.com (Alfredo Gomez)
Date: 28 Jun 1996 05:27:48 GMT
Subject: HUMOR: Top Ten Industry Practices
Organization: Destroy Fascist Republicans, Inc.
Hi, folks! I wrote this fun post for the privacy mailing list
maintained by the FTC, where there is a lot of close-quarter
debating, as you can tell.
"The privacy list is run automatically by the Majordomo list
manager. Send a "help" command to majordomo@ftc.gov for
assistance."
= = = = = =
Audience: <WILD CHEERING>
Announcer: LIIIVE! From San Francisco! Heeeeere's Alfredo
Letttttterman!
Alfredo : Hi Anton, hi Paul Schaeffer! I have in my hot little hands,
a copy of tonight's Top 10!
Audience: <WILD APPLAUSE>
Alfredo: The top ten category tonight! (Taps blue card on desk and
makes funny faces at camera. Audience laughs) I say, the category
tonight! Top ten tricks, excuses and demagoguery used by those pesky
info-thieves!
Audience: <BURSTS OUT LAUGHING AND CLAPPING>
Alfredo: Here we go, number 10!
OBJECTIVITIS! Privacy wouldn't really work for all these millions of
totally fake reasons! Look at *how many* fake reasons there are!
Alfredo : Looks at Paul Schaeffer and asks, "Paul! Isn't that also
known as Red-Herring-itis?
Paul: I think so, Dave. I mean, Alfredo.
Alfredo: Thaaaat's what I thought.
Number 9! OFFER SOLUTIONS THAT AREN'T SOLUTIONS! Wouldn't it be
better if we just *pretended* that we had privacy? That way, no one
would have to worry about it and it would go away! Here, write 10,000
letters to this telemarketer and ask him to take you off his list. Do
the same for the other million telemarketers out there.
Number 8! SCARE MONGERING! Dream up totally ridiculous (but scary)
scenarios where you can't get health care or credit cards or even
CABBAGE PATCH DOLLS if you don't give up your privacy!
Number 7! AD-HOMINEM ATTACKS! If you are on the ropes, and your ass
got nailed for saying something stupid, or you got unmasked as an
industry goon, try to turn things around by throwing out insults at
random and hope they stick!
Number 6! BRIBING! Nothing like greasin' a politician's palm, if you
know what I mean!
Number 5! DISINFORMATION! Log onto usenet and pretend you are a
regular person who just loooooves the way AhOL sells out his privacy!
Subscribe to the FTC's privacy mailing list, and pretend you are a
human being, without green scales and a tail, who just looooooves
having his privacy compromised!
Number 4! FALSE FRONTS! Go to testify at congressional hearings, and
be one of the organizations that billed itself as a privacy advocate
but is actually funded by the privacy invasion industry, and argue
against pro-privacy proposals!
Number 3! SPIN-CONTROL! Try to paint privacy advocates as criminals,
child molesters and foreign spies intent on stealing your teenage
daughter and selling her to aliens from Zeta Reticuli!
Number 2! AMORAL SOPHISTRY! Hey! The constitution doesn't forbid
privacy invasions! Same with slavery and denying women the vote!
Well, OK, we changed those, but we should still be able to look up your
private life, just like they did in the Soviet Union, after all this is
still America dammit!
< DRUM ROLL! >
And the number one trick, excuse or demagoguery used by the
presumptuous info-thieves!
Two words! - VICTIM-ITIS!! Us pooooooooor billion-dollar companies!
We would have no wayyy of checking up on applicants!
BWAAAAAAAAAAHHHH.
<AUDIENCE EXPLODES INTO CHEERING>
Alfredo: We'll be right back after this commercial break with our
special guest, from the TV show, "My So-Called Life", the lovely, the
talented young actress Claire Danes and movie reviews from Mr. Dixwell
Burnham and Mr. Bryan C. Del Monte!
<AUDIENCE WILDLY CHEERS AS SCREEN FADES OUT>
--
_/_/_/ Alfredo Jacobo Perez Gomez ( alfredo @ crl.com ) _/_/_/
_/_/_/ El Salvador / Costa Rica / San Francisco, USA _/_/_/
------------------------------
From: Stephen F Roehrig <roehrig+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Date: 25 Jun 1996 10:49:18 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Information Technology and Social Accountability [long]
References: <Almft3_00VMe03vUE0@andrew.cmu.edu>
CALL FOR PAPERS
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND SOCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY
HAWAII INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON SYSTEMS SCIENCES - 30
JANUARY 7 - 10, 1997
Papers are invited for the minitrack on Information Technology and
Social Accountability as part of the Information Systems track at the
Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS).
The so-called ``information age'' has given us new technologies
promising data on demand and access to information and tools which were
previously unavailable or difficult to use. On the other hand, many
people are understandably concerned that new information technologies
might have a negative impact on their quality of life. As the details
of individuals and organizations seem to become more readily available,
many argue that those responsible for the new information technologies
also consider their consequences for privacy and confidentiality. More
broadly, information technologists with the best intentions sometimes
overlook some of the consequences of their creations.
The Information Technology and Social Accountability mini-track is a
way for scientists knowledgable in IT to contribute to an understanding
of potential negative societal effects of IT and to devise and propose
solutions overcoming them. Specific topics of relevance include, but
are not limited to:
* database privacy and confidentiality
* disclosure limitation techniques
* information system security
* organizational restrictions on IT use
* data accuracy and integrity
* impact of computer-based medical records
* data ownership
Mini-Track Coordinators
Stephen F. Roehrig George T. Duncan
roehrig+@andrew.cmu.edu gd17@andrew.cmu.edu
The H. John Heinz III School of Public Policy and Management
Carnegie Mellon University
5000 Forbes Ave.
Pittsburgh, PA 15213-3890
The purpose of HICSS is to provide a forum for the interchange of
ideas, research results, development activities, and applications among
academicians and practitioners in computer-based systems sciences. The
conference consists of tutorials, advanced seminars, presentations of
accepted papers, open forum, tasks forces, and plenary and
distinguished guest lectures. There is a high degree of interaction
and discussion among the conference participants because the conference
is conducted in a workshop- like setting.
Instructions for submitting papers:
1. Submit 6 (six) copies of the full paper, consisting of 20 - 25
pages double-spaced including title page, abstract, references and
diagrams directly to the minitrack coordinator.
2. Do not submit the paper to more than one minitrack. The paper
should contain original material and not be previously published or
currently submitted for consideration elsewhere.
3. Each paper must have a tile page which includes the title, full
name of all authors, and their complete addresses including
affiliation(s), telephone number(s) and e-mail address(es).
4. The first page of the paper should include the title and a 300-
word abstract.
DEADLINES:
July 1, 1996: Full papers submitted to the appropriate track, or
minitrack coordinator.
August 31, 1996: Notification of accepted papers mailed to authors.
October 1, 1996: Accepted manuscripts, camera-ready, sent to
minitrack coordinators; one author from each paper
must register by this time.
November 15, 1996: All other registrations must be received.
Registrations received after this deadline may not
be accepted due to space limitation.
The Information Technology and Social Accountability minitrack is part
of the Information Systems Track. The Information Systems Track has
several minitracks that focus on a variety of research topics in
Collaboration Technology, Decision Support and Knowledge-Based Systems,
and Organizational Systems and Technology. For more information
contact:
Ralph H. Sprague, Jr. Jay F. Nunamaker, Jr.
E-mail: sprague@.hawaii.edu E-mail: nunamaker@bpa.arizona.edu
(808) 956-7082 (520) 621-4475
FAX: (808) 956-9889 (520) 621-2433
Eileen Dennis (Track Assistant)
E-mail: edennis@uga.cc.uga.edu
(706)613-7807
FAX: (706)542-3743>
There are three other majors tracks in the conference: Software
Technology, Digital Documents and Advanced Technology. For more
information on the other tracks, please contact
Software Technology Track:
Hesham El-Rewini rewini@cs.unomaha.edu
Digital Documents Track:
M. Stuart Lynn msylnn@cpa.org
Advanced Technology Track:
Ralph H. Sprague, Jr. sprague@hawaii.edu
For more information on the conference, please contact the conference
coordinator:
Barbara Edelstein
College of Business Administration
University of Hawai'i
2404 Maile Way
Honolulu, HI 96822
(808) 956-3251
FAX: (808) 956-9685
e-mail: hicss@hawaii.edu
or by checking the World Wide Web page: http://www.cba.hawaii.edu/hicss
------------------------------
From: "Prof. L. P. Levine" <levine@blatz.cs.uwm.edu>
Date: 01 Jul 1996 09:00:00 -0500 (CDT)
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 V9 #001
******************************
.