Computer underground Digest Wed Dec 1 1993

Computer underground Digest Wed Dec 1 1993 Volume 5 : Issue 90

ISSN 1004-042X

Editors: Jim Thomas and Gordon Meyer (TK0JUT2@NIU.BITNET)

Archivist: Brendan Kehoe

Shadow-Archivists: Dan Carosone / Paul Southworth

Ralph Sims / Jyrki Kuoppala

Ian Dickinson

Copy Editor: Tamen O. DeSchrew, III

CONTENTS, #5.90 (Dec 1 1993)

File 1--Conference in Russia

File 2--HR 3627 - Export Controls on Cryptography Software

File 3--Psuedospoofed again

File 4--re: Student sues to regain Internet access (CuD 5.88)

File 5--Re: Cu Digeset, #5.89

File 6--Commentary on Cyber-issues in Elansky/Ionizer Sentence

Cu-Digest is a weekly electronic journal/newsletter. Subscriptions are

available at no cost electronically from tk0jut2@mvs.cso.niu.edu. The

editors may be contacted by voice (815-753-0303), fax (815-753-6302)

or U.S. mail at: Jim Thomas, Department of Sociology, NIU, DeKalb, IL

60115.

Issues of CuD can also be found in the Usenet comp.society.cu-digest

news group; on CompuServe in DL0 and DL4 of the IBMBBS SIG, DL1 of

LAWSIG, and DL1 of TELECOM; on GEnie in the PF*NPC RT

libraries and in the VIRUS/SECURITY library; from America Online in

the PC Telecom forum under "computing newsletters;"

On Delphi in the General Discussion database of the Internet SIG;

on the PC-EXEC BBS at (414) 789-4210; and on: Rune Stone BBS (IIRG

WHQ) (203) 832-8441 NUP:Conspiracy; RIPCO BBS (312) 528-5020

CuD is also available via Fidonet File Request from 1:11/70; unlisted

nodes and points welcome.

EUROPE: from the ComNet in LUXEMBOURG BBS (++352) 466893;

In ITALY: Bits against the Empire BBS: +39-461-980493

ANONYMOUS FTP SITES:

AUSTRALIA: ftp.ee.mu.oz.au (128.250.77.2) in /pub/text/CuD.

EUROPE: ftp.funet.fi in pub/doc/cud. (Finland)

UNITED STATES:

aql.gatech.edu (128.61.10.53) in /pub/eff/cud

etext.archive.umich.edu (141.211.164.18) in /pub/CuD/cud

ftp.eff.org (192.88.144.4) in /pub/cud

halcyon.com( 202.135.191.2) in /pub/mirror/cud

ftp.warwick.ac.uk in pub/cud (United Kingdom)

KOREA: ftp: cair.kaist.ac.kr in /doc/eff/cud

COMPUTER UNDERGROUND DIGEST is an open forum dedicated to sharing

information among computerists and to the presentation and debate of

diverse views. CuD material may be reprinted for non-profit as long

as the source is cited. Authors hold a presumptive copyright, and

they should be contacted for reprint permission. It is assumed that

non-personal mail to the moderators may be reprinted unless otherwise

specified. Readers are encouraged to submit reasoned articles

relating to computer culture and communication. Articles are

preferred to short responses. Please avoid quoting previous posts

unless absolutely necessary.

DISCLAIMER: The views represented herein do not necessarily represent

the views of the moderators. Digest contributors assume all

responsibility for ensuring that articles submitted do not

violate copyright protections.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 23 Nov 1993 22:29:56 U

From: "Anne" <harwell@BANDW.PANAM.EDU>

Subject: File 1--Conference in Russia

CALL FOR PAPERS

----- (Feel Free To Cross Post This Announcement) ----

Association for International Education

Announces

the First International Conference on Distance Education

in Russia

DISTANCE LEARNING AND NEW TECHNOLOGIES IN EDUCATION

and the Exhibition

BUILDING AN EDUCATIONAL ENVIRONMENT

July 5-8, 1994

Moscow, Russia

CONFERENCE AND EXHIBITION

This conference will display a range of ongoing projects,

studies and initiatives that reflect Russia's needs for changes

in higher education, and the application of new information,

telecommunication, and distance education technologies in the

Russian educational and training sectors.

The conference will stimulate the investigation of practical

approaches to introducing Russians to the new democratic educational

system and market-oriented economy through distance learning and

mass media, as well as to providing Russian students and adults

with world-wide telecommunications access to higher education

institutions and training agencies.

The goal of the exhibition is to demonstrate modern information,

communication, and multimedia technologies, along with their

applications in education and training. It will provide conference

participants with information on the state-of-the-art in

creating the learning environment and classrooms of the 21st

century.

TOPICS OF THE CONFERENCE

Distance Education:

Theory

Quality and Standards; Recognition and Academic

Mobility

Higher Education; Training and Re-training

Economics, Management and Marketing of Distance

Education

Priorities and Strategies

Educational Environment:

Information Technologies in the Classroom

Electronic Tutors and Testing Systems

Multimedia

Audio- and Video-Conferences

Computer Mediated Communications

Innovative Solutions

DEMONSTRATIONS

The conference will also serve as a site for the

showcasing of completed or ongoing projects.

The Information Systems Research Institute of Russia

(ISRIR) is responsible for the Federal program aimed at

the development of new information technologies in

Russian higher education. ISRIR will award limited number

of grants to support selected projects. Other

organizations and foundations are invited to observe the

presentations of working projects and other activities.

EXHIBITION

The exhibition focuses on the equipment, systems,

software and other products or processes that can be used

in distance learning and education process in general.

Organizations, corporations, and institutions are invited

to present their educational products supportive to

distance learning and international education.

Special guest tours of decision-makers and experts from

Russian Ministries, governmental agencies, state and

private comp3anies and institutions will be organized.

Invitations are being sent to key people from the

user/purchaser community in Russia.

The winners of a national competition for creative

software will demonstrate their products to potential

partners.

SUBMISSION OF PAPERS

The official languages for presentations are Russian

and English. Translation facilities will be provided on

request. All the presented papers must be in English.

Prospective presenters must submit the following to the

Program Committee by January 1, 1994, by fax or e-mail in

plain ASCII form:

(i) presenter proposal form;

(ii) a one-page abstract suitable for the conference

program booklet.

Please indicate under which topic you feel your paper

should be presented.

Acceptance of a paper implies a commitment on the part

of the author(s) to present it at the conference.

Accepted papers will be published in the conference

proceedings.

Final decisions on acceptance of papers for the 1994

conference proceedings will be made by the Program

Committee of international experts by February 1, 1994.

All presenters will be notified.

KEY DATES

January 1 - Deadline of submission of abstracts

February 1 - Notification of acceptance of papers

March 1 - Preliminary program will be published.

Deadline of submission of full papers

in English (not exceeding 5000 words)

April 1 - Conference registration deadline

July 5 - Conference starts

CONFERENCE REGISTRATION FEE

Payment before April 1, 1994: USD 200

Payment after April 1, 1994: USD 250

This payment does not include accommodation and

transportation expenses.

Chairman of the International Program Committee

-----------------------------------------------

Michael G. Moore, Editor

The American Journal of Distance Education

Chairman of The National Organizing Committee

---------------------------------------------

Alexander N. Tikhonov

First Vice-Chairman,

Russian Federation State Committee

for Higher Education (Ministry)

THE ASSOCIATION FOR INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION

The Association was created in 1993 and is a not-for-

profit, non-governmental, publicly supported, educational

service organization with the goal of assisting in

enhancing the quality and availability of international

educational exchange programs using computer,

telecommunication and information technologies, and

developing a distance education system in Russia.

Its objective is, among others, to provide a channel

for the international exchange of information, experience

and material in the field of education technology,

including new information technologies in distance

education - with particular reference to business,

technical and vocational education, industrial and

commercial training, teacher training and continuing

education.

The Association unites leading Russian educational and

academic institutions, including State Pedagogical

University, Peoples Friendship University. The

Association is supported by the Russian Federation State

Committee for Higher Education and Information Systems

Research Institute of Russia.

SPONSORS

Organisations interested in acting as co-sponsors of

the Conference are asked to contact the Conference

Secretariat for further information.

-- X-------- Cut here -----------------------------------

First International Conference on

Distance Education in Russia

"DISTANCE LEARNING AND NEW TECHNOLOGIES IN EDUCATION"

PRESENTER PROPOSAL FORM

First name, last name:___________________________________

+________________________________________________________

Job or Title:____________________________________________

+________________________________________________________

Organisation:____________________________________________

Title of the paper:______________________________________

Sessions of the Conference:

Distance Education:

Theory

Quality and Standards

Recognition and Academic Mobility

Higher Education

Training and Re-training

Economics, Management and Marketing of

Distance Education

Educational Environment:

Information Technologies in a Classroom

Electronic Tutors and Testing Systems

Multimedia

Audio- and Video-Conferencing

Computer Mediated Communications

Innovative Solutions

Co-presenters:___________________________________________

Equipment Needs:_________________________________________

+________________________________________________________

Address:_________________________________________________

+________________________________________________________

Telephone (work, home):__________________________________

Facsimile:_______________________________________________

E-mail:__________________________________________________

Please return to the Conference Secretariat:

ROSNIIIS (12-4), 22 Shepkina, 129090 Moscow, Russia

Fax: 7(095) 954-5127 and 288-1861

Internet: DE_RUSSIA_1994@AIE.MSK.SU

---X-------- Cut here -----------------------------------

First International Conference on Distance Education in

Russia

"DISTANCE LEARNING AND NEW TECHNOLOGIES IN EDUCATION"

INFORMATION REQUEST

To receive future Conference/Exhibition

announcements, please complete this form, detach and send

to the address below.

First name, last name:___________________________________

+________________________________________________________

Job or Title:____________________________________________

+________________________________________________________

Organisation:____________________________________________

Address:_________________________________________________

+________________________________________________________

Telephone (work, home):__________________________________

Facsimile:_______________________________________________

E-mail:__________________________________________________

Please add your questions, ideas and comments below.

+________________________________________________________

Please return to the Conference Secretariat:

ROSNIIIS (12-4), 22 Shepkina, 129090 Moscow, Russia

Fax: 7(095) 954-5127 and 288-1861

Internet: DE_RUSSIA_1994@AIE.MSK.SU

------------------------------

Date: 26 Nov 1993 23:18:39 GMT

From: Dave Banisar <Banisar@washofc.cpsr.org>

Subject: File 2--HR 3627 - Export Controls on Cryptography Software

Maria Cantwell

1st District, Washington

1520 Longworth Building

Washington, DC 20515

202-225-6311

Congress of the United States

House of Representatives

Washington, DC 20515-4701

For Immediate Release For More Information

November 23, 1993 Larry West (202) 225-6311

Cantwell Introduces "Encryption" bill to Expand Export Markets for US

Computer and Software Companies

US Rep. Maria Cantwell (D-WA) has introduced legislation to amend the

Export Administration Act to allow US computer and software

manufacturers to compete in an international market that could mean as

much as $6 billion to $9 billion a year to American high-tech

industries. Cantwell's bill would liberalize export controls on software

that features encryption capabilities, which protect computer data

against unauthorized disclosure, theft or alteration.

As communications systems link more and more computers and telephones

around the world, Cantwell said, businesses and indviduals are becoming

more concerned about protecting the privacy of their electronic files,

messages and transactions. She said the worldwide demand for

cryptographic software, and computer systems that employ such software,

is growing rapidly and American companies must be allowed to meet that

demand. According to Cantwell, this legislation is needed to ensure that

American companies do not lose critical international markets to foreign

competitors, who operate with few export restrictions. Currently, more

than 200 software and hardware products for text, file and data

encryption are available from 20 foreign countries.

"The Export Administration Act has erected a wall between American

high-tech companies and their international customers -- it's time to

lower the wall," Cantwell said. "Computer and software technology are

among the most competitive fields in the world, and American companies

are the clear leaders. To maintain that lead, American companies must be

able to respond to worldwide consumer demand."

Robert Holleyman, president of the Business Software Alliance, an

association of America's nine leading software companies, applauded

Cantwell for introducing the leigslation and said the bill would "assist

US software companies and maintaining their competitive edge in

international markets."

Dr. Nathan Myhrvold, senior vice president for Advance Technology at

Microsoft Corporation in Redmond, Washington, also praised Cantwell for

her leadership on this issue.

"The ability to include encryption features in software we sell

markets," Myhrvold said. " We commend Rep. Cantwell for recognizing the

importance of this issue to the American software industry."

CANTWELL ON EXPORT CONTROLS/ ADD ONE

Cantwell said current export controls that prohibit the export of

American software programs that offer good encryption capabilities only

make it harder for American companies to compete internationally. She

said the regulations ignore the realities of today's post-Cold War

global economy and the needs of one of this country's most innovative

and successful industries. American software companies currently

command a 75 percent worldwide market share, and many of those companies

earn more than 50 percent of their annual revenues from exports, but

Cantwell said that could change quickly.

"The United States' export control system is broken and needs to be

fixed," Cantwell said. "It was designed as a tool of the Cold War, to

help America fight against enemies that no longer exist. If we continue

to prevent American companies from meeting the worldwide demand for

cryptographic software, America gains nothing -- but those companies

stand to lose $6 billion and $9 billion a year."

Paul Brainerd, CEO of Aldus in Seattle, said, "Rep. Cantwell's bill

would liberalize outdated export controls, which are threatening the

continued success of America's software companies in world markets. In

order to remain competitive worldwide, American companies must be able

to offer features -- like information security -- demanded by our

customers and available from foreign companies."

Cantwell said her legislation would not interfere with the

government's ability to control exports to nations with terrorist

tendencies (such as Iran, Libya and Syria) or other embargoed countries

(such as Cuba and North Korea). On the other hand, she said, current

export controls on American software do not prevent anyone from

obtaining cryptographic software.

"Much of this is ordinary shrink-wrapped software," Cantwell said,

"the kind millions of people buy every day for their home and business

computers at regular retail outlets. International consumers who cannot

purchase American computer systems and software programs with encryption

features don't do without, they just buy those products elsewhere. They

are concerned with protecting their privacy and keeping their businesses

secure."

Cantwell said she is determined to bring the issue out from behind

closed doors and into the light of public debate before the House

Subcommittee on Economic Policy, Trade and Environment marks up the

Export Administration Act early next year. She said she hopes her bill

will encourage the Administration to act quickly to revise export

controls on software -- perhaps before Congress reconvenes in late

January.

"The Administration is reviewing this issue, and I think they are

interested in making the changes that will allow American companies to

remain competitive," Cantwell said. "I would like nothing better than

to come back to Congress after the recess and discover that the problem

had been solved."

###

AMERICAN COMPUTER COMPANIES MUST BE ALLOWED TO

EXPORT SOFTWARE WITH ENCRYPTION CAPABILITIES

_Introduction and Summary_

America's computer software and hardware companies, including such

well-known companies as Apple, DEC, Hewlett-Packard, IBM, Lotus,

Microsoft, Novell and Wordperfect, have been among the country's most

internationally competitive firms earning more than one-half of their

revenues from exports. Unfortunately, this vital American industry is

directly threatened by unilateral U.S. Government export controls which

prevent those companies from meeting worldwide user demand for software

that includes encryption capabilities to protect computer data against

unauthorized disclosure, theft or alteration. Legislative action is

needed to ensure that American companies do not lose critical

international markets to foreign software companies that operate without

significant export restrictions.

_The Problem_

With ready access to powerful, interconnected, computers, business and

home users increasingly are relying on electronic information storage

and transmissions to conduct their affairs. At the same time, computer

users worldwide are demanding that computer software offer encryption

capabilities to ensure that their data is secure and its integrity is

maintained.

Unfortunately, current unilateral U.S. "munitions" export controls

administered by the National Security Agency and the State Department

effectively prohibit the export of American software programs offering

good encryption capabilities.

Yet these unilateral U.S. controls are _not_ effective in restricting

the availability of encryption abroad. More than 200 generally

available, mass-market foreign commercial programs and products, as well

as many programs available from the Internet, all offer good encryption.

In addition, generally available software with encryption capabilities

is sold within the U.S. at thousands of retail outlets, by mail and over

the phone. These programs may be transferred abroad in minutes by

anyone using a public telephone line and a computer modem.

The only result of continued U.S. export controls is to threaten the

continued preeminence of America's computer software and hardware

companies in world markets. American software companies stand to lose

between $6 and $9 billion in annual revenues from sales of generally

available software. In addition, American hardware companies are losing

hundreds of millions of dollars in computer system sales every year,

because sales increasingly are dependent on the ability of a U.S. firm

to offer encryption as a feature of an integrated customer solution

involving hardware, software and services.

_The Solution_

Legislation introduced by U.S. Rep. Maria Cantwell would ensure that

exports of software with encryption capabilities would be controlled by

the Secretary of Commerce as a commercial item and would be exportable.

This legislation is strongly supported by the Business Software Alliance

and the Industry Coalition on Technology Transfer.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF CANTWELL BILL

EXPORT CONTROL LIBERALIZATION FOR

INFORMATION ECURITY PROGRAMS AND PRODUCTS

_Section 1_

Section 1 amends the Export Administration Act by adding a new

subsection that specifically addresses exports of computer hardware,

software and technology for information security including encryption.

The new subsection has three basic provisions:

1) It gives the Secretary of Commerce exclusive authority over the

export of such programs and products except those which are specifically

designed for military use, including command, control and intelligence

applications or for deciphering encrypted information.

2) The Government is generally prohibited from requiring a validated

export license for the export of generally available software (e.g. mass

market commercial or public domain software) or computer hardware simply

because it incorporates such software.

Nevertheless, the Secretary will be able to continue controls on

countries of terrorists (like Lybia, Syria and Iran) or other embargoed

countries (like Cuba and North Korea) pursuant to the Trading With The

Enemy Act os the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (except for

instances where IEEPA is employed to extend EAA-based controls when the

EAA is not in force).

3) The Secretary is required to grant validated licenses for exports of

sotware to commercial users in any country to which exports of such

software has been approved for use by foreign financial institutions.

Importantly, the Secretary is not required to grant such export

approvals if there is substantial evidence that the software will be

diverted or modified for military or terrorists' end-use or re-exported

without requisite authorization.

_Section 2_

Section 2 provides definitions necessary for the proper implementation

of the substantive provisions. For example, generally available

software is offered for sale or licensed to the public without

restriction and available through standard commercial channels of

distribution; sold as is without further customization; and designed to

be installed by the purchaser without additional assistance from the

publisher. Computer hardware and computing devices are also defined.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

103D CONGRESS H.R. 3627

1ST SESSION

---------------------------------------

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MS. CANTWELL (for herself and ___) introduced the following bill which

was referred to the Committee on __________.

---------------------------------------

A BILL

To amend the Export Administration Act of 1979 with

respect to the control of computers and related equipment.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-

2 tives of the United States of America in Congress Assembled,

3 SECTION 1. GENERALLY AVAILABLE SOFTWARE

4 Section 17 of the Export Administration Act of 1979

5 (50 U.S.C. App. 2416) is amended by adding at the end

6 thereof the following new subsection:

7 ``(g) COMPUTERS AND RELATED EQUIPMENT.---

8 ``(1) GENERAL RULE.---Subject to paragraphs

9 (2) and (3), the Secretary shall have exclusive au-

1 thority to control exports of all computer hardware,

2 software and technology for information security

3 (including encryption), except that which is specifi-

4 cally designed or modified for military use, including

5 command, control and intelligence applications.

6 ``(2) ITEMS NOT REQUIRING LICENSES.---No

7 validated license may be required, except pursuant

8 to the Trading With The Enemy Act or the Inter-

9 national Emergency Economic Powers Act (but only

10 to the extent that the authority of such act is not

11 exercised to extend controls imposed under this act),

12 for the export or reexport of---

13 ``(A) any software, including software with

14 encryption capabilities, that is---

15 ``(i) generally available, as is, and is

16 designed for installation by the purchaser;

17 or

18 ``(ii) in the public domain or publicly

19 available because it is generally accessible

20 to the interested public in any form; or

21 ``(B) any computing device soley because

22 it incorporates or employs in any form software

23 (including software with encryption capabilities)

24 exempted from any requirement for a validated

25 license under subparagraph (A).

1 ``(3) SOFTWARE WITH ENCRYPTION CAPABILI-

2 TIES.---The Secretary shall authorize the export or

3 reexport of software with encryption capabilities for

4 nonmilitary end-uses in any country to which ex-

5 ports of software of similar capability are permitted

6 for use by financial institutions not controlled in fact

7 by United States persons, unless there is substantial

8 evidence that such software will be---

9 ``(A) diverted to a military end-use or an

10 end-use supporting international terrorism;

11 ``(B) modified for military or terrorist end-

12 use; or

13 ``(C) reexported without requisite United

14 States authorization.

15 ``(4) DEFINITIONS.---As used in this

16 subsection---

17 ``(A) the term `generally available' means,

18 in the case of software (including software with

19 encryption capabilities), software that is offered

20 for sale, license, or transfer to any person with-

21 out restriction through any commercial means,

22 including, but not limited to, over-the-counter

23 retail sales, mail order transactions, phone

24 order transactions, electronic distribution, or

25 sale on approval;

1 ``(B) the term `as is' means, in the case of

2 software (including software with encryption ca-

3 pabilities), a software program that is not de-

4 signed, developed, or tailored by the software

5 company for specific purchasers, except that

6 such purchasers may supply certain installation

7 parameters needed by the software program to

8 function properly with the purchaser's system

9 and may customize the software program by

10 choosing among options contained in the soft-

11 ware program;

12 ``(C) the term `is designed for installation

13 by the purchaser' means, in the case of soft-

14 ware (including software with encryption capa-

15 bilities)---

16 ``(i) the software company intends for

17 the purchaser (including any licensee or

18 transferee), who may not be the actual

19 program user, to install the software pro-

20 gram on a computing device and has sup-

21 plied the necessary instructions to do so,

22 except that the company may also provide

23 telephone help line services for software in-

24 stallation, electronic transmission, or basic

25 operations; and---

1 ``(ii) that the software program is de-

2 signed for installation by the purchaser

3 without further substantial support by the

4 supplier;

5 ``(D) the term `computing device' means a

6 device which incorporates one or more

7 microprocessor-based central processing units

8 that can accept, store, process or provide out-

9 put of data; and

10 ``(E) the term `computer hardware', when

11 used in conjunction with information security,

12 includes, but is not limited to, computer sys-

13 tems, equipment, application-specific assem-

14 blies, modules and integrated circuits.''

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 30 Nov 93 09:05:29 -0500

From: ferguson@ICP.NET(Paul Ferguson x2044)

Subject: File 3--Psuedospoofed again

In Cu Digest, #5.89, Michael Roberts <nagap@mindvox.phantom.com>

forwarded a message entitled "A Psychopunk's Manifesto," which

contains a byline of "...by T.C. Hughes."

This "document" has already made its rounds in the cypberspatial world

and its originator has stirred up quite a bit of trouble by incessant

claims of conspiracy in the .cypherpunks agenda.

CuD readers should be aware that "T.C. Hughes" does not exist; this

"manifesto" is a psuedospoof in itself. The "T.C. Hughes" moniker is

an apparent conjugation of the real identities of Tim May and Eric

Hughes (who, in fact, did not author the original message), who

started the .cypherpunks mailing list. The message, if memory serves

me correctly, was originally composed by an12070, an anonymous

harbinger at penet.fi, who has appeared under several alaises,

including Medusa, The Executioner, S.Boxx and more recently, The

Pervert.

Looks like the psuedospoof has come home to roost.

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 28 Nov 93 23:45:08 EDT

From: Jerry Leichter <leichter@LRW.COM>

Subject: File 4--re: Student sues to regain Internet access (CuD 5.88)

A recent CuD article reports on the case of Gregory Steshenko, who was

terminated by Microsoft for some of his network postings, then began

posting from his University of Texas account, and is now suing the

university when it responded to complaints by removing his account (or

at least his network posting privileges). Mr. Steshenko claims First

Amendment protections, and the article quotes various "electronic

frontier" personalities describing this as an important case for free

speech on the networks.

It bothers me how little thought these spokesmen appear to be giving

to the effects of what they are defending. The Internet has been

described as an anarchy, but in fact only relatively small parts of

the Internet are actually anarchic. Most of the Internet, in fact, is

better described as self-governing. There are a variety of social

norms concerning network use and interactions. One doesn't post

messages to unrelated groups. One doesn't evade moderation

restrictions. One maintains a certain (rather limited, it must be

admitted) degree of restraint in how one describes other network

participants. There are few effective mechanisms for enforcing these

norms, and they are certainly broken on an all-too-regular basis; but

the network continues to function because social pressure *can* be

applied to those who become too annoying; and in the most outrageous

cases, it's possible to remove the offenders' access to the net. I

can cite two specific examples of this in the recent past:

- A regular poster to the INFO-VAX mailing list lost patience with

some of the sillier postings appearing there and began to

berate those who asked "dumb" questions. As time went on,

his postings became more and more abusive, and eventually a

fair amount of bandwidth was being used in debates about his

postings, rather then the technical issues that group is list

is meant to discuss. The list maintainer, who's been very

"hands-off" over the years, asked the abuser to tone things

down. This drew a characteristically insulting response.

The list maintainer modified the forwarding software to

block all postings by this person.

Needless to say, cries of "censorship!" were heard for a while

(though not, interestingly enough, from the person being

censored; to his credit, he had a message forwarded to the

list acknowledging the right of the list maintainer to do what

he had done) - but the list soon settled back to more useful

issues.

- Someone posted messages ostensibly asking for information about some

sex phone lines - but in fact really acting as ads for those

lines. The messages were posted to every single Usenet news

group. The person's account was removed after multiple

complaints to his system manager. He then obtained an account

on a different system, and started his postings again. This

time, his account was removed rather quickly. He's been

quiet since.

Depending on how you look at these two incidents, they either

represent self-government or censorship. My own view is that it's the

former. No community can exist without some degree of self definition

and regulation. It's all too easy to disrupt a discussion; all it

takes is a powerful and insistent voice. That's not hard to acquire

on the network; all it takes is the willingness to spend time typing.

(In the case of the sex phone line ads, all it took was a dumb program

to walk the list of newsgroups.)

I expect Mr. Steshenko will probably prevail: Individualism is a

strong thread in our political and legal history, and is exteremely

powerful in the area of free speech. Even if he loses his lawsuit,

he'll get Internet access in some other form, and continue his

(according to the original article) offensive postings and other

actions. Some will cheer this as an extension of First Amendment

rights to electronic media. I think it makes an excellent example of

why "First Amendment rights" should *not* be blindly extended to all

electronic media without careful analysis.

I can ignore a leaflet or newspaper; I can choose not to stop and

listen to a speaker on a public street. It's much harder to be quite

so accepting of loudspeakers at 3:00 AM, or of repeated harranging

telephone calls. And, indeed, speech using the latter modalities is

much more tightly regulated than that using the former. Where do the

electronic media fall? I submit they fall somewhere in between:

Messages are more easily ignored than, say, people who show up at

meetings and spend all their time shouting about their pet peeve, but

in large enough volume inappropriate messages are at least as damaging

to discourse. Private Email is more easily ignored than telephone

calls, but either can constitute harrassment. (While in principle,

direct speech can also be harrassing, except for recent "political

correctness" cases, it's not easy to find even claims of harrassment

in this form. Phone harrassment, on the other hand, is seen enough in

need of regulation that you can find quotations from tarriffs and laws

touching on the matter in the front of any phone book.)

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1993 02:02:31 GMT

From: kadie@CS.UIUC.EDU(Carl M Kadie)

Subject: File 5--Re: Cu Digeset, #5.89

Anon by Request (a student at UTD) writes:

>It would seem to me that Steshenko has violated his contract with UTD.

>The document we have to sign in order to get an account makes it clear

>that the system is to be used for educational purposes only, and that

>we are subject to account cancellation if we abuse privileges...

But does the U. of Texas at Dallas interpret and apply this policy

consistently or does it single out offensive speech for punishment?

Any institution that calls itself a university should interpret

"educational purposes" broadly. The "Joint Statement on Rights and

Freedoms of Students", the main statement of academic freedom for U.S.

students, says:

Academic institutions exist for the transmission of knowledge, the

pursuit of truth, the development of students, and the general

well-being of society. Free inquiry and free expression are

indispensable to the attainment of these goals. As members of the

academic community, students should be encouraged to develop the

capacity for critical judgment and to engage in a sustained and

independent search for truth.

>From what I know of Steshenko's postings, they easily fits this broad

interpretation of "educational".

>Why does he think he can get away from this at a government-run

>facility, when he couldn't at Microsoft?

Because like any organization, the U. of Texas must work within its

charters, these include the U.S. Constitution. The U.S. Supreme Court

has said that this limits the Government's authority to control the

media that owns and controls. The rationale is that it would be

dangerous for a Government that is elected by the people to have too

much control on the content of what people read and write.

The Supreme Court calls created forums, like a student newspaper or

campus mail systems, limited public forums. It says that the

government can limited who may access these forums and/or what topics

may be discussed. But otherwise, "it is bound by the same standards as

apply in a traditional public forum"; "content-based prohibition must

be narrowly drawn to effectuate a compelling state interest."

_Public Schools Law: Teachers' and Students' Rights_ 2nd Ed. by Martha

M. McCarthy and Nelda H. Cambron-McCabe says:

"Although school boards are not obligated to support student

papers, if a given publication was originally created as a free speech

forum, removal of financial or other school board support can be

construed as an unlawful effort to stifle free expression. In essence,

school authorities cannot withdraw support from a student publication

simply because of displeasure with the content. In an illustrative

case, the Eight Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a university could

not change its funding policy for a student paper based on the 'hue

and cry' of the public objecting to a particular issue [Stanley v.

Magrath, 719 F.2d 279, 282-283 (8th Cir. 1983).]

- Carl

REFERENCES

ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/academic/academic/student.freedoms.aaup

ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/academic/faq/media.control

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1993 22:51:01 EST

From: IIRG <rune@world.std.com>

Subject: File 6--Commentary on Cyber-issues in Elansky/Ionizer Sentence

IIRG RESPONSE TO THE ELANSKY SENTENCING

The sentencing of Michael Elansky to 28 months in prison makes us

wonder who will be the next victim of our judicial system. Although we

may not agree with Judge Miano's ruling on the alleged probation

violations, we can understand the ruling resulted mainly due to

Miano's lack of knowledge in the field of telecommunications. The

initial charges that were the reason for Mike's arrest were dropped.

Given this, we wonder just how he violated his probation. It makes no

sense to us, nor to the many people we've consulted. Our main concerns

now are the terms of Mike's probation:

1. A ban preventing anyone under 18 years of age to use Elansky's

computer bulletin board, The Ware House.

This is an interesting idea. How does the Judge propose that Mike

enforce this? If a simple statement of age at logon is expected to be

enough, then this ruling is essentially unenforceable. A 13 year old

child can simply logon as a 35 year old adult.

On the other hand, if the Judge expects mail in registrations with a

photo-copy of a driver's license m from his users, this would defeat

the purpose of running the board in the first place, which is to

promote free exchange of information and ideas between the users under

the freedom which anonymity provides. Unfortunately, many systems have

been forced to adopt this policy.

2. A ban on Elansky (Ionizer) placing pyrotechnic information or any

other "harmful" information on his bulletin board.

It would be difficult to cite a more blatant example of First

Amendment infringement than the above. "Harmful" is an utterly

subjective term entirely open to interpretation. Harmful to whom or to

what? And just who would be charged with determining whether or

not a particular piece of information is "harmful?" In addition,

according to mandate one, there would be no users under the age of 18.

Aren't adults entitled to freedom from government censorship, or is

this becoming another Red China? Where's the EFF when you need them?

3. A requirement that a probation officer have complete freedom to

search Elansky's computer system to ensure the requirements have

not been violated.

Does this mean Mike must grant sysop access to a probation officer?

We personally know of no sysop that would like an untrained, computer

illiterate individual rummaging through his BBS. "Big Brother"

conspiracy freaks will love this one.

We only hope that in future cases, courts will become more educated as

to the inner workings of the BBS community. If the current trend

continues, we can only see a gross violation of personal privacy in

the future.

Will the proposed "Information Super-Highway" become a super

speed-trap?

------------------------------

End of Computer Underground Digest #5.90

************************************

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

This file passed through SEA OF NOISE, +1 203 886 1441...

SHARE & ENJOY!

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Search This Blog

Strange Texts

Computer underground Digest Wed Dec 1 1993

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

BOTTOM LIVE script

Evidence supporting quantum information processing in animals

ARMIES OF CHAOS