Computer Privacy Digest Mon, 15 Nov 93
Computer Privacy Digest Mon, 15 Nov 93 Volume 3 : Issue: 074
Today's Topics: Moderator: Dennis G. Rears
Re: threads in comp.dcom.telecom
Re: Privacy Source
Re: Privacy Source
LaNUGUMS
Re: California Driver License and SSN
Re: California Driver License and SSN
FBI Operation "Root Canal" Documents Revealed
Re: Finding someone
Re: California Driver License and SSN
Graduate Programs
Re: Finding someone -- FOUND!
The Computer Privacy Digest is a forum for discussion on the
effect of technology on privacy. The digest is moderated and
gatewayed into the USENET newsgroup comp.society.privacy
(Moderated). Submissions should be sent to
comp-privacy@pica.army.mil and administrative requests to
comp-privacy-request@pica.army.mil.
Back issues are available via anonymous ftp on ftp.pica.army.mil
[129.139.160.133].
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Carl Oppedahl <oppedahl@panix.com>
Subject: Re: threads in comp.dcom.telecom
Date: 12 Nov 1993 12:48:49 -0500
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC
In <comp-privacy3.73.8@pica.army.mil> Kelly Bert Manning <ua602%freenet.victoria.bc.ca@PICA.ARMY.MIL> writes:
>Near the beginning of the Digital Detective thread it was pointed out
>that DD is the moderator of the comp.dcom.telecom news group, and that
>his intent was perhaps to provoke discussion and to increase awareness
>of the availability of this information.
>I decided to follow up on these comments from the moderator by reading
>what the comp.dcom.telecom moderator posted and the remarks he added.
>
[helpful summaries omitted]
Thank you for these summaries. I'm sure they benefit people who did not
see the other discussions, but they also benefited me (even though I had
seen them) because your summaries reminded me of some things I had read
but forgotten.
--
Carl Oppedahl AA2KW (patent lawyer)
1992 Commerce Street #309
Yorktown Heights, NY 10598-4412
voice 212-777-1330
------------------------------
From: Carl Oppedahl <oppedahl@panix.com>
Subject: Re: Privacy Source
Date: 12 Nov 1993 12:49:48 -0500
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC
In <comp-privacy3.73.7@pica.army.mil> Robert Ellis Smith <0005101719@mcimail.com> writes:
>Both Vaclav Matyas of Carleton University and Alizade of University of Toronto
>asked about sources of information about technology and privacy.
>PRIVACY JOURNAL has been the authoritative publication in the field since 1974.
>We will send a sample copy of our monthly newsletter to anyone who requests it,
>as well as descriptions of the books and special reports we publish on privacy.
>Ask for our s pecial discount on subscriptions for users of the net. Books and
>subscriptions may be ordered by e-mail with a credit card number.
>Robert Ellis Smith, Publisher, Privacy Journal, PO Box 28577, Providence RI
>02908, 401/274-7861; MCI mail: rsmith, 510-1719.
I have subscribed for many years. It is a very important journal -- a
must-read for those who care about privacy.
--
Carl Oppedahl AA2KW (patent lawyer)
1992 Commerce Street #309
Yorktown Heights, NY 10598-4412
voice 212-777-1330
------------------------------
From: Laine Stump <astump@magnus.ohio-state.edu>
Subject: Re: Privacy Source
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1993 03:49:44
Organization: Youngstown State/Youngstown Free-Net
In article <comp-privacy3.73.7@pica.army.mil> Robert Ellis Smith <0005101719@mcimail.com> writes:
>PRIVACY JOURNAL has been the authoritative publication in the field since 1974.
> [etc.]
>Ask for our s pecial discount on subscriptions for users of the net. Books
>and subscriptions may be ordered by e-mail with a credit card number.
Maybe I'm paranoid, or misinformed, but it seems to me that anybody
worrying about their privacy would think at least twice before sending
their credit card number over a communication medium as insecure as
Internet email. It is a trivial task for anybody at a router along the
message's path to write a snooper program that will grab all SMTP
(Simple Mail Transfer Protocol) packets and paste them together into
complete messages. Of course you could argue that sheer volume would
lower the chances of discovery to almost nil, but...
I would never send my credit card number to anyone via email unless that
person had PGP (or similar software) and a public key for me to use. Is this
really something that an "authoritative publication" on the subject of
privacy should be suggesting its prospective readers to do? (Ah, but I guess
he didn't say "security", did he?
Laine Stump
laine@ctp.bilkent.edu.tr
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1993 13:45:49 -0500 (CDT)
From: FLIB1191@vega.selu.edu
Subject: LaNUGUMS
Organization: Southeastern Louisiana University
Let me congratulate all of you who worked hard to assure that the LANUGUMS
meeting yesterday was such a success. I know it was a success because it
was mentioned several times at the grand opening of ELMO, Nicholls' OPAC.
It was also suggested that since Southeastern did such a good job, and had
such good facilities, that we host all future meeting of LANUGUMS. I told
all who asked that we did enjoy hosting the meeting, but we did'nt want to
be greedy, and deprive some others .
Again, thanks to all of you who worked on the meeting project.
L. Greaves
------------------------------
From: Kelly Hoffman <kelly@nashua.hp.com>
Subject: Re: California Driver License and SSN
Date: 12 Nov 1993 20:17:27 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Network Test Division, Nashua, NH
Distribution: world
In article <comp-privacy3.69.1@pica.army.mil> Dave Gomberg <GOMBERG%UCSFVM.BITNET@cmsa.berkeley.edu> writes:
> So CA has a right to
> insist you identify yourself in a way that allows it to determine that
> you are not on any bad guys lists (which themselves are indexed by SSN).
> So you can give your SSN or you can refuse to avail yourself of the
> privledge of driving. Dave
Let's accept this premise for a moment. Does California put
the SSN on the license itself? If yes, why is it necessary
to do so when all they want to do is check the "bad buys list"?
(If CA only asks for the SSN on the application and doesn't
actually put it on the license, then, well, never mind. :-)
kkh
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kelly K. Hoffman kelly@nashua.hp.com
Learning Products Engineer
Hewlett-Packard, Network Test Division "Reading the manual is
One Tara Blvd., Nashua, NH 03062 admitting defeat."
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 93 20:00:18 -0500
From: Bob Sherman <bsherman@mthvax.cs.miami.edu>
Subject: Re: California Driver License and SSN
Date: 14 Nov 1993 20:00:15 -0500
Organization: Not much!
In <comp-privacy3.73.9@pica.army.mil> Richard Roda <rerodd@eos.ncsu.edu> writes:
>That's really neat. Does this mean that if I don't avail myself of the
>"privilidge" of driving, that I don't have to pay any taxes that go to
>support the highway system? Bzzz! If the highway system were supported by
>user fees, I would agree with this logic. But, since it is supported from
>my income taxes, I am paying for the road, but don't get to use the road I
>pay for because it is a Privilidge(TM).
Errrr, excuse me, but there are many ways for you to use the roads your
taxes pay for without needing a drivers license. You can for example ride
a bike, use public transportation, take a taxi, ride as a passenger in
a car while someone else does the driving, run, jog, walk etc.. All of the
above are better done on a paved roadway than through the woods..
By the way, if you own property, you'll also pay school taxes, even if
you have no children in the schools. Is that any different???
--
bsherman@mthvax.cs.miami.edu | | MCI MAIL:BSHERMAN
an764@cleveland.freenet.edu | |
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1993 08:41:08 -0500
From: Dave Banisar <banisar@washofc.cpsr.org>
Subject: FBI Operation "Root Canal" Documents Revealed
(from the CPSR Alert 2.05)
In response to a CPSR Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, the FBI this
week released 185 pages of documents concerning the Bureau's Digital
Telephony Initiative, code-named Operation "Root Canal." The newly
disclosed material raises serious doubts as to the accuracy of the
FBI's claim that advances in telecommunications technology have
hampered law enforcement efforts to execute court-authorized wiretaps.
The FBI documents reveal that the Bureau initiated a well- orchestrated
public relations campaign in support of "proposed legislation to compel
telecommunications industry cooperation in assuring our digital
telephony intercept requirements are met." A May 26, 1992, memorandum
from the Director of the FBI to the Attorney General lays out a
"strategy ... for gaining support for the bill once it reaches
Congress," including the following:
"Each FBI Special Agent in Charge's contacting key law
enforcement and prosecutorial officials in his/her territory
to stress the urgency of Congress's being sensitized to this
critical issue;
Field Office media representatives educating their contacts
by explaining and documenting, in both local and national
dimensions, the crisis facing law enforcement and the need
for legislation; and
Gaining the support of the professional associations
representing law enforcement and prosecutors."
However, despite efforts to obtain documentation from the field in
support of Bureau claims of a "crisis facing law enforcement," the
response from FBI Field Offices was that they experienced *no*
difficulty in conducting electronic surveillance. For example, a
December 3, 1992, memorandum from Newark reported the following:
The Newark office of the Drug Enforcement Administration
"advised that as of this date, the DEA has not had any
technical problems with advanced telephone technology."
The New Jersey Attorney General's Office "has not experienced
any problems with the telephone company since the last
contact."
An agent from the Newark office of the Internal Revenue
Service "advised that since the last time he was contacted,
his unit has not had any problems with advanced telephony
matters."
An official of the New Jersey State Police "advised that
as of this date he has had no problems with the present
technology hindering his investigations."
Likewise, a memorandum from the Philadelphia Field Office reported that
the local offices of the IRS, Customs Service and the Secret Service
were contacted and "experienced no difficulties with new technologies."
Indeed, the newly-released documents contain no reports of *any*
technical problems in the field.
The documents also reveal the FBI's critical role in the development of
the Digital Signature Standard (DSS), a cryptographic means of
authenticating electronic communications that the National Institute of
Standards and Technology was expected to develop. The DSS was proposed
in August 1991 by the National Institute of Standards and Technology.
NIST later acknowledged that the National Security Agency developed the
standard. The newly disclosed documents appear to confirm speculation
that the FBI and the NSA worked to undermine the legal authority of
the NIST to develop standards for the nation's communications
infrastructure.
CPSR intends to pursue further FOIA litigation to establish the extent
of the FBI involvement in the development of the DSS and also to obtain
a "cost-benefit" study discussed in one of the FBI Director's memos and
other documents the Bureau continues to withhold.
----
To subscribe to the Alert, send the message:
"subscribe cpsr <your name>" (without quotes or brackets)
to listserv@gwuvm.gwu.edu. Back issues of the Alert are available at
the CPSR Internet Library FTP/WAIS/Gopher cpsr.org /cpsr/alert
Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility is a national,
non-partisan, public-interest organization dedicated to understanding
and directing the impact of computers on society. Founded in 1981, CPSR
has 2000 members from all over the world and 22 chapters across the
country. Our National Advisory Board includes a Nobel laureate and
three winners of the Turing Award, the highest honor in computer
science. Membership is open to everyone.
For more information, please contact: cpsr@cpsr.org or visit the CPSR
discussion conferences on The Well (well.sf.ca.us) or Mindvox
(phantom.com).
------------------------------
From: Bill Kisse <kisse@clark.net>
Newsgroups: alt.privacy,comp.society.privacy,misc.legal
Subject: Re: Finding someone
Followup-To: alt.privacy,comp.society.privacy,misc.legal
Date: 13 Nov 1993 17:51:50 GMT
Organization: Clark Internet Services, Inc., Ellicott City, MD USA
'Database America' publishes CD-ROMS that allow you to find EVERY person
in the U.S. who has a telephone in their name (of course this excludes
non-listed phones).
It's available for $99.95.
I purchased mine at a local computer store.
If you can't find it, E-Mail me and I'll get the phone number of the firm
that produces it.
Regards.
--
Bill Kisse............................................Video Labs Corporation
1+ (301) 217-0000........................................15237 Display Court
1+ (301) 217-0044 (Fax).............................Rockville, MD USA 20850
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1993 11:29:30 -0500
From: Bob Goudreau <goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com>
Subject: Re: California Driver License and SSN
Richard Roda <rerodd@eos.ncsu.edu> writes:
>
>>privledge of driving. Dave
>
>That's really neat. Does this mean that if I don't avail myself of the
>"privilidge" of driving, that I don't have to pay any taxes that go to
>support the highway system? Bzzz! If the highway system were supported by
>user fees, I would agree with this logic. But, since it is supported from
>my income taxes, I am paying for the road, but don't get to use the road I
>pay for because it is a Privilidge(TM).
Actually, most highway systems in the US *are* primarily supported
by "user fees" (in the form of federal and state fuel taxes), *not*
by income taxes. There are even some exemptions from those taxes
available for non-road fuel uses, such as heating oil or for fuel
that the user guarantees will only be used in farm equipment.
And BTW, if you're going to flame his spelling, at least get it
right yourself! It's "privilege".
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bob Goudreau Data General Corporation
goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com 62 Alexander Drive
+1 919 248 6231 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA
------------------------------
From: "Joseph Reagle Jr." <jreagl1@gl.umbc.edu>
Subject: Graduate Programs
Date: 15 Nov 1993 15:40:30 -0500
Organization: University of Maryland, Baltimore County
Can anyone recommend a graduate program that deals with the
social/legal/economic issues of future computer technology and it's
security issues? (Growth of Internet, is it secure though?.... etc.)
Kind of along the lines of what the EFF is concerned with.
--
Regards,
Joseph M. Reagle Jr. | ST: What's a self-locking stemp-bolt for?
reagle@umbc.edu | SNL: You put your weed in there man.
jreagl1@umbc8.umbc.edu |
------------------------------
From: Rajiv A Manglani <rajiv@athena.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Finding someone -- FOUND!
Date: 15 Nov 1993 17:38:51 GMT
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Just wanted to thank everyone on this group who gave me suggestions...
I have found the person that I was looking for.
Rajiv
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Me: Rajiv A. Manglani rajiv@mit.edu
La Maison Francaise Brilliant Image
476 Memorial Drive Seven Penn Plaza
Cambridge, MA 02139-4319 New York, NY 10001
617. 225. 7690 800. 727. 3278 x200
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stuyvesant High School Alumni EMail Address List Maintainer
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
End of Computer Privacy Digest V3 #074
******************************
Comments
Post a Comment