The RISKS of Posting to the Net

 From: mmm@cup.portal.com

Subject: The RISKS of Posting to the Net

Date: Thu, 23 May 91 11:58:07 PDT

Newsgroups: comp.risks

I just had an interesting visit from the FBI.  It seems that a posting I made

to sci.space several months ago had filtered through channels, caused the FBI

to open (or re-open) a file on me, and an agent wanted to interview me, which I

did voluntarily.

My posting concerned destruct systems for missiles.  I had had a chance to look

at the manual on the destruct system used on the Poseidon and Polaris A3

missiles, and was shocked at the vulnerability of the system which triggers the

system.  In my posting, I commented that the system seemed less secure than

many garage-door openers.  It uses a set of three tones, in which two tones are

presented, then one tone is taken away and the third tone is applied.  The only

classified parts of the system are the frequencies of the second and third

tones.

On the net, I asked whether tone control systems like this are still used for

missile destruct systems.  By e-mail, I received an answer from a person who

was currently designing a destruct system, and he indeed confirmed that not

only are tone-control destruct systems still used, they are a requirement of

some test ranges.  (However, he thought it would be difficult to send a bogus

destruct command because of the need to blot out one of the tones which is

transmitted continuously from ground control; it would be far easier to insert

a bogus flight control command and send the missile toward a city.)

A few months later, I received a message from my sysop asking me to call a

person at Patrick Air Force Base who wanted to get in touch with me.  This guy

was real concerned that I had revealed "sensitive" information.  He said he

kept his copy of my posting in his safe!  I guess he didn't know that it had

already been distributed throughout the industrialized world.  He didn't want

to say anything about the subject over the phone.  He asked whether I would be

willing to be interviewed by an investigator.  I agreed, and he said I would be

contacted within 24 hours by someone locally.  That was the last I heard of

him.  I suppose he talked to someone who knew more about destruct systems, and

was reassured that it isn't possible because it hasn't happened yet.

Two days ago, more than half a year after my original posting, I got a message

that someone from the Palo Alto office of the FBI wanted to talk to me.  I

called him, and we agreed to meet this morning.  He didn't seem too concerned

with the technical aspects of my posting -- I guess he also had his own experts

to consult.  He mostly seemed to be checking me out to see if I was plotting to

blow up a missile.  He was also very interested in how the net works.  I told

him all about the net.  He wanted to know if there was any sort of censorship

or control over what goes on the net, and I explained it was mostly

after-the-fact control, for example if you post a commercial advertisement the

management of your site will get a ton of e-mail asking that your account be

cancelled.

He asked whether someone could post an offer for $10,000 for blueprints of a

missile or something, and I said there isn't any sort of censorship that would

prevent that sort of thing.  But the closest thing to a request for information

on performing a crime that I knew of was a couple years ago when someone asked

in the chemistry newsgroup about methods for electrically igniting a chemical.

I told him about the controversy that caused, though I omitted my role in

answering the original poster's question :-)

I also told him about newsgroups like alt.drugs, rec.pyrotech, etc.  He took

copious notes.  He asked about the equipment needed to access the net.  I told

him about computers and modems and Portal.  I should contact Portal management

to see if I get a bonus if he signs up as a customer :-)

The only surprise came at the end of the interview.  He asked if I had any

questions.  I said I was curious how my posting ended up in his hands.  Before

he could answer, I said I suppose you were contacted by that guy at Patrick Air

Force Base.  This surprised him, and he said he knew of no involvement by

anyone at Patrick Air Force Base.  I asked how he _did_ know about my posting,

and he said he couldn't answer that.  I then went on to tell him about the

controversy over Uunet, and their role in supplying archives of Usenet traffic

on tape to the FBI, and he seemed surprised by that also.

So what's the RISK here?  None to me, because I was a perfectly innocent party.

I suppose some people would be really concerned to learn that their postings to

the net are being monitored for possible illegal activity.  But I would be far

more concerned if they weren't.  The fact that two independent investigations

were started is reassuring to me, because it shows that the government is not

totally brain-dead with regard to possible threats to their big projects.

Certainly if _I_ were FBI director, I would consider Usenet to be a great

resource.  I'd learn all about computer crime, recreational drugs that aren't

illegal yet, low-tech ways of building bombs, how to contact Earth First!,

etc., etc.