informis
/
textfiles
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
textfiles/magazines/CUD/cud0836.txt

898 lines
38 KiB
Plaintext
Raw Permalink Normal View History

Initial commit
2021-04-15 11:31:59 -07:00
Computer underground Digest Wed May 15, 1996 Volume 8 : Issue 36
ISSN 1004-042X
Editor: Jim Thomas (cudigest@sun.soci.niu.edu)
News Editor: Gordon Meyer (gmeyer@sun.soci.niu.edu)
Archivist: Brendan Kehoe
Shadow Master: Stanton McCandlish
Field Agent Extraordinaire: David Smith
Shadow-Archivists: Dan Carosone / Paul Southworth
Ralph Sims / Jyrki Kuoppala
Ian Dickinson
Cu Digest Homepage: http://www.soci.niu.edu/~cudigest
CONTENTS, #8.36 (Wed, May 15, 1996)
File 1--CIEC Bulletin 5/16/96 - Court Orders DOJ to Halt CDA 'Reviews' Pending
File 2--LAWSUIT: Dalzell's Court Order
File 3--Letter From Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) On Encryption
File 4--Remaining Scientology Secret Scriptures Posted to Usenet
File 5--(fwd) Level 30 -- [An Online Anti-Pornography Crusade]
File 6--Judge Denies Bond to Accused Hacker
File 7--New Internet Journal
File 8--Cu Digest Header Info (unchanged since 7 Apr, 1996)
CuD ADMINISTRATIVE, EDITORIAL, AND SUBSCRIPTION INFORMATION ApPEARS IN
THE CONCLUDING FILE AT THE END OF EACH ISSUE.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 16 May 1996 17:58:08 -0400
From: jseiger@CDT.ORG(Jonah Seiger)
Subject: File 1--CIEC Bulletin 5/16/96 - Court Orders DOJ to Halt CDA 'Reviews'
Pending
Citizens Internet Empowerment Coalition Trial Update No. 12
Special Update -- May 16 1996 5:56 pm ET
-----------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.cdt.org/ciec/
ciec-info@cdt.org
-----------------------------------------------------------------
CIEC UPDATES intended for members of the Citizens Internet
Empowerment Coalition. CIEC Updates are written and edited by the
Center for Democracy and Technology (http://www.cdt.org). This
document may be reposted as long as it remains in total.
------------------------------------------------------------------
** 40,000 Netizens Vs. U.S. Department of Justice. **
* The Fight To Save Free Speech Online *
Contents:
o Court Orders DOJ to Halt "Reviews" Under the CDA
o Transcripts from All 6 days of Court Testimony Now Online
o How To Unsubscribe from this list
o More Information on CIEC and the Center for Democracy and Technology
---------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Court Orders DOJ to Halt "Reviews" Under the CDA
In response to a complaint filed last week by the CIEC, a Federal Judge in
Philadelphia Wednesday ordered the Justice Department to stop all "reviews"
of complaints under the Communications Decency Act until the three-judge
panel rules on the constitutionality of the law. The order was issued by
Judge Stewart Dalzell, one of the three judges presiding over the case.
CIEC and ACLU attorneys filed the compliant after several national
newspapers reported last week that the FBI had opened an investigation of
Compuserve for violations of the CDA. The FBI has since denied that any
investigation is or was underway, though the stories sparked a great deal
of confusion and created a significant public relations problem for the
commercial online service.
In the order Judge Dalzell stated that "the government's conduct in
subjecting a content provider to private and public scrutiny for displaying
material that is neither obscene nor child pornography clearly runs afoul
of both this Court's orders and the government's promises."
Closing arguments in the case concluded on Friday May 10, and a final
decision on the constitutionality of the CDA is expected soon. While
Wednesday's ruling by Judge Dalzell provides little insight into which way
the court will rule on the constitutionality of the CDA, the speed with
which the order was issued does show that the court appreciates the
tremendous free speech and commercial concerns riding on this case.
The full text of the seven page order, tramscripts from Friday's oral
arguments, and with other relevant information, is available at the
Citizens Internet Empowerment Coalition web page:
http://www.cdt.org/ciec
BACKGROUND ON THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT/AFA FOLLIES
After a Philadelphia federal judge granted a temporary restraining order
against the CDA in February, the government agreed not to prosecute or
investigate anyone for violations of the CDA until the court challenge had
been completed. However, recent events have called the government's
commitment to the February agreement into question.
In early April, the conservative American Family Association (AFA) filed a
complaint with the Justice Department accusing Compuserve of violating the
CDA for material in a forum called MacGlamour, despite the fact that the
site was labeled for adults only and Compuserve provides its users free
software to block access to unwanted material.
Last week in response to pressure from the AFA, acting Chief of the DOJ
Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section Terry Lord sent a letter to AFA
director Patrick Truman indicating that the Department "has referred [the
AFA] letter and accompanying materials to the Federal Bureau of
Investigation for further review."
The FBI denied it was investigating, which would have been a violation of
the February court agreement, but said it was "reviewing" the AFA
complaint. CIEC attorneys asked the court to clarify if such a "review"
violated the government's promise not to investigate or prosecute under the
CDA.
In granting the motion for clarification, Judge Dalzell ordered Attorney
General Reno, the Justice Department, and the FBI to stop all "reviews" of
online indecency complaints pending a decision regarding the
constitutionality of the Communications Decency Act.
----------------------------------------------------------------
(2) Hearing Transcripts for All 6 Days of Testimony Now Online
Transcripts for all 6 days of hearings, including last Friday's (5/10)
closing arguments, are now available online at the CIEC web site:
http://www.cdt.org/ciec
-----------------------------------------------------------------
(3) How to Unsubscribe From This List
As CIEC members, you have been invited to join this list in order to
receive news updates and other information relevant to the CIEC challenge
to the Communications Decency Act. To subscribe, visit
http://www.cdt.org/ciec and join the Coalition.
If you ever want to remove yourself from this list, send email to
ciec-members-request@cdt.org
with 'unsubscribe ciec-members' in the SUBJECT LINE (w/o the 'quotes').
Leave the body of your message blank.
------------------------------------------------------------------
(4) For More Information
For more information on the CIEC challenge, including the text of the
complaint and other relevant materials:
* World Wide Web -- http://www.cdt.org/ciec/
* General Information about CIEC -- ciec-info@cdt.org
* Copy of the Complaint -- ciec-docs@cdt.org
* Specific Questions Regarding the
Coalition, incuding Press Inquiries -- ciec@cdt.org
* General information about the
Center for Democracy and Technology -- info@cdt.org
--
end ciec-update.12
5/16/96
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 16 May 1996 16:32:23 -0800
From: telstar@WIRED.COM(--Todd Lappin-->)
Subject: File 2--LAWSUIT: Dalzell's Court Order
My apologies to one and all for yesterday's failed attempts to update
you on Judge Dalzell's court order reaffirming the injunction that
blocks the DoJ from "reviewing" potentially "indecent" violations of
the Communications Decency Act.
Many thanks to all those who alerted me to the problem of the
mysteriously truncated messages. Such are the perils of life in this
technological age.
In compensation -- and in the true spirit of open government -- I'm
passing along some highlights of Judge Dalzell's order. It's a
powerful document that is worth getting to know.
After all, for the time being, this text is our only bulwark against
the censor-happy thugs from the American Family Association and their
eager accomplices at the Child Exploitation and Obscenity Division of
the U.S. Department of Justice.
( ... Assuming, of course, that this message doesn't get truncated
too.)
Work the network!
--Todd Lappin-->
Section Editor
WIRED Magazine
(EDITOR'S NOTE: the unabridged text of this document is available at:
http://www.cdt.org/ciec/CIS_DOJ_order.html )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION, : CIVIL ACTION
et al.
v.
JANET RENO, Attorney General of :
the United States, : NO. 96-963
___________________________________________________________________
AMERICAN LIBRARY ASSOC., : CIVIL ACTION
INC., et al. :
v. :
UNITED STATES DEP'T OF :
JUSTICE, et al. : NO. 96-1458
ORDER
AND NOW, this 15th day of May, 1996, upon consideration of
plaintiffs' Motion to Clarify and Restate the Court's Orders
Concerning Defendants' Actions Pending Resolution of Plaintiffs'
Motions for Preliminary Relief, and the response of the Government
thereto, and the Court finding that:
(a) On February 15, 1996 this Court entered a Temporary Restraining
Order enjoining "[t]he defendant, her agents, and her servants . . .
from enforcing against plaintiffs the provisions of 47 U.S.C.
223(a) (1) (B) (ii), insofar as they extend to 'indecent,' but not
'obscene'" Internet content, see docket no. 14;
(b) Thereafter, the parties entered a stipulation in which the
Attorney General promised that "she will not initiate any
investigations or prosecutions for violations of 47 U.S.C. 223(d)
for conduct occurring after enactment of this provision until
the three-judge court hears Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary
Injunction... and has decided the motion" see docket no. 18;(1)
(c) This Court approved the Stipulation on February 26, 1996,
giving it the force of an Order of this Court;
[ DELETED SECTION (A chronology of the AFA's dispute with CompuServe) ]
(j) The plaintiffs in C.A. No. 96-1458 have now moved this court
for an Order to clarify the February 15th Temporary Restraining
Order and the February 26th Stipulation and Order to prevent the
Department of Justice from "reviewing" Internet Content that falls
within the scope of the prohibitions in those two Orders;
(k) In its written response to the motion, the Government has
emphasized that the Attorney General retains her full discretion to
prosecute the CDA as it relates to obscenity and child pornography,
see defs.' resp. at 5-6;
(l) The Government echoed these arguments at oral argument on May
10, 1996, see Transcript of May 10, 1996 at 150, 154-55;
(m) Although the Government is correct about the Attorney General's
continued discretion under the obscenity and child pornography
provisions of the CDA, this point misses the mark entirely, for the
following reasons:
i. Under the Government's view of this case, nude depictions of
sexual organs alone are almost certainly not obscene,
[ ... ]
ii. The women in the photographs are almost certainly not minors;
iii. At most, then, the Government has initiated a "review" of
CompuServe purportedly for obscenity and child pornography based
only on the availability of indecent material there;
(n) Thus, neither actual obscenity nor child pornography provided
the impetus for the Department of Justice's referral of CompuServe
for "review" by the FBI;
(o) Notwithstanding the Government's post hoc rationalization for
the actions of the Child Exploitation and Obscenity Division,
its conduct in subjecting a content provider to private and public
scrutiny for displaying material that is neither obscene nor child
pornography clearly runs afoul of both this Court's Orders and the
Government's promises, as made in the Stipulation we approved on
February 26, 1996;
It is hereby ORDERED that:
1. Plaintiffs' Motion to Clarify and Restate the Court's Orders
Concerning Defendants' Actions Pending Resolution of Plaintiffs'
Motions for Preliminary Relief is GRANTED;
2. "Review" by the Attorney General or her agents, including the
Federal Bureau of Investigation, of sexually oriented Internet
content falls within this Court's Temporary Restraining Order of
February 15, 1996 and the Stipulation this Court approved by Order
on February 26, 1996, when that "review" is triggered by (1)
content that is neither obscene nor child pornography, or (2)
complaints of Internet content that, as described, constitute
neither obscenity nor child pornography;
3. The Attorney General and her agents are ENJOINED from engaging
in "review" of a content provider if that "review" is triggered by
either of the two circumstances described in paragraph two of this
Order; and
4. The Attorney General and her agents retain their full power to
"review" complaints regarding Internet content that constitutes
obscenity or child pornography, provided that, if, upon "review" it
appears that the material complained of is neither obscene or child
pornography, the "review" must then immediately cease.
BY THE COURT:
[signature]
STEWART DALZELL, J.
[Footnotes deleted]
+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+=
This transmission was brought to you by....
THE CDA DISASTER NETWORK
The CDA Disaster Network is a moderated distribution list providing
up-to-the-minute bulletins and background on efforts to overturn the
Communications Decency Act. To subscribe, send email to
<majordomo@wired.com> with "subscribe cda-bulletin" in the message body.
------------------------------
From: Senator_Leahy@LEAHY.SENATE.GOV
Date: Thu, 02 May 96 12:04:07 EST
Subject: File 3--Letter From Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) On Encryption
Please post where appropriate
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
LETTER FROM SENATOR PATRICK LEAHY (D-VT) ON ENCRYPTION
May 2, 1996
Dear Friends:
Today, a bipartisan group of Senators has joined me in supporting
legislation to encourage the development and use of strong,
privacy-enhancing technologies for the Internet by rolling back
the out-dated restrictions on the export of strong cryptography.
In an effort to demonstrate one of the more practical uses of
encryption technology (and so that you all know this message
actually came from me), I have signed this message using a
digital signature generated by the popular encryption program
PGP. I am proud to be the first member of Congress to utilize
encryption and digital signatures to post a message to the
Internet.
As a fellow Internet user, I care deeply about protecting
individual privacy and encouraging the development of the Net as
a secure and trusted communications medium. I do not need to
tell you that current export restrictions only allow American
companies to export primarily weak encryption technology. The
current strength of encryption the U.S. government will allow out
of the country is so weak that, according to a January 1996 study
conducted by world-renowned cryptographers, a pedestrian hacker
can crack the codes in a matter of hours! A foreign intelligence
agency can crack the current 40-bit codes in seconds.
Perhaps more importantly, the increasing use of the Internet and
similar interactive communications technologies by Americans to
obtain critical medical services, to conduct business, to be
entertained and communicate with their friends, raises special
concerns about the privacy and confidentiality of those
communications. I have long been concerned about these issues,
and have worked over the past decade to protect privacy and
security for our wire and electronic communications. Encryption
technology provides an effective way to ensure that only the
people we choose can read our communications.
I have read horror stories sent to me over the Internet about how
human rights groups in the Balkans have had their computers
confiscated during raids by security police seeking to find out
the identities of people who have complained about abuses.
Thanks to PGP, the encrypted files were undecipherable by the
police and the names of the people who entrusted their lives to
the human rights groups were safe.
The new bill, called the "Promotion of Commerce On-Line in the
Digital Era (PRO-CODE) Act of 1996," would:
o bar any government-mandated use of any particular
encryption system, including key escrow systems and affirm
the right of American citizens to use whatever form of
encryption they choose domestically;
o loosen export restrictions on encryption products so
that American companies are able to export any generally
available or mass market encryption products without
obtaining government approval; and
o limit the authority of the federal government to set
standards for encryption products used by businesses and
individuals, particularly standards which result in products
with limited key lengths and key escrow.
This is the second encryption bill I have introduced with Senator
Burns and other congressional colleagues this year. Both bills
call for an overhaul of this country's export restrictions on
encryption, and, if enacted, would quickly result in the
widespread availability of strong, privacy protecting
technologies. Both bills also prohibit a government-mandated key
escrow encryption system. While PRO-CODE would limit the
authority of the Commerce Department to set encryption standards
for use by private individuals and businesses, the first bill we
introduced, called the "Encrypted Communications Privacy Act",
S.1587, would set up stringent procedures for law enforcement to
follow to obtain decoding keys or decryption assistance to read
the plaintext of encrypted communications obtained under court
order or other lawful process.
It is clear that the current policy towards encryption exports is
hopelessly outdated, and fails to account for the real needs of
individuals and businesses in the global marketplace. Encryption
expert Matt Blaze, in a recent letter to me, noted that current
U.S. regulations governing the use and export of encryption are
having a "deleterious effect ... on our country's ability to
develop a reliable and trustworthy information infrastructure."
The time is right for Congress to take steps to put our national
encryption policy on the right course.
I am looking forward to hearing from you on this important issue.
Throughout the course of the recent debate on the Communications
Decency Act, the input from Internet users was very valuable to
me and some of my Senate colleagues.
You can find out more about the issue at my World Wide Web home
page (http://www.leahy.senate.gov/) and at the Encryption Policy
Resource Page (http://www.crypto.com/). Over the coming months, I
look forward to the help of the Net community in convincing other
Members of Congress and the Administration of the need to reform
our nation's cryptography policy.
Sincerely,
Patrick Leahy
United States Senator
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 14 May 1996 21:24:19
From: anonymous@netcom.com
Subject: File 4--Remaining Scientology Secret Scriptures Posted to Usenet
In article <noringDr3F19.1M1@netcom.com you write:
[Carefully note that followup discussion has been set to the
newsgroups alt.religion.scientology and comp.org.eff.talk, so
subscribe accordingly if you are at all interested in following this
thread.]
Last last week, a series of anonymous postings were made to the
Usenet newsgroup alt.religion.scientology. Contained in these
postings were the complete NOTS materials (NEDs for OTs), the last
remaining, and highest level, secret materials ("scriptures") of the
Church of Scientology (CoS).
Late last year, the OT materials, a related set of high-level secret
"scriptures" were similarly posted to Usenet. This action destroyed
what was left of CoS' claims the OT materials were "trade secret" and
may have cast doubt on the validity of the copyrights to some of
them. Copies of the Fishman affidavit, a Federal court document
which includes the OT materials as exhibits, can be read via several
Web sites in the Netherlands, where the Dutch courts ruled earlier
this year the Fishman affidavit could be maintained on Web pages
there. The court ruling is being appealed by CoS and even if CoS
gets the ruling overturned (unlikely), the trade secret status of the
OT materials is all but lost, with ramifications for ongoing
litigation here in the U.S. between CoS and several critics.
The NOTS are considered even higher level than the OT materials, and
CoS has gone through extraordinary lengths to try to suppress their
dissemination on the Internet. In the last few months, Ms. Helena
Kobrin, a Scientology attorney representing the Religious Technology
Center, who defends the intellectual property rights to all the AT
("Advanced Technology") materials for the owner, the Church of
Spiritual Technology, legally threatened any person who simply posted
a *request* to purchase a *legal* copy of the NOTS materials! Her
threats enraged the Internet community, and probably led someone who
happened to possess the NOTS to scan and anonymously post them in
order to end the egregious and unwarranted harassment of ordinary
users.
What is interesting about both the OT and the NOTS materials is that
they are, as a whole, quite boring, even though there are a few
glimmers of "excitement" here and there, such as in OT3 which depicts
a "space opera" (Xenu, the Marcabs, hydrogen bombs, etc.) and in the
OT8 (which CoS disputes is a forgery) which says that Jesus was a
pederast. However, the value of these materials to CoS is obviously
monetary; for a person to advance to these levels requires them
paying hundreds of thousands of dollars or serving as a slave to the
organization for many years. This is in contradiction to nearly all
legitimate religions which essentially teach their spiritual "truths"
for free or for a very nominal fee to cover expenses. The
ramifications to CoS are obvious if their "secret" AT materials are
disseminated and commented upon in public.
Thus, it is clear by CoS' actions, as well as comments from former
high-level Scientologists, that (from CoS' perspective) the posting
of the NOTS is a disaster of the first magnitude, comparable to the
impact on the tobacco industry by the recent leak of the "tobacco
papers", and the impact on the Federal Government by the leak of the
"Pentagon papers" during the Vietnam War.
Following the posting of the NOTS, the infamous "CancelBunny"
appeared, a throwaway account at Netcom used to cancel the NOTS posts
(such cancellation is probably a violation of Federal Law). Thus,
the NOTS postings have been cancelled and are no longer available at
many sites except at those sites which do not honor cancels.
However, if past experience with the OT levels is any indication, the
NOTS might be reposted over and over again to minimize the actions of
the "CancelBunny." No doubt tens of thousands of copies of the NOTS
have already been downloaded and are sitting on computers all around
the world. Pandora's box has been opened and public access and
commentary of the NOTS in the public interest can no longer be
stifled.
The next few days and weeks should be watched very closely. It has
been predicted that the anonymous remailers in the Netherlands
(through which the NOTS were posted) may be put under extraordinary
legal pressure to try to shut them down since they are the easiest
means for a person to anonymously repost the NOTS (which CoS is
deathly afraid of). Also look for CoS to get a court order to access
the logs/records for all anonymous remailers in the U.S. in the hope
(a long shot at best) of finding the person who posted the NOTS (they
may have used a chain of remailers to post the NOTS), and possibly to
help with discovery in other related litigation they are now involved
in. Another benefit of such a court order is that it simply puts
more pressure on anonymous remailers, and may cause many of them to
simply "throw in the towel."
It's also been suggested that CoS may accelerate their
long-anticipated filing of a RICO suit against scores of net.critics,
attornies, journalists (such as Leiby at the Washington Post) and
other non-net.critics. The hope behind this RICO suit, which will
ultimately fail since it has absolutely no merit, is that it will
shut down, even if temporarily, critical discussion of CoS on the
Internet. CoS has shown themselves by their actions to be a paranoid
and schizophrenic organization who cannot tolerate or ignore even one
word of criticism.
I urge everybody reading this post to become familiar with what is
occuring and to keep a close eye on events. Ron Newman maintains a
wonderful Web page describing what's happened in the Scientology vs.
Internet war in the last 18 months, and has links to many other
sites, including Scientology's (while Scientology refuses to link to
Ron's page in a show of good faith). It will give a good background
as to what is currently happening. The URL to Ron's page is:
http://www.cybercom.net/~rnewman/scientology/home.html
The integrity of the anonymous remailers, an important component of
cyber liberties, is being gravely threatened. And many people on the
Internet who are exercising their Freedom of Speech to comment and
criticize the Church of Scientology may come under severe attack --
if CoS can get away with this, then other groups who also cannot
tolerate any criticism or public exposure will be encouraged to
follow in CoS' footsteps, with grave ramifications to the integrity
of our net.freedoms.
I urge the Internet community to closely monitor the unfolding events
and to become active should CoS overstep the bounds of accepted
decency and attempt to bully their way around the Internet. Read
Ron's Web page, read the Usenet newsgroup 'alt.religion.scientology'.
Become involved!
Jon Noring
--
OmniMedia Electronic Books | URL: http://www.awa.com/library/omnimedia
9671 S. 1600 West St. | Anonymous FTP:
South Jordan, UT 84095 | ftp.awa.com /pub/softlock/pc/products/OmniMedia
801-253-4037 | E-mail: omnimedia@netcom.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Join the Electronic Books Mailing List (EBOOK-List) Today! Just send e-mail
to majordomo@aros.net, and put the following line in the body of the message:
subscribe ebook-list
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 16 May 1996 23:30:36 -0500 (CDT)
From: David Smith <bladex@BGA.COM>
Subject: File 5--(fwd) Level 30 -- [An Online Anti-Pornography Crusade]
---------- Forwarded message ----------
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Please Note: Every effort has been made to post
this announcement only in those groups and lists
where there should be a natural interest in its subject
matter. We apologize in advance if any readers
believe it to be off-topic or otherwise inappropriate.
It is a single post and it will not be repeated or followed
with others. Thank you.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
ANNOUNCING LEVEL30
An Important New Internet
Newsletter Dealing With
Pornography and Censorship
Issues
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
No matter what side of these issues you are on...
DO NOT IGNORE THIS NEWSLETTER!
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
About the Cost - FREE
About the Subscription - To receive this biweekly
(or more frequently) newsletter, simply send
an e-mail message
To: majordomo@databack.com
Subject-- (leave blank)
Message: subscribe level30
About the Purpose - To instruct families on how to safely
use the Internet, and to inform families, law enforcement,
the media and other interested Internet organizations about
breaking news in the fight to keep illegal pornography and
child pornography OFF the Internet.
About the Title - This is the Offense Level mandated by the
United States Sentencing Commission for the trafficking of
child pornography often found on the Internet in Usenet
newsgroups. (Base offense level - 17; if the material involves
a prepubescent minor, increase by 2 levels; if the offense
involves distribution, increase by at least 5 levels; if the offense
involves material that portrays sadistic or masochistic conduct
or other depictions of violence, increase by 4 levels; and if a
computer was used to transport or ship the visual depiction,
increase by 2 levels.) (The Sentencing Table can be found at
http://www.ussc.gov.)
About the Author - Paul D. Cardin, P.A
**Member of the Board of Directors of Oklahomans for Children
And Families (OCAF).
**Author of The Agincourt Project - the electronic expose that
explains how Internet Service Providers (ISPs) are responsible
for the distribution of illegal pornography and child pornography
throughout America. (You may obtain a copy of The Agincourt
Project via autoresponder e-mail by sending a blank e-mail
message to noporn@mailback.com).
** Architect of the most effective and successful campaign in the
United States today to stop the electronic distribution of illegal
pornography and child pornography.
** National Directorship soon to be announced.
About the Regular Features -
**America#s Most Wanted - A list of public corporations that are
the enemies of America#s children and families because of their
continued electronic distribution of illegal pornography and child
pornography.
**(Your State Here)#s Most Wanted - A state by state list of ISPs
that are the enemies of children and families because of their
continued electronic distribution of illegal pornography and child
pornography.
**Commentary - Incisive and hard hitting analysis of the legal and
constitutional issues facing the Internet today.
** Battle Reports - Updates from the front lines, from "war
correspondents" across the country.
***** The court battles over the Communications Decency Amendment.
***** The status of OCAF against the Oklahoma ISPs.
***** The status of Loving v. Boren - is it a ridiculous waste of
taxpayers money or will it be the definitive Internet court ruling?
*****The status of other important electronic obscenity court cases.
*****The status of battles yet to be engaged.
About Special Reports -
**Testimonies from the victims of pornography.
** Profiles of the men and women who are engaged in the battle
to free our society from its plague.
**Interviews with law enforcement officers, prosecutors, and ISPs.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
The Top Ten Reasons TO SUBSCRIBE To "Level30" -
**Reason #10 - You are an INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDER who wants
to stop violating federal and state obscenity and child pornography
laws.
**Reason #9 - You are a LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER or PROSECUTOR
who wants to learn how to stop ISPs from violating federal and state
obscenity and child pornography laws
** Reason #8 - You are a PUBLIC OFFICIAL who wants to learn how to
keep illegal pornography and child pornography off of publicly owned
and operated computer systems.
** Reason #7 - You are a UNIVERSITY OFFICIAL or LIBRARY OFFICIAL
who wants to learn how to keep illegal pornography and child
pornography off of your university or library computer system.
**Reason #6 - You are a SCHOOL OFFICIAL or TEACHER who wants to
learn how to keep illegal pornography and child pornography off of
your school#s computer system.
**Reason #5 - You belong to a CHILD ADVOCACY or WOMEN#s RIGHTS
group and you want to learn how to fight illegal pornography and
child pornography on the Internet.
**Reason #4 - You belong to a CHURCH or RELIGIOUS GROUP and you
want to learn how to fight illegal pornography and child pornography
on the Internet.
**Reason #3 - You are a CORPORATE EXECUTIVE or PR OFFICER who
wants to learn how to avoid extremely damaging publicity for your
company.
**Reason #2 - You are a REPORTER who wants to stay one step ahead of
numbers 3 through 10 above
And, finally.......
**Reason #1 - You are a PARENT or GRANDPARENT who wants to learn
more about how to keep the Internet safe for your children and/or
grandchildren.
SUBSCRIBE TODAY
--------------64A53C482272--
|Fidonet: Terry Liberty-Parker 1:382/804
|Internet: Terry.Liberty-Parker@804.ima.infomail.com
|
| Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly their own.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 1996 23:51:56 -0400 (EDT)
From: Q*Bert <qbert@access.digex.net>
Subject: File 6--Judge Denies Bond to Accused Hacker
JUDGE DENIES BON TO ACCUSED HACKER
St. Louis Post Dispatch (SL) - Saturday, April 6, 1996
By: Tim Bryant Of The Post-Dispatch Staff
After another prisoner said accused computer hacker Christopher
Schanot was planning a quick escape from his parents' home near High
Ridge, a federal magistrate decided Friday to keep Schanot in jail.
Schanot was close to being released on bond when the prisoner told
his story. In computer lingo, that kind of bad luck is called a
crash.
..................
Releasing Schanot, 19, under even the most stringent conditions
would be "very risky," ruled U.S. Magistrate Judge Lawrence Davis.
The judge ordered that Schanot remain in custody pending trial, set
to begin June 10.
Schanot's lawyer, federal public defender Norm London, told Davis
that the alleged conversation between the young man and Esposito
never happened.
Schanot had been close to release on $150,000 bond earlier Friday.
That was before Esposito told his lawyer about a conversation he
said he had with Schanot on Thursday night in the jail in Jennings.
..................
Esposito testified that after he asked Schanot about his bond
hearing Thursday, Schanot replied that he planned to stay at his
parents' house briefly, then flee.
..................
Authorities say Schanot left the St. Louis area shortly after
graduating in May from Vianney High School, where he had been an
honor student. A federal prosecutor in Philadelphia has called
Schanot a computer genius capable of entering almost any computer
system.
An indictment returned here March 14 accuses Schanot of hacking into
the computers of Southwestern Bell, Bell Communications Research,
Sprint and SRI International, a research and development contractor
with government contracts.
As part of the hearing Friday, the government played a tape-recorded
telephone conversation several months ago between Schanot's father,
Michael Schanot, and Netta Gilboa. Christopher Schanot had been
living with Gilboa in the Philadelphia area.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 14 May 96 06:49:44 EST
From: Computer Privacy Digest Moderator <comp-privacy@UWM.EDU>
Subject: File 7--New Internet Journal
From--Computer Privacy Digest Tue, 14 May 96 Volume 8 : Issue: 038
From--cpsr-global@Sunnyside.COM
Date--08 May 1996 07:20:40 -0700
Subject--New Internet Journal
Taken from CPSR-GLOBAL Digest 376
Sender: Andy Oram <andyo@ora.com>
A journal that may interest readers in many countries has just
started: "First Monday" at http://www.firstmonday.dk. You can read
it free on the Web (just register your name) or pay to get it by
email. The issue I read had an interesting article on how digital
cash could weaken the currencies of small countries.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 22:51:01 CST
From: CuD Moderators <cudigest@sun.soci.niu.edu>
Subject: File 8--Cu Digest Header Info (unchanged since 7 Apr, 1996)
Cu-Digest is a weekly electronic journal/newsletter. Subscriptions are
available at no cost electronically.
CuD is available as a Usenet newsgroup: comp.society.cu-digest
Or, to subscribe, send post with this in the "Subject:: line:
SUBSCRIBE CU-DIGEST
Send the message to: cu-digest-request@weber.ucsd.edu
DO NOT SEND SUBSCRIPTIONS TO THE MODERATORS.
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, USA.
To UNSUB, send a one-line message: UNSUB CU-DIGEST
Send it to CU-DIGEST-REQUEST@WEBER.UCSD.EDU
(NOTE: The address you unsub must correspond to your From: line)
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 RIPCO BBS (312) 528-5020 (and via Ripco on internet);
and on Rune Stone BBS (IIRGWHQ) (860)-585-9638.
CuD is also available via Fidonet File Request from
1:11/70; unlisted nodes and points welcome.
EUROPE: In BELGIUM: Virtual Access BBS: +32-69-844-019 (ringdown)
Brussels: STRATOMIC BBS +32-2-5383119 2:291/759@fidonet.org
In ITALY: ZERO! BBS: +39-11-6507540
In LUXEMBOURG: ComNet BBS: +352-466893
UNITED STATES: etext.archive.umich.edu (192.131.22.8) in /pub/CuD/CuD
ftp.eff.org (192.88.144.4) in /pub/Publications/CuD/
aql.gatech.edu (128.61.10.53) in /pub/eff/cud/
world.std.com in /src/wuarchive/doc/EFF/Publications/CuD/
wuarchive.wustl.edu in /doc/EFF/Publications/CuD/
EUROPE: nic.funet.fi in pub/doc/CuD/CuD/ (Finland)
ftp.warwick.ac.uk in pub/cud/ (United Kingdom)
The most recent issues of CuD can be obtained from the
Cu Digest WWW site at:
URL: http://www.soci.niu.edu/~cudigest/
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.
------------------------------
End of Computer Underground Digest #8.36
************************************