873 lines
42 KiB
Plaintext
873 lines
42 KiB
Plaintext
|
||
|
||
Computer underground Digest Sun Mar 7 1993 Volume 5 : Issue 18
|
||
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: Etaion Shrdlu, Seniur
|
||
|
||
CONTENTS, #5.18 (Mar 7 1993)
|
||
File 1--PKZIP Bankruptcy Rumor is a *HOAX*
|
||
File 2--Hackers in the News (Orange County Register Reprint)
|
||
File 3--GPO ACCESS - WINDO UPDATE
|
||
File 4--London Times Educational Supplement Article
|
||
File 5--FWD: The White House Communication Project
|
||
|
||
Cu-Digest is a weekly electronic journal/newsletter. Subscriptions are
|
||
available at no cost from tk0jut2@mvs.cso.niu.edu. The editors may be
|
||
contacted by voice (815-753-6430), 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 DL0 and DL12 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 the PC-EXEC BBS at (414) 789-4210;
|
||
in Europe from the ComNet in Luxembourg BBS (++352) 466893;
|
||
|
||
ANONYMOUS FTP SITES:
|
||
UNITED STATES: ftp.eff.org (192.88.144.4) in /pub/cud
|
||
red.css.itd.umich.edu (141.211.182.91) in /cud
|
||
halcyon.com( 192.135.191.2) in /pub/mirror/cud
|
||
AUSTRALIA: ftp.ee.mu.oz.au (128.250.77.2) in /pub/text/CuD.
|
||
EUROPE: nic.funet.fi in pub/doc/cud. (Finland)
|
||
ftp.warwick.ac.uk in pub/cud (United Kingdom)
|
||
|
||
Back issues also may be obtained from the mail server at
|
||
mailserv@batpad.lgb.ca.us.
|
||
|
||
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. Some authors do copyright their material, 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: 03 Mar 1993 16:22:19
|
||
From: Moderators <tk0jut2@mvs.cso.niu.edu>
|
||
Subject: File 1--PKZIP Bankruptcy Rumor is a *HOAX*
|
||
|
||
A recent "press release" indicated that PKWARE, producers of PKZIP and
|
||
other popular software has filed for bankruptcy under Chapter 11.
|
||
|
||
THE PRESS RELEASE IS A HOAX! PKWARE's Mike Stanton indicated that the
|
||
PKWARE is in sound financial shape and that there is no basis
|
||
whatsoever to the release. "It's probably somebody's idea of an early
|
||
April Fool's joke," said Stanton.
|
||
|
||
The release contained a number of factual errors that prompted us call
|
||
PKWARE, and they confirmed what we suspected.
|
||
|
||
The original press release read:
|
||
|
||
FYI
|
||
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
|
||
FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 1993 5:00PM CST
|
||
===============================================================
|
||
|
||
PKware Inc., citing overwhelming advertising, administrative and
|
||
development expenses with the recent problem-plagued release of
|
||
their new PKZIP product, filed for chapter 11 bankruptcy today in
|
||
the Milwaukie County District Court.
|
||
|
||
"PKWARE will continue to operate normally, and will provide, as
|
||
always, the high-quality data compression products and services
|
||
which have made us the leader in the data compression market,"
|
||
Mark Gresbach, press-relations manager of PKWARE, said.
|
||
|
||
In business since 1987, PKWARE Inc. produces high-performance
|
||
data compression software, which makes computer program and data
|
||
files smaller, for faster transmission over telephone lines or to
|
||
take up less disk space. Fortune 500 companies such as Borland
|
||
Inc., of Scotts Valley, CA and government agencies such as the US
|
||
Air Force are major customers of PKWARE.
|
||
|
||
Any questions or concerns may be directed to PKWARE at any of the
|
||
following telephone numbers:
|
||
|
||
Phone (414) 354-8699
|
||
FAX (414) 354-8599
|
||
BBS (414) 356-8670.
|
||
+++
|
||
|
||
The errors include:
|
||
|
||
1) Inaccurate phone numbers
|
||
2) A non-existent spokesperson position at PKWARE
|
||
3) An improper court of jurisdiction: There is no "Milwaukee County
|
||
*District* Court; Chapter 11 is filed under federal statutes, not
|
||
"County"/State statutes
|
||
4) Unusual wording
|
||
|
||
PKWARE's latest release of PKZip (2.04g) has been released and has
|
||
been so well received that the Katz folk are barely able to keep up
|
||
with the orders. It is faster, tighter, and provides more options than
|
||
earlier releases.
|
||
|
||
------------------------------
|
||
|
||
Date: 04 Mar 1993 11:29:00 -0800
|
||
From: lynn.dimick@PCB.BATPAD.LGB.CA.US(Lynn Dimick)
|
||
Subject: File 2--Hackers in the News (Orange County Register Reprint)
|
||
|
||
I have received permission from Catherine A, Boesche of the Orange
|
||
County register to reprint this story ONE TIME. They would like to
|
||
receive the following credit:
|
||
|
||
Reprinted with permission of The Orange County Register, copyright 1993.
|
||
|
||
This originally appeared on February 17, 1993
|
||
|
||
Jeffrey Cushing knew his teenage son was a "computer freak,"
|
||
spending hours hunched over a bedroom keyboard playing games and
|
||
tapping out messages to friends.
|
||
|
||
It seemed like wholesome, hightech fun -- until Cushing was sued
|
||
last April by a Garden Grove telephone company that accused his son of
|
||
hacking into the firms' long distance lines.
|
||
|
||
The tab: $80,000
|
||
|
||
"I was in shock," said Cushing, 51, an advertising executive from
|
||
Huntington Beach. "all of a sudden this guy knocks on the door at 9
|
||
p.m. and serves me with this humungous suit."
|
||
|
||
The war against hackers who steal long-distance telephone time
|
||
has left a trail of slack-jawed parents throughout the state. Hit with
|
||
lawsuits throughout the state. Hit with lawsuits, search warrants and
|
||
demands for damages many parents are gulping hard and paying the toll
|
||
for telephone fraud.
|
||
|
||
Although no record is kept, some industry analysts estimate that
|
||
telephone fraud drains as much as $5 billion a year from companies
|
||
nationwide.
|
||
|
||
"Fraud on the (telephone) network is still one of the most
|
||
devastating things to long-distance companies, especially the smaller
|
||
ones," said Jim smith, vice president of the 34-member California
|
||
Association of Long Distance Telephone Companies.
|
||
|
||
The culprits often are juveniles, whose parents know little about
|
||
computers and less about what their children are doing with them.
|
||
|
||
At the forefront in pursuing the dial-tone desperadoes is Garden
|
||
Grove's Thrifty Tel Inc. -- which in 1990 became the first telephone
|
||
company to impose a tariff on hackers.
|
||
|
||
The idea was copied by several other small phone companies in
|
||
California, although Thrifty's tariff remains the highest at $2,880
|
||
per day, per line.
|
||
|
||
As part of every settlement, Thrifty also confiscates the
|
||
offending computer.
|
||
|
||
"This is designed to spank 'em hard. It can (financially) wipe
|
||
out a family," said Dale L. Herring, Thrifty's director of security.
|
||
"I sympathize, to some extent, but why should our company absorb the
|
||
loss? Giving their kids a computer and a modem is like giving them a
|
||
loaded gun."
|
||
|
||
Thrifty estimates its hacker losses at $22,000 a month.
|
||
|
||
Over the past three years the company has recovered nearly $1
|
||
million and has nabbed 125 alleged hackers -- the vast majority of
|
||
them juveniles. About 24 cases were prosecuted, with nearly all the
|
||
defendants pleading guilty.
|
||
|
||
Early the month, Thrifty said, it busted, a 10-member ring of
|
||
teenage hackers stretching from La Habra to Mission Viejo.
|
||
|
||
Criminal charges are pending against one of the suspects, a 19
|
||
year-old Irvine man who allegedly called Thrifty's computer system
|
||
6,435 times in 24 days. More than 1,000 calls came on Christmas.
|
||
|
||
The bill from Thrifty: $75,000.
|
||
|
||
The teen-ager allegedly used a simple scam employed by dozens of
|
||
hackers to break into long-distance carriers:
|
||
|
||
Using a modem and a home computer programed for hacking the thief
|
||
telephones the company's switching system. From there, the hacker's
|
||
computer generates ran-dom digits until it hits the access codes
|
||
--similar to calling-card numbers - - given to customers.
|
||
|
||
Those special codes are then used by the hacker to make
|
||
long-distance calls that will be billed to unsuspecting customers.
|
||
Many times, egotistical hackers post the codes on computer bulletin
|
||
boards for others to use, much like a victorious matador throwing a
|
||
rose to a pretty lady.
|
||
|
||
It can take several hours -- and several hundred calls to the
|
||
phone company -- to identify a handful of codes. But the hackers
|
||
simply set their computers to run night and day, calling three to four
|
||
times a minute.
|
||
|
||
For the novice, hacking programs with names such as "Code Thief
|
||
Deluxe" are widely available and can be downloaded without charge from
|
||
computer bulletin boards.
|
||
|
||
"It's becoming a subculture. Just as kids were sucked into
|
||
%Dungeons and Dragons,' they're being sucked into hacking," said
|
||
Thrifty's Herring.
|
||
|
||
Often teen-age hackers are highly intelligent loners, addicted to
|
||
the worldwide computer bulletin boards that allow them to communicate
|
||
with others of their ilk.
|
||
|
||
"But they run up $300 to $400 in monthly phone bills, their
|
||
parents go ballistic, so they turn to hacking," Herring said.
|
||
|
||
Unknown to the young hackers, some calls can be traced. Digging
|
||
through stacks of computer printouts. Herring and other experts at
|
||
Thrifty have followed the electronic trail over the past three years
|
||
to:
|
||
|
||
* An Escondido boy whose parents were ordered by an Orange Count
|
||
judge recently to pay Thrifty $33,000 in damages.
|
||
|
||
* A Foothill High School student in Santa Ana who was blamed for
|
||
more than $250,000 in losses to Thrifty and two other long-distance
|
||
companies in 1991. The boy pleaded guilty to telephone fraud.
|
||
|
||
* A six-member ring of San Diego high school students who raided
|
||
system in March. Their families are paying more than $100,000 in
|
||
damages.
|
||
|
||
Herring said the response from parents is always the same.
|
||
|
||
"Their first reaction is they want to kill their kids. Then, 24
|
||
hours later, they want to kill us," Herring said.
|
||
|
||
Last year, a 63-year-old father from San Diego responded to
|
||
Thrifty's demands for $16,000 by filing a harassment suit. The man
|
||
contended that he suffered from a nervous condition and had warned by
|
||
his doctor to avoid emotional shock.
|
||
|
||
And what could be more shocking then being hit with Thrifty's
|
||
$2,880-a-day tariff, approved by the Public Utilities Commission in
|
||
1990?
|
||
|
||
The tariff is meant to recover the costs of investigation hacker
|
||
paying attorneys and losing customers who've been victimized.
|
||
|
||
While the fee has been upheld in court, some parents complain th
|
||
it is unfair and inflated. The actual cost of the pirated phone call
|
||
amounts to only a small part of the huge damages sought by Thrifty.
|
||
|
||
Part of Thrifty's aggression in civil court comes from its growiin
|
||
inability to get the hackers into criminal court.
|
||
|
||
Thrifty has had a tough time persuading law authorities to spend
|
||
their limited resources on telephone hacking.
|
||
|
||
Garden Grove police recently notified Thrifty that the department
|
||
will no longer investigate hacking calls that do not originate in th
|
||
city. Since then, Herring said, the company keeps getting passed fro
|
||
one police agency to another, each claiming not to have jurisdiction
|
||
|
||
"I have to fight tooth and nail to get them interested," said
|
||
Herring, who last month persuaded the Orange County District Attorney
|
||
Office to prosecute at least one alleged member of the recently bus
|
||
Orange County hacking ring.
|
||
|
||
Garden Grove Lt. Bill Dalton said his department couldn't keep u
|
||
with the expense of investigating Thrifty's hacker problem. Dalton a
|
||
that Thrifty could make its telephone system more secure by putting
|
||
digits in the access codes, making them harder to discover.
|
||
|
||
That strategy literally saved Com-Systems of Westlake Village, w
|
||
was losing $250,000 a month to hackers before it overhauled its security
|
||
system in 1990. The move cost $1 million.
|
||
|
||
"Now we don't lose $250,000 in a whole year," said senior
|
||
investigator John Elerick. "We were getting killed."
|
||
|
||
About 15 of the small long-distance carriers in California have
|
||
reconfigured their access codes. But Thrifty has resisted, because t
|
||
change would inconvenience customers by making them wait a few seconds
|
||
more for their calls to go through, Herring said.
|
||
|
||
While Thrifty wrestles with its security dilemma, Huntington Be
|
||
dad Cushing found and easy way to protect himself from ever again be
|
||
sued for hacking: He disconnected the phone line in his son's bedroom.
|
||
|
||
"Now, he can only games, do homework, and that's about it."
|
||
|
||
++++++End of article++++++
|
||
|
||
* RM 1.0 B0008 * lynn.dimick@pcb.batpad.lgb.ca.us (Lynn Dimick)
|
||
|
||
////// This article originated at The Batchelor Pad PCBoard BBS ///////
|
||
/ Long Beach, CA ///// 1200-14,400 V.32bis+HST ///// +1 310 494 8084 //
|
||
|
||
------------------------------
|
||
|
||
Date: Wed, 3 Mar 1993 14:26:58 EDT
|
||
From: LOVE@TEMPLEVM.BITNET
|
||
Subject: File 3--GPO ACCESS - WINDO UPDATE
|
||
|
||
Taxpayer Assets Project
|
||
Information Policy Note
|
||
February 28, 1993
|
||
|
||
UPDATE ON WINDO/GATEWAY LEGISLATION
|
||
|
||
Note: the WINDO/GATEWAY bills from last Congress (HR 2772;
|
||
S. 2813) would have provided one-stop-shopping online access
|
||
to federal databases and information systems through the
|
||
Government Printing Office (GPO), priced at the incremental
|
||
cost of dissemination for use in homes and offices, and free
|
||
to 1,400 federal depository libraries).
|
||
|
||
Both the House and Senate are soon expected to introduce legislation
|
||
that would replace the GPO WINDO/GATEWAY bills that were considered in
|
||
the last Congress. According to Congressional staff members, the bill
|
||
will be called "GPO Access." The new name (which may change again)
|
||
was only one of many substantive and symbolic changes to the
|
||
legislation.
|
||
|
||
Since the bill is still undergoing revisions, may be possible (in the
|
||
next day or so) to provide comments to members of Congress before the
|
||
legislation is introduced.
|
||
|
||
The most important changes to the legislation concern the scope and
|
||
ambition of the program. While we had expected Congressional
|
||
democrats to ask for an even broader public access bill than were
|
||
represented by the WINDO (hr 2772) and Gateway (S. 2813) bills, the
|
||
opposite has happened. Despite the fact that the legislation is no
|
||
longer facing the threat of a Bush veto or an end of session
|
||
filibuster (which killed the bills last year), key supporters have
|
||
decided to opt for a decidedly scaled down bill, based upon last
|
||
year's HR 5983, which was largely written by the House republican
|
||
minority (with considerable input from the commercial data vendors,
|
||
through the Information Industry Association (IIA)).
|
||
|
||
The politics of the bill are complex and surprising. The decision to
|
||
go with the scaled down version of the bill was cemented early this
|
||
year when representatives of the Washington Office of the American
|
||
Library Association (including ALA lobbyist Tom Sussman) meet with
|
||
Senator Ford and Representative Rose's staff to express their support
|
||
for a strategy based upon last year's HR 5983, the republican
|
||
minority's version of the bill that passed the House (but died in the
|
||
Senate) at the end of last year's session. ALA's actions, which were
|
||
taken without consultation with other citizen groups supporting the
|
||
WINDO/GATEWAY legislation, immediately set a low standard for the
|
||
scope of this year's bill.
|
||
|
||
We were totally surprised by ALA's actions, as were many other groups,
|
||
since ALA had been a vigorous and effective proponent of the original
|
||
WINDO/GATEWAY bills. ALA representatives are privately telling people
|
||
that while they still hope for broader access legislation, they are
|
||
backing the "compromise bill," which was publicly backed (but
|
||
privately opposed) last year by IIA, as necessary, to avoid a more
|
||
lengthy fight over the legislation. If the negotiations with the
|
||
House and Senate republicans hold up, the new bill will be backed by
|
||
ranking Republicans on the Senate Rules and House Administration
|
||
Committees, and passed by Congress on fast track consent calendars.
|
||
|
||
We only obtained a draft of the legislation last week, and it is still
|
||
a "work in progress." All changes must be approved by key Republican
|
||
members of Senate Rules and House Administration.
|
||
|
||
Gone from the WINDO/GATEWAY versions of the bill were any funding (S.
|
||
2813 would have provided $13 million over two years) to implement the
|
||
legislation, and any findings which set out the Congressional intent
|
||
regarding the need to provide citizens with broad access to most
|
||
federal information systems. Also missing are any references to
|
||
making the online system available through the Internet or the NREN.
|
||
|
||
WHAT THE GPO ACCESS BILL WILL DO (subject to further changes)
|
||
|
||
1. Require the Government Printing Office (GPO) to provide
|
||
public online access to:
|
||
|
||
- the Federal Register
|
||
- the Congressional Record
|
||
- an electronic directory of Federal public information
|
||
stored electronically,
|
||
- other appropriate publications distributed by the
|
||
Superintendent of Documents, and
|
||
- information under the control of other federal
|
||
departments or agencies, when requested by the
|
||
department or agency.
|
||
|
||
2. Most users will pay user fees equal to the "incremental cost of
|
||
dissemination of the information." This is a very important
|
||
feature that was included in the WINDO/GATEWAY legislation. At
|
||
present many federal agencies, including the National Technical
|
||
Information Services (NTIS), make profits on electronic
|
||
information products and services. Given the current federal
|
||
government fiscal crisis, this strong limit on online prices is
|
||
very welcome.
|
||
|
||
3. The 1,400 member federal Depository Library Program will have
|
||
free access to the system, just as they presently have free
|
||
access to thousands of federal publications in paper and
|
||
microfiche formats. Issues to be resolved later are who will pay
|
||
for Depository Library Program telecommunications costs, and
|
||
whether or not GPO will use the online system to replace
|
||
information products now provided in paper or microfiche formats.
|
||
|
||
|
||
WHAT THE GPO ACCESS BILL DOESN'T DO
|
||
|
||
- Provide any start-up or operational funding
|
||
|
||
- Require GPO to provide online access through the Internet
|
||
|
||
- The Gateway/WINDO bills would have given GPO broad authority to
|
||
publish federal information online, but the new bill would
|
||
restrict such authority to documents published by the
|
||
Superintendent of Documents (A small subset of federal
|
||
information stored electronically), or situations where the
|
||
agency itself asked GPO to disseminate information stored in
|
||
electronic formats. This change gives agencies more discretion
|
||
in deciding whether or not to allow GPO to provide online access
|
||
to their databases, including those cases where agencies want to
|
||
maintain control over databases for financial reasons (to make
|
||
profits).
|
||
|
||
- Language that would have explicitly allowed GPO to reimburse
|
||
agencies for their costs in providing public access was
|
||
eliminated in the new bill. This is a potentially important
|
||
issue, since many federal agencies will not work with GPO to
|
||
provide public access to their own information systems, unless
|
||
they are reimbursed for costs that they incur.
|
||
|
||
- S. 2813 and HR 2772 would have required GPO to publish an annual
|
||
report on the operation of the Gateway/WINDO and accept and
|
||
consider *annual* comments from users on a wide range of issues.
|
||
The new bill only makes a general requirement that GPO "consult"
|
||
with users and data vendors. The annual notice requirement that
|
||
was eliminated was designed to give citizens more say in how the
|
||
service evolves, by creating a dynamic public record of citizen
|
||
views on topics such as the product line, prices, standards and
|
||
the quality of the service. Given the poor record of many
|
||
federal agencies in dealing with rapidly changing technologies
|
||
and addressing user concerns, this is an important omission.
|
||
|
||
- The WINDO/GATEWAY bills would have required GPO to address
|
||
standards issues, in order to simplify public access. The new
|
||
bill doesn't raise the issue of standards.
|
||
|
||
OTHER POLITICAL CONSIDERATIONS
|
||
|
||
Supporters of a quick passage of the scaled down GPO Access
|
||
legislation are concerned about a number of budget, turf and
|
||
organizational issues. Examples are:
|
||
|
||
- Congress is considering the elimination of the Joint Committee on
|
||
Printing, which now has oversight of GPO.
|
||
|
||
- There are proposals to break-up GPO or to transfer the entire
|
||
agency to the Executive Branch, which would slow down action on
|
||
the online program, and may reduce the federal support for the
|
||
Federal Depository Library Program, or lead to a different (and
|
||
higher) pricing policy.
|
||
|
||
- The National Technical Information Service (NTIS) opposes an
|
||
important role by GPO in the delivery of online services, since
|
||
NTIS wants to provide these services at unconstrained prices.
|
||
|
||
It does not appear as though the Clinton/Gore Administration has had
|
||
much input on the GPO Access legislation, which is surprising since
|
||
Vice President Gore was the prime sponsor of the GPO Gateway to
|
||
Government (S. 2813) bill last year. (Michael Nelson will reportedly
|
||
be moving from the Senate Commerce Committee to the White House to be
|
||
working on these and related information policy issues.)
|
||
|
||
Even the scaled down GPO Access bill will face opposition. According
|
||
to House republicans, despite IIA's low key public pronouncements, the
|
||
vendor trade group "hates" the bill. Opposition from NTIS is also
|
||
anticipated.
|
||
|
||
|
||
TAXPAYER ASSETS PROJECT VIEW
|
||
|
||
We were baffled and disappointed the decision of ALA and Congress to
|
||
proceed with a scaled down version of last year's bills. We had hoped
|
||
that the election of the Clinton/Gore administration and the growing
|
||
grass roots awareness of public access issues would lead to a
|
||
stronger, rather than a weaker, bill. In our view, public
|
||
expectations are rapidly rising, and the burden is now on Congress and
|
||
the Administration to break with the past and take public access
|
||
seriously. The GPO Access legislation provides incremental benefits
|
||
over the status quo, but less than might seem.
|
||
|
||
- The statutory mandate to provide online services is useful, but
|
||
public access proponents have always argued that GPO already has
|
||
the authority to create the WINDO/GATEWAY under the current
|
||
statutes. In fact, GPO now offers hundreds of CD-ROM titles and
|
||
the online GPO Federal Bulletin Board, a service that could (and
|
||
should) be greatly expanded.
|
||
|
||
- The three products that the GPO Access bill refers to are already
|
||
online or under development GPO. GPO is now working on the
|
||
development of a locator system and an online version of the
|
||
Federal Register, and the Congressional Record is already online
|
||
in the Congressional LEGIS system -- a system that is presently
|
||
closed to the public, and which is not mentioned in the GPO
|
||
Access bill.
|
||
|
||
- The "incremental cost of dissemination" provision of the new bill
|
||
is welcome, but GPO is already limited to prices that are 150
|
||
percent of dissemination costs.
|
||
|
||
Several suggestions to strengthen last year's bills were ignored.
|
||
Among them:
|
||
|
||
- Expand the initial core products to include other online
|
||
information systems that are already under the control of
|
||
congress, such as the Federal Elections Commission (FEC) online
|
||
database of campaign contributions, the House LEGIS system which
|
||
provides online access to the full text of all bills before
|
||
Congress, or the Library of Congress Scorpio system.
|
||
|
||
- Create a special office of electronic dissemination in GPO. At
|
||
present, GPO's electronic products and services are managed by
|
||
Judy Russell, who is capable, but who is also responsible for
|
||
managing the primarily paper and microfiche based federal
|
||
Depository Library Program, a time consuming and complicated job.
|
||
We believe that GPO's electronic dissemination program is
|
||
important enough to warrant its own director, whose career would
|
||
depend upon the success of the electronic dissemination program.
|
||
|
||
The GPO Access bills will be considered by the following
|
||
Congressional Committees:
|
||
|
||
Senate Committee on Rules and Administration 202/224-6352
|
||
Chair, Senator Wendell Ford
|
||
Ranking Minority, Senator Ted Stevens
|
||
|
||
House Committee on House Administration 202/225-225-2061
|
||
Chair, Representative Charlie Rose
|
||
Ranking Minority, Representative Bill Thomas
|
||
|
||
------------------------------
|
||
|
||
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1993 20:26:36 EST
|
||
From: Arnie Kahn <FAC_ASKAHN@VAX1.ACS.JMU.EDU>
|
||
Subject: File 4--London Times Educational Supplement Article
|
||
|
||
****
|
||
Originally from:
|
||
From--Mike C Holderness <mch@doc.ic.ac.uk>
|
||
Subject--Invisible (internet) college
|
||
|
||
Greetings everyone --Here, belatedly, is the article for the Times
|
||
Higher Education Supplement in which you expressed an interest. The
|
||
published article was very little different, apart from some errors of
|
||
punctuation which they introduced... A conspiracy of silent
|
||
communication
|
||
|
||
"In the high-tech world, if you're not on the net, you're not in the
|
||
know." Thus the Economist included the Internet in its festive guide
|
||
to networks -- alongside the Freemasons, the Trilateral Commission,
|
||
and others which only the best-informed conspiracy theorists can fret
|
||
about. More seriously, Lynne Brindley, head of the British Library of
|
||
Political and Economic Science, asks how, as a young researcher, "you
|
||
break in to a discipline if you haven't source journals to look at".
|
||
Increasingly, research is being discussed on the Internet rather than
|
||
on paper: by "those in the know, in these invisible colleges who can
|
||
safely whizz their way round draft documents and papers," as Brindley
|
||
puts it.
|
||
|
||
Research has always involved "invisible colleges", whether they meet
|
||
at conferences or exchange ideas in the post -- what the electronic
|
||
community refers to as "snail mail". Does the age of electronic
|
||
communication herald newer, more invisible and more exclusive
|
||
colleges?
|
||
|
||
"Despite the normative description of science as an arena of
|
||
fully-open communication, the new communication technologies
|
||
exacerbate the practical problem of some groups of people having more
|
||
access to information than other people." That's the conclusion of
|
||
Bruce Lewenstein, of the departments of communication and Science &
|
||
Technology Studies at Cornell University in Ithaca, New York state.
|
||
|
||
The first thing about an exclusive network is that many people don't
|
||
even know about it. So some history is in order. The Internet grew out
|
||
of a project by the US Department of Defense to build a communication
|
||
system which would function after a nuclear attack. In the 1970s,
|
||
programmers working for the DoD got themselves connected, and started
|
||
sending electronic messages containing working notes, queries and
|
||
--crucially -- gossip.
|
||
|
||
The technology was taken up by the US National Science Foundation to
|
||
make super-computer resources available to universities across the
|
||
country. More and more local university networks joined. The British
|
||
Joint Academic Network (JANET) gained a high-speed connection to the
|
||
US, shared with NASA.
|
||
|
||
The Internet is deeply decentralized: an institution "joining" it need
|
||
only be connected to a few "neighbours", which forward messages on to
|
||
their neighbours, by whatever route is available, until they reach
|
||
their destination. So no-one knows quite how large it is. One recent
|
||
estimate is that about 7 million people --somewhere between 3.5
|
||
million and 14 million -- have full access through their university or
|
||
employer.
|
||
|
||
What's the Internet good for? You could, with permission, sit at a
|
||
kitchen table on the isle of Jura and run a programme on a
|
||
super-computer in Cambridge -- or, equally easily, in Cambridge,
|
||
Massachusetts, or both at once. But most researchers deal more in text
|
||
than number-crunching.
|
||
|
||
If you want to exchange text with colleagues around the world, you
|
||
first need an "account" on a computer, or a local network, with an
|
||
Internet connection. You compose your message in a word-processor and
|
||
convert it to unadulterated plain text (ASCII in the jargon). You
|
||
locate the account name for the person you want to write to -- more on
|
||
that later. Type the command "mail jones@history.winnesota.edu" and
|
||
attach the text; a few minutes or hours later jones looks at her
|
||
computer in the notorious University of Winnesota and discovers your
|
||
message waiting for her.
|
||
|
||
Immediately, you can see the possibility of collaborative writing with
|
||
anyone, anywhere. You can form a group, too. A "mailing list"
|
||
re-distributes all the messages it receives to all its subscribers.
|
||
And you can have public discussions: a message sent to one of the more
|
||
than 2000 "news-groups" is visible to anyone who cares to look, and
|
||
possibly to reply.
|
||
|
||
It's not, of course, quite as easy as that.
|
||
|
||
Assume, for the moment, that you can type, in English. Assume that you
|
||
have access to the necessary equipment. Assume that you're able and
|
||
prepared to learn the sometimes baroque commands needed to access the
|
||
system. Assume that you're tolerant of the fact that when you make a
|
||
mistake, as you will, the system may fail to notify you at all, or may
|
||
throw screeds of gobbledegook at you.
|
||
|
||
For these assumptions to be true, you're quite likely either to be a
|
||
member of an academic institution in a Western industrialised country,
|
||
or very well-to-do in world terms. You're also likely to be male. And
|
||
the public area of the news system bears this out. An high proportion
|
||
of messages -- over 90% in an unrepresentative sample of discussions
|
||
of physics -- comes from the USA. An even higher proportion (of those
|
||
with identifiable senders) comes from men.
|
||
|
||
"Women in science worry that these 'private' network exchanges of
|
||
research results serve to reinforce the 'Old Boy Network' in
|
||
scientific research circles, especially given the overwhelmingly male
|
||
demographics of e-mail and news-group users," says Ruth Ginzberg,
|
||
Assistant Professor of Philosophy at Wesleyan University in the US.
|
||
|
||
Why should there be this preponderance of men? Sarah Plumeridge is
|
||
research assistant on a project to study women's use of computers at
|
||
the University of East London. She comments that "A lot of research
|
||
suggests that women prefer computing when it's for use, as a tool,
|
||
when it's not taught as an abstract science." It's clear from the tone
|
||
of messages in the public news-groups that the boys see them as a
|
||
playground.
|
||
|
||
Newcomers are often mercilessly attacked for stylistic solecisms.
|
||
Kerri Lindo, who teaches philosophy at Middlesex University, saw the
|
||
Internet for the first time when interviewed for this piece. She
|
||
immediately related it to her work on the French philosopher Bourdieu
|
||
and remarked: "it's what I'd call a social Freemasonry -- you can't
|
||
join a club unless know in advance what the rules are. Someone who
|
||
learns the rules and then plays the game won't play it as successfully
|
||
as someone who never explicitly learnt them -- just as people who
|
||
learn middle-class manners or second languages always get caught out,
|
||
however fluent they become."
|
||
|
||
And Josh Hayes, a post-doctorate studying community ecology at the
|
||
University of Washington, may have hit on a sensible social reason for
|
||
avoiding electronic communication: "For the moment, those of us who
|
||
use the net a lot are probably considered to be, well, a little bit
|
||
geeky. Real ecologists would be out in the field, don't you know."
|
||
|
||
There are more serious issues too. Cheris Kramerae of the Department
|
||
of Speech Communication at the University of Illinois at Urbana is,
|
||
working on the issue of sexual harassment on "the net". This happens
|
||
in very specific ways -- men sending abusive messages to women, often
|
||
having obtained their electronic addresses from the electronic
|
||
"personals column". There is also the problem of socially retarded
|
||
students abusing the system to distribute digitised pornographic
|
||
images: the direct equivalent of the calendar on the workshop wall.
|
||
Kramerae concludes, however, that "Obviously it is not the technology
|
||
but the policies which are presenting particular problems for women."
|
||
|
||
Arnie Kahn runs a private mailing list for about 45 feminist
|
||
psychologists from James Madison University in Virginia. "A few years
|
||
ago I was sending electronic mail to a few friends who, like myself,
|
||
were feminist psychologists doing research on gender.... I announced
|
||
to my friends that if they had a question, they could just send the
|
||
message to me and I would forward it to the rest of the group."
|
||
|
||
Kahn's list is, then, exactly an invisible college. Given the vast
|
||
space occupied by anti-feminist men in the open news-groups which are
|
||
supposed to discuss feminism, it can only operate if it remains
|
||
private and by invitation.
|
||
|
||
Are there, though, fields in which access to the Internet is
|
||
essential, rather than helpful, to making progress? It seems so. Jim
|
||
Horne, an Associate Research Scientist in high-energy physics at Yale
|
||
University in the US, states that "a number of people in high energy
|
||
(only those with tenure though) have even stopped sending their papers
|
||
to journals. They only send their papers to the preprint bulletin
|
||
boards." Paper publication is quite simply too slow to bother with.
|
||
|
||
These collections of preprints are public, if you have net access and
|
||
if you've been told where to find them. Stephen Selipsky, a physics
|
||
post-doctorate at Boston University, points out that, since the
|
||
preprints were made available in this way, "in the circles I move in,
|
||
'private' mailing lists play very little role... There is very little
|
||
point keeping results secret in theoretical work, and large career
|
||
rewards from disseminating results... in contrast to areas like
|
||
biochemistry, where people [want] to stay in the lead on a hot topic."
|
||
|
||
Computer science is naturally another field where work is exchanged
|
||
exclusively on the net. A researcher at Edinburgh --who preferred not
|
||
to be named "from shyness" -- says that "you tend not to chase up the
|
||
actual publication (which can be months later). I have seen someone
|
||
appealing for information about where some papers were eventually
|
||
published, because you can't (yet) put 'archive@ohio-state.edu' in a
|
||
bibliography entry." Here, too, there is at least one mailing list
|
||
which is private -- "in order to keep down the traffic and free it
|
||
from the 'can anyone tell me what a neural network is?' questions."
|
||
|
||
In some fields, electronic distribution is the only practical method.
|
||
If you've ever watched someone laboriously typing DNA sequences out of
|
||
a journal into a computer -- "ACG ACT AAG TAG" and thus for pages
|
||
--you'll see why this is the case for molecular biology.
|
||
|
||
There are some ways in which electronic communications can break down
|
||
boundaries. "Speaking as someone at a relatively small and remote
|
||
institution," says Steve Carlip at the physics department of the
|
||
University of California Davis, "the biggest handicap is not private
|
||
electronic distribution, but rather the fact that so much happens at
|
||
seminars and in conversations."
|
||
|
||
Robert Gutschera finished his PhD last year and is now an Assistant
|
||
Professor of mathematics at Wellesley College in the USA. "The
|
||
heaviest users of electronic mail seem to be younger researchers," he
|
||
says. "Getting into a field is always hard, but I think e-mail makes
|
||
it better rather than worse."
|
||
|
||
Some are positively evangelical. Lewenstein quotes Tom Droege, who is
|
||
looking for "anomalous" heat production from palladium electrodes in
|
||
heavy water -- the notorious cold fusion experiment -- in his basement
|
||
laboratory. Droege communicates and discusses all his results publicly
|
||
on the Internet -- finding negative interest from his work colleagues
|
||
at Fermilab. "...the real experiment I am trying to do is e-mail
|
||
science. The 'anomalous heat' project is just an excuse. I think this
|
||
is the media of the future."
|
||
|
||
You may notice that most of the people quoted here work in the USA.
|
||
This is, as you might guess, because their comments were obtained on
|
||
the Internet -- neatly demonstrating the bias it introduces. On the
|
||
one hand, the research for this article might have been impossibly
|
||
expensive without it. On the other, people with net connections are
|
||
tempted to talk only to the connected.
|
||
|
||
Kerri Lindo, as a total newcomer, was immediately struck by the
|
||
possibility of finding others working on Bourdieu -- until she saw the
|
||
content of the one public philosophy news-group: "It's a real shame,
|
||
isn't it..." She composed and sent a message anyway -- and was able to
|
||
predict what the programme would do next, which suggests that the
|
||
computer software for sending messages isn't as awful as it's often
|
||
made out to be, at least for post-graduate philosophers. She got just
|
||
one response, from a group with an estimated 23,000 readers, and this
|
||
could be summarised as "who he?".
|
||
|
||
Some of those ten or thirty thousand occasional readers of the
|
||
philosophy news-group could probably be useful collaborators for
|
||
Lindo. But how to find them? The sheer volume of public tittle-tattle
|
||
-- known on the net as "the noise-to-signal ratio" --means that only
|
||
those with time to kill will pay attention. The Internet has no
|
||
equivalent to a phone book. If you know that you want to contact a
|
||
particular person, you know what institution they work at, and you can
|
||
guess or find out that institution's electronic address, there are
|
||
tools which may locate them -- but they're cranky and unreliable.
|
||
|
||
Often the easiest way to find someone's electronic address is a phone
|
||
call, which may involve explaining exactly what electronic mail is to
|
||
three or four departmental secretaries. On the other hand, once you've
|
||
made contact, the computer screen is a great leveller. If you can work
|
||
out how to de-gender your personal name, then all the information the
|
||
reader has about you is what you choose to put into your text. (Or
|
||
maybe not: Lindo recalls an small experiment in which she could tell
|
||
the gender of pseudonymous essayists with 93% accuracy, though this
|
||
was from hand-written scripts.) An intelligent and literate amateur
|
||
could still conceivably enter into collaboration with a professor...
|
||
|
||
If you work in the humanities, you can probably put off coming to
|
||
grips with the technology for a few years. You might want, however, to
|
||
consider the rich seam of research on how this medium affects the
|
||
nature of the messages. Lindo is not the only person to speculate that
|
||
"It's possible that [the net] will influence the whole structure and
|
||
nature of knowledge as much as the printing press did." Consider, too,
|
||
that if Cyril Burt's twin studies had been published electronically,
|
||
some awkward person --very possibly an amateur -- would have run his
|
||
figures through a statistics programme and spotted something funny,
|
||
probably within 24 hours.
|
||
|
||
If you work in some fields -- certainly high-energy physics and
|
||
molecular biology, and probably mathematics -- you'd better get
|
||
connected, get retrained, or get a highly computer-literate graduate
|
||
assistant ("a nerd", in the jargon) to do it for you. Lewenstein
|
||
concludes that though electronic communication "will not replace
|
||
traditional face-to-face interaction... researchers with access to
|
||
these forms of communication [are] making progress while other
|
||
researchers, still awaiting information through more traditional
|
||
slower channels, have not yet begun to work." For them, the ability to
|
||
use computer communication is an essential part of literacy.
|
||
|
||
Dorothy Denning works on computer security, and teaches computer
|
||
literacy, at Georgetown University in Washington DC. She "doubt that
|
||
the electronic research communities will be any harder to break into
|
||
than non-electronic ones. Based on my own experience, I expect they
|
||
will be much easier to join (assuming you have the resources). Her
|
||
qualification is vital -- funders, take note.
|
||
|
||
------------------------------
|
||
|
||
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1993 22:51:14 EDT
|
||
From: Susan_L._Irwin.Henr801C@XEROX.COM
|
||
Subject: File 5--FWD: The White House Communication Project
|
||
|
||
I am currently involved in a research project that is trying to aid
|
||
the Clinton Administration in making effective use of
|
||
computer-mediated communication to stay "in touch" with the public.
|
||
Our coordinator has gotten in touch with Jack Gill, Director of
|
||
Electronic Publishing and Public Access Electronic Mail for the
|
||
Clinton Administration, and he (Gill) has embraced the efforts of the
|
||
research group to lend a helping hand to this task. Some questions he
|
||
has posed to the researchers include the following:
|
||
|
||
(1) When you get thousands of messages a day, how do you
|
||
respond effectively?
|
||
(2) How do you make a public e-mail system inclusive
|
||
and accessible?
|
||
(3) What would happen if e-mail became the primary
|
||
mode of(mediated) access to government?
|
||
|
||
We would appreciate any insights and suggestions of possible solutions to
|
||
these questions.
|
||
|
||
Shellie Emmons sme46782@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu
|
||
|
||
------------------------------
|
||
|
||
End of Computer Underground Digest #5.18
|
||
************************************
|
||
|
||
|