814 lines
37 KiB
Plaintext
814 lines
37 KiB
Plaintext
Computer underground Digest Wed Aug 24, 1994 Volume 6 : Issue 76
|
|
ISSN 1004-042X
|
|
|
|
Editors: Jim Thomas and Gordon Meyer (TK0JUT2@NIU.BITNET)
|
|
Archivist: Brendan Kehoe
|
|
Retiring Shadow Archivist: Stanton McCandlish
|
|
Shadow-Archivists: Dan Carosone / Paul Southworth
|
|
Ralph Sims / Jyrki Kuoppala
|
|
Ian Dickinson
|
|
Copylate Editor: John Holmes Shrudlu
|
|
|
|
CONTENTS, #6.76 (Wed, Aug 24, 1994)
|
|
|
|
File 1--ACTION ALERT! PTO Commission Lehman's Intell. Property report
|
|
File 2--Good, bad, ugly, confused, and wary
|
|
File 3--EFF - "This bill will pass" - Telecom reg - WATCH OUT ISPs!
|
|
File 4--Congressional Committee on the Net (fwd)
|
|
File 5-- Clinton's Crime Bill - new threat to Sysops? (fwd)
|
|
File 6--EPIC Statement on FBI Wiretap Bill
|
|
File 7--Updates on 12-ICPR, Jerusalem
|
|
File 8--Fourth International Virus Bulletin Conference
|
|
File 9--The CuD Header now Appears at the END OF EACH ISSUE
|
|
File 10--Cu Digest Header Information (unchanged)
|
|
|
|
CuD ADMINISTRATIVE, EDITORIAL, AND SUBSCRIPTION INFORMATION APPEARS IN
|
|
THE CONCLUDING FILE AT THE END OF EACH ISSUE.
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Date: Sat, 20 Aug 1994 15:48:13 -0700
|
|
From: Jim Warren <jwarren@WELL.SF.CA.US>
|
|
Subject: File 1--ACTION ALERT! PTO Commission Lehman's Intell. Property report
|
|
|
|
Hi all -- [blind cc'ed to numerous folks]
|
|
|
|
Just spotted this in Dave Farber's interesting-people msgs.
|
|
|
|
Personally, I think that Lehman and the PTO is permanently-entrenched in
|
|
offering nothing better than band-aids to protect the past. I think that
|
|
the *only* chance we have for a more-enlightened approach to freedom
|
|
versus software monopolies is massive, virulent [articulate] *torching*
|
|
of our Congress-creatures. (At the least, it will force the monopolists
|
|
to spend much more loot bribing friendly votes from the representatives
|
|
they are buying.)
|
|
|
|
Like always, freedom requires vigilence AND action.
|
|
|
|
--jim
|
|
Jim Warren, columnist for MicroTimes, Government Technology, BoardWatch, etc.
|
|
jwarren@well.com -or- jwarren@autodesk.com
|
|
345 Swett Rd., Woodside CA 94062; voice/415-851-7075; fax/415-851-2814
|
|
|
|
===re===
|
|
|
|
>From farber@eff.org Tue Aug 16 04:56:33 1994
|
|
From: mkj@world.std.com (Mahatma Kane-Jeeves)
|
|
|
|
Has anyone here seen the so-called Lehman Panel report? It is
|
|
available by ftp from ftp.uspto.gov, in the directory /pub/nii-ip. It
|
|
is offered there in several formats. The deadline for comments is
|
|
September 7th. (Sorry about the short notice, but I've only just
|
|
recently discovered the report myself.)
|
|
|
|
The Lehman Panel is more officially known as the "Working Group on
|
|
Intellectual Property Rights", a subcommittee of President Clinton's
|
|
"Information Infrastructure Task Force". The Lehman Panel report
|
|
makes a number of recommendations concerning changes to current
|
|
intellectual property law, in light of challenges presented by the
|
|
National Information Infrastructure (NII) project.
|
|
|
|
This appears to me to be quite an important report, which could play a
|
|
major role in shaping vital aspects of our near-future society. I
|
|
find the whole approach taken by the panel disturbing, though perhaps
|
|
not surprising. Very briefly, my general concerns are these:
|
|
|
|
There appears to be a natural tension between current intellectual
|
|
property law and the widespread deployment of computer networking.
|
|
(John Barlow has put it more simply: "Copyright is dead".) The Lehman
|
|
panel's report, rather than trying to accomodate and adapt to the
|
|
inevitable effects of the NII, instead recommends tightening up
|
|
existing laws, and expanding their scope, in an attempt to preserve
|
|
the status quo and protect established interests. It seems to me that
|
|
this approach would dramatically undercut the potential of the NII,
|
|
making many of its most natural uses and benefits illegal. Worse, I
|
|
believe this approach would create a body of law which will make speed
|
|
limits look well-respected by comparison, and any attempt to enforce
|
|
these laws is likely to be destructive and unpleasant for all of us.
|
|
|
|
There are numerous other, more specific things in this report which
|
|
make me unhappy, too -- such as the presumption that the NII should be
|
|
little more than a new marketplace for old businesses; the creation of
|
|
gratuitous new rights for major record labels which would hurt
|
|
artists, and would enable the record companies to control the digital
|
|
audio server industry; and most frightening of all, the shameless
|
|
suggestion that the public schools should be used to pound these new
|
|
rules into the heads of children as early as Kindergarten.
|
|
|
|
I've obviously considered firing off a letter of comment myself, but
|
|
after I calmed down I realized how little impact that would be likely
|
|
to have. So I decided the most constructive thing I could do would be
|
|
to post this "alert" here, in the hope that someone with better
|
|
qualifications and resources than myself might pick up the ball.
|
|
|
|
Thanks for your attention.
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 94 09:11 MDT
|
|
From: chuck@MU.LAW.UTAH.EDU(Charles Perkins)
|
|
Subject: File 2--Good, bad, ugly, confused, and wary
|
|
|
|
Jerry Leichter knocks down a straw man in his argument that free
|
|
market concerns (about cryptograpy and the clipper chip) should not
|
|
take precedence over public interest and safety. He correctly argues
|
|
that we have regulations for our safety. However, his article assumes
|
|
that the proposed regulations will safeguard citizens' safety and
|
|
interests in a manner similar to current automotive and industrial
|
|
regulations. I do not share this assumption. In fact, I am afraid
|
|
that these proposals will reduce my safety and compromise my own
|
|
interests.
|
|
|
|
I am not concerned about the ethical use of the powers of observation
|
|
that would be created by the digital telephony proposals. I AM
|
|
concerned about the unethical uses. The unethical uses by government
|
|
officials or criminals (anyone using these avenues without authority
|
|
but with the technical ability and illicit knowlege.) I also am
|
|
concerned about the precedent this would set. I would like to think
|
|
that I have a right to privacy in my communications with others.
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: karl@MCS.COM (Karl Denninger)
|
|
Subject: File 3--EFF - "This bill will pass" - Telecom reg - WATCH OUT ISPs!
|
|
|
|
An excerpt from Farber's "interesting people" list:
|
|
|
|
I. Overview
|
|
|
|
During the final hours before the Senate telecommunications
|
|
bill (S.1822) was marked-up by the Senate Commerce Committee, a
|
|
provision was added which would expand the current FCC regulation on
|
|
obscene and indecent audiotext (900 number) services to virtually all
|
|
electronic information services, including commercial online service
|
|
providers, the Internet, and BBS operators. This proposal, introduced
|
|
by Senator Exon, would require all information service providers and
|
|
all other electronic communication service providers, to take steps to
|
|
assure that minors do not have access to obscene or indecent material
|
|
through the services offered by the service provider.
|
|
|
|
......
|
|
|
|
II. Summary of Exon Amendment
|
|
|
|
The Exon amendment which is now part of S.1822, expands
|
|
section 223 of the Communications Act to cover anyone who "makes,
|
|
transmits, or otherwise makes available" obscene or indecent
|
|
communication. It makes no distinction between those entities which
|
|
transmit the communications from those which create, process, or use
|
|
the communication. This section of the Communications Act was
|
|
originally intended to criminalize harassment accomplished over
|
|
interstate telephone lines, and to require telephone companies that
|
|
offer indecent 900 number services to prevent minors from having
|
|
access to such services. The 900 number portions are know as the
|
|
Helms Amendments, having been championed by Senator Jesse Helms.
|
|
These sections have been the subject of extension constitutional
|
|
litigation.
|
|
|
|
If enacted into law, these amendments would require that
|
|
anyone who
|
|
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
|
"makes, transmits, or otherwise makes available" indecent communication
|
|
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
|
take prescribed steps to assure that minors are prevented from having
|
|
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
|
access to these communications.
|
|
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
|
|
|
If I remember correctly the EFF was quite sure that a bill of this
|
|
kind was going to pass, so they rolled over and said "ok" to the one
|
|
offered.
|
|
|
|
Now look where it is going to get all of us.
|
|
|
|
You want to know how to destroy what we have here? Force every
|
|
provider, every carrier, and every end-node to verify by legally
|
|
acceptable proof of age each and every person online. Since there is
|
|
no way to filter newsgroups 100%, you have to accept only those who
|
|
are legally of age -- or else you filter every message.
|
|
|
|
There goes the library connections we've been working for, as an
|
|
example. The libraries THEMSELVES could be held legally liable for
|
|
permitting a minor to use their terminals if they have Internet
|
|
access.
|
|
|
|
This bill MUST GO DOWN TO DEFEAT. Flood your congressmen and senators
|
|
phones RIGHT NOW. DO NOT allow this thing to pass.
|
|
|
|
While you're at it fire the EFF and rip up your membership cards.
|
|
IMHO they're asleep at the switch or have sold us all out. Take your
|
|
pick; either is equally bad.
|
|
|
|
Just what DOES the EFF stand for?
|
|
|
|
Or perhaps clearing the playing field of all "small guys" so the
|
|
telcos, who have been giving you folks operating money, can come in
|
|
and take over?
|
|
|
|
What's the real agenda here guys?
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 1994 15:36:20 -0500 (CDT)
|
|
From: Charles Stanford <cstanfor@BIGCAT.MISSOURI.EDU>
|
|
Subject: File 4--Congressional Committee on the Net (fwd)
|
|
|
|
---------- Forwarded message ----------
|
|
Date--Fri, 12 Aug 1994 15:35:11 +0400
|
|
From--JPX@hr.house.gov
|
|
To--Multiple recipients of list SAIS-L <SAIS-L@unb.ca>
|
|
Subject--Congressional Committee takes to the Net (long)
|
|
|
|
This is the initial posting from the Committee on Science, Space,
|
|
and Technology of the U.S. House of Representatives, chaired by the
|
|
Honorable George Brown of California. We have agreed to serve as
|
|
the "beta" testers for House Committees trying to learn how to use
|
|
the Internet. We posted this message to some of the USENET
|
|
newsgroups that discuss topics relevant to our jurisdiction over
|
|
Federal civilian research and development activities to:
|
|
|
|
(1) Increase the number of people who know we do have
|
|
Internet access;
|
|
(2) Indicate how we can be reached on the net; and
|
|
(3) Start learning how to take advantage of this information
|
|
system in our daily activities.
|
|
|
|
Getting the Congress to use Internet has been discussed in a few
|
|
threads on various USENET newsgroups of late. Some of you may be
|
|
familiar with the E-Mail Pilot Project established by the Committee
|
|
on House Administration, chaired by the Honorable Charlie Rose of
|
|
North Carolina. Those Members of the House currently maintaining
|
|
an electronic mailbox for constituent communications may be found
|
|
by e-mailing "congress@hr.house.gov" with the text "HELP" or "INFO"
|
|
in the message body. You will receive an automated response with
|
|
the necessary instructions.
|
|
|
|
Also, the text of legislation introduced in the U.S. House of
|
|
Representatives during the current Congress is now available on a
|
|
W.A.I.S server located at the House Information Systems data
|
|
center. The server may be accessed from the directory at
|
|
quake.think.com or using the following information:
|
|
|
|
Server: diamond
|
|
Port: 210
|
|
Database Name: USHOUSE_house_bill_text_103rd
|
|
|
|
It can also be found on gopher.house.gov in:
|
|
|
|
Congressional Information/Legislative Resources
|
|
|
|
The database contains the text of House bills beginning with
|
|
October 1993 and is updated daily.
|
|
|
|
What follows now is the message you will automatically receive in
|
|
response to messages sent to housesst@hr.house.gov, the Committee's
|
|
Internet address. It describes items like the Committee's gopher
|
|
server, which you can also find at gopher.house.gov.
|
|
|
|
----------- begin -----------
|
|
Welcome to the electronic mailbox system for the Committee on
|
|
Science, Space, and Technology of the U.S. House of
|
|
Representatives. This Internet service is provided for ease of
|
|
communication with the Members and staff of the Committee.
|
|
|
|
If your message is addressed to a specific Member, it will be
|
|
printed out in hard copy and forwarded to the Member's office for
|
|
response by U.S. Mail.
|
|
|
|
If your message is addressed to a staff member of the
|
|
Committee, it will be forwarded electronically to that staff member
|
|
for response. Depending on the nature of the response, it might
|
|
reach you in either electronic or postal form.
|
|
|
|
Messages for the Committee press office will be acknowledged
|
|
electronically and then followed up on, if necessary, with material
|
|
by post or fax. You can reach the press office directly via
|
|
Internet at "sstpress@hr.house.gov".
|
|
|
|
The Committee also maintains a bulletin board on the House of
|
|
Representatives Internet gopher server at "gopher@hr.house.gov".
|
|
Much of the public information material provided by the Committee
|
|
is available on this gopher system.
|
|
|
|
Much of this information also is available on the Committee's
|
|
"Straight Talk" voice-response system. Dial 202/225-3018 and
|
|
follow the menu instructions for a touch-tone telephone.
|
|
|
|
Thank you for contacting the House Science Committee. Please
|
|
be patient as we experiment with this new way of better serving
|
|
your communications needs. If you wish to write to the Committee,
|
|
please direct your correspondence to:
|
|
|
|
Committee on Science, Space, and Technology
|
|
2320 Rayburn House Office Building
|
|
U.S. House of Representatives
|
|
Washington, DC 20515
|
|
----------- end -----------
|
|
|
|
At this time, we suggest you supply both your e-mail and postal
|
|
addresses in any communication to the Committee. Each office in
|
|
Congress has its own policy for responding to public inquiries.
|
|
So, if we forward your e-mail to a particular Member's office, they
|
|
may choose to respond with a regular letter. Our Committee hopes
|
|
to increase our use of e-mail in responding to public inquiries.
|
|
|
|
We have chosen the following subset of USENET groups for our
|
|
initial foray into the net.world:
|
|
|
|
alt.california
|
|
alt.cyberspace
|
|
alt.dcom.telecom
|
|
alt.politics.datahighway
|
|
comp.dcom.telecom
|
|
comp.org.cpsr.talk
|
|
comp.org.eff.talk
|
|
misc.education
|
|
misc.education.science
|
|
misc.legal
|
|
sci.agriculture
|
|
sci.astro
|
|
sci.bio.ecology
|
|
sci.chem
|
|
sci.energy
|
|
sci.engr
|
|
sci.environment
|
|
sci.geo.geology
|
|
sci.math
|
|
sci.med
|
|
sci.misc
|
|
sci.physics
|
|
sci.research
|
|
sci.space.policy
|
|
talk.environment
|
|
talk.politics.crypto
|
|
|
|
Please feel free to repost this message to other groups that might
|
|
find the information of value. Your comments on what should be
|
|
carried by this channel of communications would also be welcomed.
|
|
|
|
---------------
|
|
|
|
Committee on Science, Space, and Technology
|
|
U.S. House of Representatives
|
|
Washington, D.C. 20515 HOUSESST@HR.HOUSE.GOV
|
|
|
|
DISCLAIMER: Opinions expressed in this posting are those of the
|
|
sender and do not necessarily reflect those of the Committee, the
|
|
Chairman or any Member of Congress.
|
|
|
|
|
|
** End of text from cdp:pol.access.usa **
|
|
|
|
***************************************************************************
|
|
This material came from PeaceNet, a non-profit progressive networking
|
|
service. For more information, send a message to peacenet-info@igc.apc.org
|
|
***************************************************************************
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 94 14:38:00 EDT
|
|
From: "W. K. (Bill) Gorman" <34AEJ7D@CMUVM.CSV.CMICH.EDU
|
|
Subject: File 5-- Clinton's Crime Bill - new threat to Sysops? (fwd)
|
|
|
|
Look at the civil forfeiture provisions buried deep in the Crime Bill.
|
|
Looks like Sysops will be facing civil forfeiture for their OPINIONS now;
|
|
the Crime Bill just redefines darn near everything as a TERRORIST ACT.
|
|
|
|
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
|
|
|
|
Here is a synopsis of the wonderful things hidden in the so-called
|
|
"Crime Control Act of 1993."
|
|
|
|
Property Forfeiture for Speeches, Writings and Assembly
|
|
by Ross Regnart
|
|
|
|
The Crime Control Act of 1993
|
|
The Crime Control Act of 1993 redefines Illegal Search and Seizure
|
|
while eliminating an innocent citizen's civil redress in suits against
|
|
government officials and agents. [Title VII Section 2337]
|
|
Incorporated: were provisions of proposed S.45 titled "Terrorism
|
|
Death Penalty Act of 1991" Both bills contained language which can
|
|
charge law abiding citizens of being agents or affording support to
|
|
terrorist organizations.
|
|
Consider: the Proper Forfeiture Effects on organizations and
|
|
individuals when Speeches, Writings, and Assemblies mentioned in S.45
|
|
are combined with the Forfeiture Provisions of Biden's SB 266 now
|
|
incorporated in The Crime Control Act of 1993: any individual or
|
|
organization in the United States who had or should have had knowledge
|
|
that an associate might commit a terrorist act can have their property
|
|
seized. Written like Federal Drug Forfeiture Laws, a citizen who
|
|
allowed their home or other real property to be used for an assembly
|
|
would start out guilty having to prove they did not have knowledge of
|
|
unlawful methods of the organization or individuals they allowed to use
|
|
their property. See S.8 Definitions Title VII Section 2332
|
|
"Local" C
|
|
Politically active organizations and labor unions are especially
|
|
vulnerable to The Crime Control Act of 1993 provisions which define
|
|
bodily acts as "terrorist acts" A fist fight at a demonstration or
|
|
picket line would qualify. The physical act need not cause bodily harm
|
|
as its provisions refer to "involving any violent act".
|
|
S.8 The Crime Control Act of 1993 Forfeiture Provisions which seem
|
|
aimed at public dissent are written like RICO laws taking on the added
|
|
prospect of Political Property Forfeiture. Broadly written intent to
|
|
commit terrorist acts is defined: "appear to be intended (1) to
|
|
intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (2) to influence the policy
|
|
of a government by intimidation or coercion."
|
|
It would appear that provisions contained in Senator Biden's proposed
|
|
Senate Bill 266, now included in The Crime Control Act of 1993, target
|
|
any group of persons which would dare demonstrate for or against any
|
|
issue. Any picket line which is alleged to have blocked public access
|
|
could qualify to intimidate or coerce a civilian population. Should
|
|
violence result for any reason at a public assembly, the Property
|
|
Forfeiture Provisions of The Crime Control Act of 1993 may be triggered
|
|
causing forfeiture of attending demonstrators' homes used for meetings
|
|
and the vehicles they used for transportation to the event.
|
|
Demonstrators and/or pickets who left messages on a member or
|
|
organization computer BBS System could cause the forfeiture of the
|
|
system and all its records. The fact the system operator had no
|
|
knowledge of any planned violence will Not Prevent Property Forfeiture
|
|
of organization and member assets.
|
|
Conspiracy is enough. Under provisions of The Crime Control Act of
|
|
1993 Property Forfeiture, Arrest, Huge Fines, and Prison Sentences can
|
|
result from "activities which appear to be intended toward violence".
|
|
Distributing political action flyers could qualify.
|
|
The Crime Control Act of 1993 Terrorist Provisions when first examined
|
|
are misleading for they give the reader the impression they are after
|
|
agents of a foreign power wishing to do Americans harm. The "Trojan
|
|
Horse" in The Crime Control Act of 1993: anyone in the United States
|
|
committing an undefined violent act or attending an assembly can be
|
|
charged with terrorism. S.8 Terrorism Forfeiture Provisions Would Be
|
|
Retroactive Going Back 4 Years.
|
|
|
|
Discovery of Witnesses and Evidence Eliminated
|
|
If a Defendant under Section 2333 of Title VII terrorist acts and/or
|
|
conspiracy seeks to discover from the Department of Justice the
|
|
evidence against him, the attorney for the Government may object on the
|
|
grounds that compliance will interfere with a criminal investigation or
|
|
prosecution of the incident, or a national security operation related
|
|
to the incident, which is the subject of Civil Litigation. Example:
|
|
Government Civil Forfeiture. Expected: Defense against Government
|
|
charges may be difficult where citizens have no access to knowing of
|
|
the alleged evidence against them or the right to cross examine
|
|
government's secret witnesses.
|
|
Secret Witnesses - Secret Trials: Protection of jurors and witnesses
|
|
in Capital Cases
|
|
Chapter 113B Section 138 states that the list of jurors and witnesses
|
|
need not be furnished to Capital Offense Defendants should the court
|
|
find by a preponderance of the evidence that providing the list may
|
|
jeopardize the life or safety of any person.
|
|
|
|
Title VII Section n2337
|
|
The Crime Control Act of 1993 eliminates civil suits against U.S. and
|
|
Foreign Governments by innocent persons injured resulting from
|
|
Government Agents in prusuit of terrorist acts.
|
|
|
|
Title VII Section 711: Sentencing Guidelines Increased for Terrorist
|
|
Crimes
|
|
The United States Sentencing Commission shall have the power to provide
|
|
an increase in the base offense level for any felony committed in the
|
|
United States that involves or is intended to promote international
|
|
terrorism. Participation by political activists in Lawful Speeches,
|
|
Writings and Public Assemblies may be used as evidence by Government to
|
|
show that a political participant was aware of the unlawful methods of
|
|
the individual or organization they are alleged to have afforded
|
|
support.
|
|
One person's violent unlawful act at an assembly may be enough for
|
|
the Government to allege the assembly Appears To Be Intended Toward
|
|
Violence or Activities which could Intimidate or Coerce a Civilian
|
|
Population.
|
|
Under current drug forfeiture laws: innocent citizens have been
|
|
implicated by informants who will often testify to anything to mitigate
|
|
their own arrest. This has resulted in innocent citizens being
|
|
arrested and killed by drug agents; forfeiture of the property; and
|
|
financial ruination. Under proposed provisions of The Crime Control
|
|
Act of 1993 special breaks are afforded informants, even against the
|
|
death penalty. Government will have no difficulty Creating Informants
|
|
to cause the incarceration of any citizen considered a threat to one's
|
|
political agenda.
|
|
Disproportionate zero tolerance laws have served as precedents for
|
|
expanding forfeiture: Since 1984, forfeiture laws have been operating
|
|
on the erroneous contention that property can possess intent to commit
|
|
crime. Innocent owners can have their property seized prior to trial
|
|
on mere suspicion, starting out guilty, the owner having to prove they
|
|
did not have reason to know that their property was being used to
|
|
facilitate a forfeitable offense. Government need only show the
|
|
property owner was negligent in making his property available for
|
|
illegal drug activity to cause its forfeiture.
|
|
The Forfeiture Scam: tenants arrested on real property when offered a
|
|
sentencing deal by a prosecutor or immunity from further prosecution,
|
|
often reply in testimony, "that had the real property owner been
|
|
vigilant, he or she could have discovered drug activity taking place on
|
|
their property." Government has used against real property owners in
|
|
Civil Forfeiture actions the fact that a property owner had reported to
|
|
police that a tenant was dealing drugs at their property to show an
|
|
owner had prior knowledge of the activity. Elderly citizens afraid to
|
|
face machine guns and other threats by drug dealers are especially
|
|
vulnerable to having their homes and rental property siezed. Elderly
|
|
property owners, often in bad health, are easy prey for Police
|
|
Forfeiture Squads.
|
|
The Crime Control Act of 1993 will allow government to use against its
|
|
citizens illegally seized evidence. Searches, wiretaps and seizures
|
|
that result in obtaining evidence from an invalid warrant issued by a
|
|
detached and neutral magistrate found to be invalid based on misleading
|
|
information or reckless disregard of the truth may in many instances
|
|
override Constitutional 4th Amendment protection against illegal search
|
|
and seizure.
|
|
S.8 The Crime Control Act of 1993 amends the "Exclusionary Rule" to
|
|
add Section 3509 Admissibility of Evidence Obtained By Search or
|
|
Seizure (a) Evidence Obtained By Objectively Reasonable Search or
|
|
Seizure (b) Evidence Not Excludable By Statute or Rule: sets the
|
|
groundwork for Government Forfeiture Squads to at random invade
|
|
innocent owners' homes and businesses with a minimum of probable cause.
|
|
Government need only assert that "a search and seizure was carried out
|
|
in circumstances justifying an objectively reasonable belief that it
|
|
was in conformity with the Fourth Amendment."
|
|
Informants: Now being paid by government 25% of net proceeds realized
|
|
from Forfeited Assets in drug related seizures could earn similar
|
|
amounts causing forfeiture of citizens homes they allege to have been
|
|
used by an owner for discussion of attending assemblies which the
|
|
informant believed "appeared to be intended toward violence or to
|
|
intimidate or coerce a civilian population."
|
|
|
|
The Crime Control Act of 1993
|
|
Informants and law enforcement agencies addressing prevention of
|
|
terrorist acts are to be funded by Forfeiture and Fines collected from
|
|
terrorists and/or persons alleged to have afforded terrorists material
|
|
support. Will Citizens Exercising Their Constitutional Right To Free
|
|
Expression And Association Be Targeted By Government Agents Who Know
|
|
Their Jobs Are Dependent ON Property Seizures, Fines and Arrests?
|
|
|
|
>From "Property Forfeiture for Speeches, Writings and Assembly," by Ross
|
|
Regnart, in the May, 1993 _Asset_Guardian_ newsletter (POBox 513,
|
|
Franklin, NJ 07416, 1-201-827-0513). Informational posting of this
|
|
article is allowed as long as credit is given to _Asset_Guardian_.
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 1993 16:42:34 +0000
|
|
From: Dave Banisar <banisar@EPIC.ORG>
|
|
Subject: File 6--EPIC Statement on FBI Wiretap Bill
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*DISTRIBUTE WIDELY*
|
|
|
|
EPIC Statement on Digital Telephony Wiretap Bill
|
|
|
|
The digital telephony bill recently introduced in Congress is the
|
|
culmination of a process that began more than two years ago, when the
|
|
Federal Bureau of Investigation first sought legislation to ensure its
|
|
ability to conduct electronic surveillance through mandated design
|
|
changes in the nation's information infrastructure. We have monitored
|
|
that process closely and have scrutinized the FBI's claims that
|
|
remedial legislation is necessary. We have sponsored conferences at
|
|
which the need for legislation was debated with the participation of
|
|
the law enforcement community, the telecommunications industry and
|
|
privacy advocates. We have sought the disclosure of all relevant
|
|
information through a series of requests under the Freedom of
|
|
Information Act. Having thus examined the issue, EPIC remains
|
|
unconvinced of the necessity or advisability of the pending bill.
|
|
|
|
As a threshold matter, we do not believe that a compelling case
|
|
has been made that new communications technologies hamper the ability
|
|
of law enforcement agencies to execute court orders for electronic
|
|
surveillance. For more than two years, we have sought the public
|
|
disclosure of any FBI records that might document such a problem. To
|
|
date, no such documentation has been released. Without public scrutiny
|
|
of factual information on the nature and extent of the alleged
|
|
technological impediments to surveillance, the FBI's claims remain
|
|
anecdotal and speculative. Indeed, the telecommunications industry
|
|
has consistently maintained that it is unaware of any instances in
|
|
which a communications carrier has been unable to comply with law
|
|
enforcement's requirements. Under these circumstances, the nation
|
|
should not embark upon a costly and potentially dangerous re-design of
|
|
its telecommunications network solely to protect the viability of fewer
|
|
than 1000 annual surveillances against wholly speculative impediments.
|
|
|
|
We also believe that the proposed legislation would establish a
|
|
dangerous precedent for the future. While the FBI claims that the
|
|
legislation would not enhance its surveillance powers beyond those
|
|
contained in existing law, the pending bill represents a fundamental
|
|
change in the law's approach to electronic surveillance and police
|
|
powers generally. The legislation would, for the first time, mandate
|
|
that our means of communications must be designed to facilitate
|
|
government interception. While we as a society have always recognized
|
|
law enforcement's need to obtain investigative information upon
|
|
presentation of a judicial warrant, we have never accepted the notion
|
|
that the success of such a search must be guaranteed. By mandating the
|
|
success of police searches through the re-design of the telephone
|
|
network, the proposed legislation breaks troubling new ground. The
|
|
principle underlying the bill could easily be applied to all emerging
|
|
information technologies and be incorporated into the design of the
|
|
National Information Infrastructure. It could also lead to the
|
|
prohibition of encryption techniques other than government-designed
|
|
"key escrow" or "Clipper" type systems.
|
|
|
|
In short, EPIC believes that the proposed digital telephony bill
|
|
raises substantial civil liberties and privacy concerns. The present
|
|
need for the legislation has not been established and its future
|
|
implications are frightening. We therefore call upon all concerned
|
|
individuals and organizations to express their views on the legislation
|
|
to their Congressional representatives. We also urge you to contact
|
|
Rep. Jack Brooks, Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, to share
|
|
your opinions:
|
|
|
|
Rep. Jack Brooks
|
|
Chair, House Judiciary Committee
|
|
2138 Rayburn House Office Bldg.
|
|
Washington, DC 20515
|
|
(202) 225-3951 (voice)
|
|
(202) 225-1958 (fax)
|
|
|
|
The bill number is H.R. 4922 in the House and S. 2375 in the Senate. It can
|
|
be referred to as the "FBI Wiretap Bill" in correspondence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Electronic Privacy Information Center
|
|
666 Pennsylvania Avenue, S.E.
|
|
Suite 301 Washington, DC 20003
|
|
(202) 544-9240 (voice)
|
|
(202) 547-5482 (fax)
|
|
<info@epic.org>
|
|
|
|
EPIC is a project of the Fund for Constitutional Government and Computer
|
|
Professionals for Social Responsibility.
|
|
|
|
=======================================================================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Date: Tue, 26 Jul 1994 14:04:09 +0300
|
|
From: Shmuel Peleg <peleg@CS.HUJI.AC.IL>
|
|
Subject: File 7--Updates on 12-ICPR, Jerusalem
|
|
|
|
***** Updates *****
|
|
12th ICPR : INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON PATTERN RECOGNITION
|
|
9-13 October 1994
|
|
Renaissance Hotel, Jerusalem, Israel
|
|
***** Advance Registration Deadline: 9 August 1994 *****
|
|
***** Authors: Camera ready due August 8 at the IEEE Computer Society *****
|
|
===================================================================
|
|
|
|
1. Get full updated information by sending E-Mail to
|
|
icpr-info@cs.huji.ac.il.
|
|
|
|
2. A network of 15 Silicon Graphics computers and 10 NCD X-terminals,
|
|
with a high-speed Internet link, will be available. Bring your
|
|
Demonstrations!! You could also telnet to your own computer, of
|
|
course, and read E-Mail.
|
|
|
|
3. On-Line information about Jerusalem can be obtained by telnet into
|
|
"www.huji.ac.il", login as www, and then select "[1] Line Mode
|
|
Interface" followed by "[3] Databases in Israel" and "[13] The
|
|
Jerusalem Mosaic". Dont worry if you get some funny symbols. If
|
|
you have Mosaic you can select:
|
|
http://shum.cc.huji.ac.il/jeru/jerusalem.html
|
|
|
|
4. The Banquet will be a Bedouine feast, combined with a special
|
|
sight-and-sound show, at the foot of Massada. An unfogettable
|
|
experience! During the banquet, the following announcements will
|
|
be made: * IAPR Announcement: New IAPR Executive Committee, Venue
|
|
for 14-ICPR
|
|
* Nomination of IAPR Fellows
|
|
* Best Industry-Related Paper Award
|
|
* Best-Paper-Award by the journal "Pattern Recognition"
|
|
|
|
5. The opening session of the conference will be on Monday, 10 Aug, 08:30 AM:
|
|
8:30 Welcome Address: J. Aggarwal, President of IAPR
|
|
8:40 Presentation of the K.S. Fu Award
|
|
8:45 Address by the winner of the K.S. Fu Award
|
|
9:15 Welcome Address: 12-ICPR Conference Chairmen
|
|
9:30 Plenary Talk: Avnir, D. - Hebrew University - THE PATTERNED NATURE
|
|
10:00 Coffee Break
|
|
10:30 Start of 4 Parallel Sessions
|
|
|
|
6. Master Card is now also accepted for registration payments.
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 1994 09:32:20 +0100
|
|
From: virusbtn@VAX.OX.AC.UK
|
|
Subject: File 8--Fourth International Virus Bulletin Conference
|
|
|
|
In light of the last conference announcements, I thought that some readers
|
|
may find the following short chunk of information useful:
|
|
|
|
Virus Bulletin Conference 1994.
|
|
|
|
The Fourth International Virus Bulletin Conference will be held at the
|
|
Hotel de France, Jersey, UK, on 8th and 9th September 1994. Speakers
|
|
at the conference include Vesselin Bontchev, Sara Gordon, Alan
|
|
Solomon, Joe Wells...
|
|
|
|
Delegates at VB '94 will gain an insight into virus prevalence on a
|
|
range of platforms and discuss technical and management concerns with
|
|
internationally acknowledged experts.
|
|
|
|
The conference registration fee is UK#595, and includes admission to
|
|
all sessions, admission to the exhibition, a copy of the conference
|
|
proceedings, lunch and mid-session refreshment on both dyas, welcome
|
|
reception and dinner on Wednesday 7th September, the coference
|
|
reception and Black Tie Gala Dinner on Thursday 8th September.
|
|
|
|
Anybody requiring further information should Email
|
|
virusbtn@vax.ox.ac.uk or fax Petra Duffield on (UK) 01235 559935
|
|
(International) +44 1235 559935.
|
|
|
|
Regards,
|
|
|
|
Richard Ford
|
|
Editor, Virus Bulletin.
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1993 19:21:33 CDT
|
|
From: CuD Moderators <tk0jut2@mvs.cso.niu.edu>
|
|
Subject: File 9--The CuD Header now Appears at the END OF EACH ISSUE
|
|
|
|
We receive periodic complaints from readers that they dislike
|
|
scrolling through the 60 lines of CuD (or any digest) header at the
|
|
beginning of a file. Their reasons:
|
|
|
|
1) Some digest-reading software excludes the Administrivia
|
|
information, so readers don't know what a CuD is or where to contact
|
|
editors.
|
|
|
|
2) Some readers who are interested only in a single article or two
|
|
must scroll through a long header that repeats each issue.
|
|
|
|
3) Some readers store CuDs as individual files, and they would prefer
|
|
the header as a separate file.
|
|
|
|
So, beginning with this issue, we will expermiment with placing the
|
|
header information as a separate, concluding file that will generally
|
|
remain the same each issue. If it causes problems, let us know.
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1994 22:51:01 CDT
|
|
From: CuD Moderators <tk0jut2@mvs.cso.niu.edu>
|
|
Subject: File 10--Cu Digest Header Information (unchanged)
|
|
|
|
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 a one-line message: SUB CUDIGEST your name
|
|
Send it to LISTSERV@UIUCVMD.BITNET or LISTSERV@VMD.CSO.UIUC.EDU
|
|
The editors may be contacted by voice (815-753-0303), fax (815-753-6302)
|
|
or U.S. mail at: Jim Thomas, Department of Sociology, NIU, DeKalb, IL
|
|
60115, USA.
|
|
|
|
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) (203) 832-8441.
|
|
CuD is also available via Fidonet File Request from
|
|
1:11/70; unlisted nodes and points welcome.
|
|
|
|
EUROPE: from the ComNet in LUXEMBOURG BBS (++352) 466893;
|
|
In ITALY: Bits against the Empire BBS: +39-461-980493
|
|
In BELGIUM: Virtual Access BBS: +32.69.45.51.77 (ringdown)
|
|
|
|
UNITED STATES: etext.archive.umich.edu (192.131.22.8) in /pub/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/
|
|
uceng.uc.edu in /pub/wuarchive/doc/EFF/Publications/CuD/
|
|
wuarchive.wustl.edu in /doc/EFF/Publications/CuD/
|
|
EUROPE: nic.funet.fi in pub/doc/cud/ (Finland)
|
|
ftp.warwick.ac.uk in pub/cud/ (United Kingdom)
|
|
|
|
JAPAN: ftp.glocom.ac.jp /mirror/ftp.eff.org/
|
|
|
|
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 #6.76
|
|
************************************
|
|
|