891 lines
40 KiB
Plaintext
891 lines
40 KiB
Plaintext
########## | Volume I August 24,1991 Number 10 |
|
|
########## | |
|
|
### | EFFECTOR ONLINE |
|
|
####### | eff.org |
|
|
####### | |
|
|
### | |
|
|
########## | The Electronic Newsletter of |
|
|
########## | The Electronic Frontier Foundation |
|
|
| 155 Second Street, Cambridge MA 02141 |
|
|
########## | Phone:(617)864-0665 FAX:(617)864-0866 |
|
|
########## | |
|
|
### | Staff: |
|
|
####### | Gerard Van der Leun (van@eff.org) |
|
|
####### | Mike Godwin (mnemonic@eff.org) |
|
|
### | Mitchell Kapor (mkapor@eff.org) |
|
|
### | Managing Editors: |
|
|
### |Chris Davis (ckd@eff.org), Helen Rose (hrose@eff.org)|
|
|
| |
|
|
########## | Reproduction of Effector Online via all |
|
|
########## | electronic media is encouraged.. |
|
|
### | To reproduce signed articles individually |
|
|
####### | please contact the authors for their express |
|
|
####### | permission. |
|
|
### | |
|
|
### | |
|
|
### | |
|
|
|
|
effector: n, Computer Sci. A device for producing a desired change.
|
|
|
|
-==--==--==-<>-==--==--==-
|
|
|
|
STEVE JACKSON GAMES UPDATE:
|
|
THE GOVERNMENT FILES ITS RESPONSE
|
|
|
|
This week, after several delays, the EFF has at last received the
|
|
government's response to the Steve Jackson Games lawsuit. Our
|
|
attorneys are going over these documents carefully and we'll have more
|
|
detailed comment on them soon.
|
|
|
|
Sharon Beckman, of Silverglate and Good, one of the leading attorneys
|
|
in the case said: "In general, this response contains no surprises for
|
|
us. Indeed, it confirms that events in this case transpired very much
|
|
as we thought that they did. We continue to have a very strong case.
|
|
In addition, it becomes clearer as we go forward that the Steve
|
|
Jackson Games case will be a watershed piece of litigation when it
|
|
comes to extending constitutional guarantees to this medium."
|
|
|
|
-==--==--==-<>-==--==--==-
|
|
|
|
|
|
OTHER ITEMS IN THIS ISSUE:
|
|
|
|
WHY THE BELLSOUTH E911 DOCUMENT COST $79,000 TO PRODUCE
|
|
THE NATIONAL CONFERENCE ON COMPUTING AND VALUES
|
|
HOW EFF MEMBERSHIPS ARE PUT TO WORK
|
|
COMPUTERS & PRIVACY: EXCERPTS & STATISTICS FROM A GOVERNMENT REPORT
|
|
WHO PAYS FOR FTP?
|
|
THE MAVEN
|
|
WRITING TO LEN ROSE
|
|
THE WORST USER INTERFACE IN KNOWN SPACE
|
|
HOW MANY PEOPLE READ THE EFF GROUPS?
|
|
|
|
|
|
-==--==--==-<>-==--==--==-
|
|
|
|
IN OVER THEIR HEADS
|
|
--OR--
|
|
WHY THE 911 DOCUMENT COST $79,449 TO PRODUCE
|
|
AT BELLSOUTH
|
|
|
|
Over the months since it first came to light, many have wondered
|
|
how BellSouth could spend the immense amount of money that it
|
|
claimed it spent on producing the brochure known as the
|
|
E911 document.
|
|
|
|
Now it can be told!
|
|
|
|
The following is BellSouth's actual estimate of its production costs
|
|
as sent to Bill Cook in January of 1990. We were amazed that the
|
|
company felt it necessary to add in the entire cost of a major
|
|
computer system, printer and software.
|
|
|
|
[Text of letter from K. Megahee to Bill Cook]
|
|
|
|
BellSouth
|
|
1155 Peachtree Street. N E
|
|
Atlanta, Georgia 30367 -6000
|
|
January 10, 1990
|
|
|
|
Bill Cook - Assistant United States Attorney
|
|
United States Attorney's Office
|
|
Chicago, Illinois
|
|
|
|
Dear Mr. Cook:
|
|
Per your request, I have attached a breakdown of the costs
|
|
associated with the production of the BellSouth Standard Practice
|
|
(BSP) numbered 660-225-104SV. That practice is BellSouth
|
|
Proprietary Information and is not for disclosure outside
|
|
BellSouth.
|
|
Should you require more information or clarification, please
|
|
contact my office at XXX-XXX-XXXX. FAX: XXX-XXX-XXXX
|
|
|
|
Sincerely,
|
|
Kimberly Megahee
|
|
Staff Manager - Security, Southern Bell
|
|
|
|
[Handwritten total]
|
|
17,099
|
|
37,850
|
|
24,500
|
|
------
|
|
79,449
|
|
|
|
[Attachment to letter itemizing expenses]
|
|
|
|
DOCUMENTATION MANAGEMENT
|
|
|
|
1. Technical Writer To Write/Research Document
|
|
-200 hrs x 35 = $7,000 (Contract Writer)
|
|
-200 hrs x 31 = $6,200 (Paygrade 3 Project Mgr)
|
|
|
|
2. Formatting/Typing Time
|
|
-Typing WS14 = 1 week = $721.00
|
|
-Formatting WS 14 = 1 week = $721.00
|
|
-Formatting Graphics WS16 = 1 week = $742.00
|
|
|
|
3. Editing Time
|
|
-PG2 = 2 days x $24.46 = $367
|
|
|
|
4. Order Labels (Cost) = $5.00
|
|
|
|
5. Prepare Purchase Order
|
|
-Blue Number Practice WS14 x 1 hr = $18.00
|
|
-Type PO WS10 x 1 hr = $17.00
|
|
-Get Signature (PG2 x 1 hr = $25.00)
|
|
(PG3 x lhr = $31.00)
|
|
(PG5 x 1 hr = $38.00)
|
|
|
|
6. Printing and Mailing Costs
|
|
Printing= $313.00
|
|
Mailing WS10 x 50 hrs = $858.00
|
|
(Minimum of 50 locations/ 1 hr per location/ 115 copies
|
|
|
|
7. Place Document on Index
|
|
-PG2 x 1 hr = $25.00
|
|
-WS14 x 1 hr = $18.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Costs for involvement = $17,099.
|
|
|
|
|
|
HARDWARE EXPENSES
|
|
|
|
VT220 $850
|
|
Vaxstation II $31,000
|
|
Printer $6,000
|
|
Maintenance 10% of costs
|
|
|
|
SOFTWARE EXPENSES
|
|
|
|
Interleaf Software $22,000
|
|
VMS Software $2,500
|
|
Software Maintenance 10% of costs
|
|
|
|
|
|
[End of Document]
|
|
|
|
-==--==--==-<>-==--==--==-
|
|
|
|
THE NATIONAL CONFERENCE ON COMPUTING AND VALUES
|
|
A Report by Brad Templeton
|
|
via ClariNet
|
|
(REPRINTED BY PERMISSION OF THE AUTHOR)
|
|
|
|
NEW HAVEN, CONNECTICUT, U.S.A., 1991 AUG 20 (NB) -- The first National
|
|
Conference on Computing and Values concluded last week on the campus
|
|
of Southern Connecticut State University and was proclaimed a big
|
|
success by its organizers.
|
|
|
|
The NCCV attracted a multi-disciplinary audience, with attendees and
|
|
luminaries from the fields of philosophy, computer security, privacy,
|
|
law, academia and general computing.
|
|
|
|
Mitch Kapor and John Perry Barlow, founders of the Electronic Frontier
|
|
Foundation, described the EFF and updated the audience on their recent
|
|
efforts to educate lawmakers on how to apply the law to the new world
|
|
of electronic networking. The EFF has been instrumental in curbing
|
|
what its members see as serious civil rights violations perpetrated by
|
|
law enforcement officials who over-react to the danger of alleged
|
|
computer criminals.
|
|
|
|
Gary Chapman, founding Executive Director of Computer Professionals
|
|
for Social Responsibility spoke on "The 21st Century Project," CPSR's
|
|
new venture to deal with the technology related social problems they
|
|
expect us to encounter as we enter the next century.
|
|
|
|
Joseph Weizenbaum received the first award for Leadership and
|
|
Excellence in Human Values and Computing. Accepting the award
|
|
he addressed the conference about the necessity of technical
|
|
professionals considering the consequences of their efforts.
|
|
|
|
Richard Stallman, ideological leader of the Free Software Foundation
|
|
(GNU Project) and League for Programming Freedom spoke and contributed
|
|
to a lively panel of the nature of intellectual property. Stallman
|
|
believes that all software should be free of copying and use
|
|
restrictions. Another panelist, Helen Nissenbaum of Princeton,
|
|
suggested the less drastic step of changing copyright law to permit
|
|
"casual copying" (the non-commercial copying of originals for family
|
|
and friends).
|
|
|
|
Discussions on privacy issues ranged over the spectrum. Those
|
|
examining the impact of computers on privacy had to grapple with
|
|
fundamental issues such as the very nature of privacy before coming to
|
|
conclusions about it. Richard Wright of the U. of Omaha proposed that
|
|
individuals be granted ownership and control over the data about them,
|
|
allowing them to charge royalties on its use, or block undesired use.
|
|
Others feared such complex legislative changes, decrying what they
|
|
viewed as a growing trend to say "there ought to be a law" when there
|
|
is no need for one.
|
|
|
|
Speculation is that there will be a division between the two main
|
|
"computers and values" societies, with CPSR pushing for privacy
|
|
protection legislation and EFF objecting to excessive government
|
|
regulation of how computers may be used.
|
|
|
|
Other addresses and panels covered Computer Security and Crime,
|
|
Academia, and equal access to computers for the handicapped and the
|
|
disadvantaged. "Equity" advocates warned that software designers are
|
|
unaware that they are designing software and computer systems to be of
|
|
interest primarily to "young, white, able-bodied men."
|
|
|
|
Computers need to be made more accessible not just through funding and
|
|
special tools to aid the handicapped, but through changes in their
|
|
fundamental design, panelists argued. Providing more computers for a
|
|
school often does little more than provide those already keen on
|
|
computers with more toys, according to one panelist.
|
|
|
|
The conference consisted both of panels and papers and six special
|
|
working groups. Each morning conference attendees gathered in their
|
|
six groups to debate particular issues of interest. Each group
|
|
prepared a report delivered at the close of the conference with
|
|
recommendations for the center for research into computing and values
|
|
at SCSU and for the National Science Foundation, which helped fund the
|
|
conference.
|
|
|
|
Other speakers and panelists included former ACM President and CACM
|
|
editor Peter Denning, and computer security expert Dorothy
|
|
Denning, who spoke on the Hacker Ethic. Gene Spafford of Purdue
|
|
University chaired the security panel and Peter Neumann, editor of the
|
|
ACM RISKS forum gave the security address.
|
|
|
|
Conference organizer Walter Maner of Bowling Green State University
|
|
expressed great pleasure at the success of the conference and the
|
|
large variety of material it addressed. Attendance was low, at around
|
|
200 participants, however this met Maner's expectations for an August
|
|
conference. Plans are already under consideration for another
|
|
conference in the future, though no date has been set. Maner can be
|
|
contacted as maner@andy.bgsu.edu or at 419-372-2337.
|
|
|
|
(Brad Templeton/19910820)
|
|
For futher information on ClariNet
|
|
write to info@clarinet.com or phone 1-800-USE-NETS.
|
|
|
|
-==--==--==-<>-==--==--==-
|
|
|
|
How Your EFF Memberships and Donations
|
|
Are Put to Work
|
|
|
|
Now that we have become a membership organization, we'd like to outline
|
|
for you the ways in which your money is used to advance the cause of
|
|
free and open online communications.
|
|
|
|
Essential Litigation:
|
|
Memberships help with the costs of litigation in key cases such as the
|
|
Steve Jackson Case, and others.
|
|
|
|
Washington office:
|
|
In order to better track and participate in legislation of critical
|
|
interest to this new medium, we are beginning a Washington, D.C. branch
|
|
of the EFF.
|
|
|
|
As we learned last year with the events that led to the rewriting of
|
|
Senate Bill 266, a strong Washington presence is necessary if we are to
|
|
make sure that legislators have the input that only an informed and
|
|
committed organization can provide. It is much better to have wise and
|
|
fair laws from the outset than to try and correct bad laws through
|
|
litigation later.
|
|
|
|
The Open Road Project:
|
|
This is the EFF's major initiative for 1992 and beyond. We see The Open
|
|
Road Project as a broadly based plan encompassing both the social and
|
|
technical realms of networking; an armature for the design and creation
|
|
of a National Public Network.
|
|
|
|
The goals of the Open Road are to ensure equal and fair network access
|
|
to all, along with technological tools that make the NPN easy to use,
|
|
and affordable.
|
|
|
|
The EFF Node on the Internet:
|
|
We have worked hard to make eff.org an important part of the Internet by
|
|
providing access to our central files via ftp, an open forum for a wide
|
|
range of view on the Usenet group eff.talk, and a home for other worthy
|
|
newsgroups whose interests and commitments compliment ours, such as the
|
|
Computers and Academic Freedom group. We will be expanding our online
|
|
capability significantly in the last quarter of 1991 and on into 1992.
|
|
To this end we have been creating an offline library of our extensive
|
|
archives. This process is almost completed. The next step will be to
|
|
move these files online via scanning technology. As you might expect
|
|
this is a time-consuming and labor-intensive task, but an important one.
|
|
|
|
Other activities on the system involve the creation and expansion of our
|
|
email capabilities and the effort to bring all of our online text into
|
|
WAIS for use across the Internet. WAIS is a powerful, though still
|
|
experimental, information retrieval service that allows full-text
|
|
searches of large document archives. We are also adding new online
|
|
publications in various subject areas.
|
|
|
|
Education:
|
|
In addition to these projects, there are the numerous conferences that
|
|
EFF staff and representative attend as commentators or main speakers;
|
|
the costs associated with the publication of EFFECTOR, EFFector Online,
|
|
and numerous brochures and flyers. As we have seen time and again, much
|
|
of the trouble associated with online communications comes from
|
|
ignorance or simple misunderstanding. One of the most effective programs
|
|
of the past year has been the attendance of EFF staff members at various
|
|
law enforcement conferences and conventions. That kind of simple,
|
|
face-to-face work has proven to be one of the most helpful activities we
|
|
can perform.
|
|
|
|
Add to all the above the overhead at the main office and dozens of other
|
|
activities from the marvelous to the mundane. and you have a snapshot of
|
|
the way in which we try to make every penny of your membership or
|
|
donation advance the goals of the EFF. Our aim is to keep the
|
|
organizational overhead low so that the largest possible portion of your
|
|
donation can go towards the goals of the EFF and our current and new
|
|
programs.
|
|
|
|
-==--==--==-<>-==--==--==-
|
|
|
|
Feedback to EFFector #9
|
|
|
|
From: ccastmg@prism.gatech.EDU (Michael G. Goldsman)
|
|
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
|
|
Subject: Re: EFFector Online 1.09
|
|
|
|
In Effector Online #9 the editors write:
|
|
> WE WUZ HACKED!
|
|
>
|
|
>As Monty Python has wisely noted, "NOBODY expects the Spanish
|
|
>Inquisition!" In like manner, nobody expects people to crack their
|
|
>system in quite the way that they *are* cracked. After all, if you
|
|
>knew about an unlocked door in your system, you'd lock it. Right? As
|
|
>soon as you could get around to it, of course....
|
|
>
|
|
>"User 'mycroft' was logged on kropotkin.gnu.ai.mit.edu at the
|
|
>time, and admits entering the machine, but denies 2, 3, 4, and 5."
|
|
|
|
What,you fail to mention is the fact that the EFF then secured the
|
|
services of the Secret Service who confiscated every computer at MIT
|
|
along with every disk, manual, and power-outlet they could find.
|
|
|
|
MIT, I believe has issued a request aimed at getting their equipment
|
|
back, but as of yet, the Secret Service has declined citing "National
|
|
Security Interests." A Secret Service spokesman was quoted as saying
|
|
"MIT operates a huge network of computer criminals who are intent on
|
|
bringing our free country to its knees. Their Techno-Terrorism cannot
|
|
be tolerated!!!
|
|
|
|
The EFF will be representing MIT in their case.
|
|
|
|
|
|
-Mike
|
|
|
|
-==--==--==-<>-==--==--==-
|
|
|
|
"[I]f I `send' you a message I do not lose it myself but retain it in
|
|
memory or in a duplicate copy. We have then shared it. Consequently,
|
|
it is true to say that messages, unlike commodities, are not required
|
|
to be lost to the `sender' when he communicates them to another.
|
|
Indeed, the word `sender' is a misnomer; strictly, he cannot send
|
|
messages as he can send goods or commodities, he must always share
|
|
them ....Messages do not have the nature of commodities and cannot be
|
|
property."
|
|
-- Colin Cherry, THE AGE OF ACCESS,
|
|
Published by Croom Helm,London, 1985
|
|
|
|
-==--==--==-<>-==--==--==-
|
|
|
|
Who Pays for FTP?
|
|
|
|
From: netspec@zeus.unomaha.edu
|
|
(Dan Kenny, Network Specialist/ U of N-Omaha)
|
|
|
|
In a previous article, tld@cosmos.bae.bellcore.com
|
|
(Terry Davidson) writes:
|
|
|
|
"One question: I've asked this before, and have received no response.
|
|
Who pays for ftp? Some uploads/downloads can take a *VERY* large amount of
|
|
time; and this has to cost someone some hard cash - but who? Is the login
|
|
used to send bills to the company from where the call originated (some ftp
|
|
may be anonymous, but modern UNIX systems darned well get the info anyway,
|
|
including the actual line/port/phone of the originating machine).
|
|
I'd like answers to these questions, simply because (1) I have
|
|
approximately 5 MB of shareware (DOS) utilities to upload to an ftp
|
|
site for propagation, and (2) there are some GIF files out on the ftp
|
|
sites I would like to ftp in. Whether or not I actually do this depends
|
|
on how ftp is billed.
|
|
|
|
Terry,
|
|
|
|
FTP (the file transfer protocol), NNTP (the protocol for the news
|
|
service you are reading), TELNET (the remote login protocol), SMTP
|
|
(the mail protocol you receive Internet mail through), and other
|
|
protocol services in the TCP/IP specification are made available to
|
|
you courtesy of the educational system in America.
|
|
|
|
Individual colleges, military sites, organizations and commercial
|
|
sites wire up their machines as a campus network. These networks join
|
|
a consortium of regional networks (like MIDnet for the Midwest
|
|
colleges, MILnet for the military, etc) for a fee and if they are an
|
|
educational institution, also receive subsidization on the cost of
|
|
connecting their campus networks to the regional network through the
|
|
National Science Foundation. Additionally, the NSF foots the bill for
|
|
the long-haul national network connecting the regional networks in one
|
|
giant internetwork. This long-haul network is built upon the work of
|
|
the military's Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPAnet) in
|
|
the 1970's and 1980's.
|
|
|
|
These resources are provided to the average Internet user virtually
|
|
for free, and are done so in the spirit of research and cooperation.
|
|
Not everyone in the world ascribes to the philosophy of the
|
|
"bottom-line" business mentality, and they recognize the value of open
|
|
access to educational resources in the quest for enhancing
|
|
communication between educators, researchers, students, businesses,
|
|
organizations, and the community.
|
|
|
|
So to answer your question, we all pay - just like we all pay for open
|
|
and public access to the nation's highways, the open and public access
|
|
to community libraries, the open and public access to secondary
|
|
schools, and the open and public access to the state universities.
|
|
|
|
Individual sites on the Internet make services and resources available
|
|
(like disk space for anonymous FTP or the ARCHIE database service) out
|
|
of the spirit of this cooperation and belief that the greater benefit
|
|
of increased communication outweighs the per-unit-cost of a megabyte
|
|
of disk storage or a packet of network bandwidth. Usenet news feeds
|
|
are traditionally provided as a courtesy between educational
|
|
institutions in this spirit also.
|
|
|
|
If you believe your 5 megs of utilities have educational value, by all
|
|
means upload them to an appropriate FTP site. If you believe that
|
|
files you find on an anonymous FTP will enhance your education,
|
|
download them. Realize that the mere act of communicating with someone
|
|
on the Internet and exploring available services has educational value.
|
|
|
|
Speaking as a student majoring in one of those science/technical and
|
|
engineering fields (Computer Science) that people keep worrying about
|
|
due to growing lack of interest from our youth, I can assure you that
|
|
the educational benefit I have received through the cooperation of the
|
|
Internet community has been tremendous. Innovation is not dead in
|
|
America, at least not yet. We just need to properly recognize the
|
|
value of long-term investment and commitment to cooperation (whether
|
|
that be in basic research & development, educating ourselves, or in
|
|
laying fiber to every household like Japan is doing), regardless of
|
|
short-term cost (or lack of profit). Remember the technological
|
|
fallout from the Apollo Moon program? We -all- foot the bill for it,
|
|
and we -all- (consumers, industry, education, military, and our
|
|
general competitiveness in the world) benefited from the cooperation
|
|
and technology-sharing of that national project.
|
|
|
|
Think of the Internet in the same fashion. I do.
|
|
|
|
Just my opinions,
|
|
Dan Kenny, Network Specialist : University of Nebraska-Omaha
|
|
netspec@zeus.unomaha.edu
|
|
|
|
-==--==--==-<>-==--==--==-
|
|
|
|
We Know What You Are Doing and We Know Where You Live
|
|
|
|
From: spaf@cs.purdue.EDU (Gene Spafford)
|
|
Subject: Re: where do I find out my Longitude and Latitude?
|
|
|
|
In article <3048@maserati.qsp.UUCP> scotts@qsp.COM (Scott Simpers)
|
|
writes: "Why do you want your position that accurately for
|
|
UUCP registration? "
|
|
|
|
Why, so the net.police can target the missiles if your site
|
|
posts any articles that:
|
|
1) offer anything for sale
|
|
2) tell the string joke, or Paddy O'Furniture jokes
|
|
3) suggests new groups dealing with aquaria
|
|
4) request postcards be sent to Craig Shergold
|
|
5) predict the death of the net
|
|
6) threaten to disclose the plans of the secret backbone cabal that
|
|
really control the Usenet
|
|
|
|
Provide elevation and room number, too -- the net.police just got
|
|
a great deal on a bunch of smart weapons.
|
|
--
|
|
Gene Spafford
|
|
-==--==--==-<>-==--==--==-
|
|
|
|
COMPUTERS & PRIVACY -- EXCERPTS & STATISTICS FROM A GOVERNMENT REPORT
|
|
From:(allen h. lutins)
|
|
|
|
I just got an interesting report, "Computers & Privacy: How the
|
|
Government Obtains, Verifies, Uses, and Protects Personal Data"
|
|
{GAO/IMTEC-90-70BR, Aug. 1990} available free from the U.S. General
|
|
Accounting Office {P.O. Box 6015, Gaithersburg, MD 20877;
|
|
(202)275-6241}. Among the tidbits revealed, the report notes:
|
|
|
|
"(N)ew applications have made it easier for agencies to access, share,
|
|
and process information and to carry out their missions effectively and
|
|
efficiently. However, they have also increased opportunities for
|
|
inappropriate or unauthorized use of personal information and have made
|
|
it more difficult to oversee agencies' information management practices
|
|
and to safeguard individuals' rights." {p. 7}
|
|
|
|
"AGENCIES CONDUCT COMPUTER PROFILING TO IDENTIFY BEHAVIORS OF INTEREST
|
|
-- Computer profiling involves using inductive logic to determine the
|
|
characteristics of individuals most likely to engage in behaviors or
|
|
interest -- for example, illegal activities...Computer profiling raises
|
|
privacy and constitutional concerns because individuals may be singled
|
|
out for scrutiny or different treatment...
|
|
|
|
"Thirty seven agencies [of the 178 who responded to a GAO inquiry]
|
|
reported that they conducted computer profiling...In developing
|
|
profiles, agencies use social security, health, educational, financial,
|
|
tax, law enforcement, property, and housing and public assistance
|
|
information." {p. 32}
|
|
|
|
"Agencies use profiles for many purposes, including program analyses,
|
|
planning, investigation, screening, scientific research, and
|
|
surveillance. Two examples of agencies' computer profiling descriptions
|
|
are the Social Security Administration's profiles on people most likely
|
|
to have unreported changes in income, resources, and/or living
|
|
arrangements; and the U.S. Secret Service's profiles of individuals most
|
|
likely to commit aggressive action against a public figure." {p. 33}
|
|
|
|
Of 910 computer systems at 178 federal agencies:
|
|
|
|
o 16 agencies reported using profiling for occupational
|
|
and/or regulatory purposes
|
|
o 12 agencies reported using profiling for "investigations"
|
|
o 10 agencies reported using profiling for "screening"
|
|
o 6 agencies reported using profiling for law enforcement
|
|
purposes
|
|
o 2 agencies reported using profiling for surveillance
|
|
o Law enforcement records were used for profiling on 81
|
|
systems
|
|
o Credit history was used for profiling on 58 systems
|
|
o Information on 15 systems was made available to state
|
|
agencies for surveillance purposes
|
|
o Information on 13 systems was made available to local
|
|
agencies for surveillance purposes
|
|
o Information on 3 systems was made available to the "private
|
|
sector" for surveillance purposes
|
|
o 13 systems had no operational controls to protect against
|
|
alteration and unauthorized access
|
|
o Security measures and training were not available for
|
|
personnel working on 65 systems
|
|
o Incidents of unauthorized access or exceeding authorized
|
|
access to personal information were reported six agencies;
|
|
eight agencies did not know whether there were security
|
|
breaches
|
|
o Breaches of security numbered 13 in 1988; there were 21
|
|
such incidents in 1989
|
|
|
|
|
|
-==--==--==-<>-==--==--==-
|
|
|
|
The Maven
|
|
|
|
Once upon a weekend weary, while I pondered, beat and bleary,
|
|
Over many a faintly printed hexadecimal dump of core --
|
|
While I nodded, nearly napping, suddenly there came a tapping,
|
|
As of some Source user chatting, chatting of some Mavenlore.
|
|
"Just a power glitch," I muttered, "printing out an underscore --
|
|
Just a glitch and nothing more."
|
|
|
|
Ah, distinctly I remember that old Teletype ASR,
|
|
And the paper tape dispenser left its chad upon the floor.
|
|
Eagerly I thought, "Tomorrow, maybe I will go and borrow
|
|
From my friend an Apple micro -- micro with a monitor --
|
|
So that I can chat at leisure, and then throw away my paper --
|
|
Lying all across the floor.
|
|
|
|
And the repetitious tapping which had nearly caught me napping
|
|
Woke me -- and convinced me that it could not be an underscore;
|
|
Appearances can be deceiving, so I sat there, still believing;
|
|
"My terminal must be receiving more express mail from the Source --
|
|
That's it -- my terminal's receiving new express mail from the Source;
|
|
Posted mail and nothing more."
|
|
|
|
But my curiosity grew stronger; hesitating then no longer,
|
|
I stood up and crossed the room to see what waited there in store.
|
|
Sticking up from the terminal were three inches or so of paper;
|
|
Carefully my trembling hand tore off the scrap, and then I swore --
|
|
"What is this?", I cried in anger -- here I threw it to the floor;
|
|
Blankness there and nothing more.
|
|
|
|
Deep into its workings peering, long I stood there wondering, fearing,
|
|
What could cause the thing to stutter, dropping twenty lines or more?
|
|
But the ribbon was unbroken, and the "HERE IS" gave no token,
|
|
I thought the Teletype was broken, so I typed the number "4"!
|
|
This I typed, and then the modem echoed back the number "4" --
|
|
Merely this and nothing more.
|
|
|
|
Back then to my work returning, with my temper slowly burning,
|
|
Soon again I heard a tapping something louder than before.
|
|
"Surely," said I, "surely that is just another RESET message;
|
|
With my luck, there's probably expensive data to restore!" --
|
|
As it chattered, still I sat there, trying to complete my chore.
|
|
"'Tis the Source and nothing more."
|
|
|
|
Such a simple program, really -- just to fill 1K of memory
|
|
With the Fibonacci series, but when it reached 144,
|
|
It had failed to set the high bit -- suddenly, I thought I had it!
|
|
But, just as I found the bug, my train of thought derailed once more --
|
|
And the Teletype's loud bell rang, then it sat just like before --
|
|
Rang, and sat, and nothing more.
|
|
|
|
Suddenly, I couldn't stand it -- Just as if someone had planned it,
|
|
Now the paper, like a bandit, rolled its way across the floor!
|
|
As I put it back, I spied two words: CHAT TCX122 --
|
|
Which I knew must be the Maven, chatting from the Eastern shore.
|
|
Presently the terminal received and printed one word more --
|
|
Quoth the Maven, "#4?"
|
|
|
|
Such a message I was having difficulty understanding,
|
|
For his letters little meaning -- little relevancy bore;
|
|
Though I must admit believing that no living human being
|
|
Ever could remember seeing evidence of Mavenlore --
|
|
Tell me now, what kind of Maven of the saintly days of yore
|
|
Could have written "#4?"
|
|
|
|
But the Maven, waiting for me to reply, transmitted only
|
|
That one word, as if his soul in that one word he did outpour.
|
|
Nothing farther then he ventured; silently the Teletype purred --
|
|
Till I scarcely more than murmured: "Stars and garters, what a bore!" --
|
|
Whereupon the terminal abruptly started with a roar;
|
|
Then it typed out, "#4?!"
|
|
|
|
Startled at the stillness broken by reply so tersely spoken
|
|
"Doubtless," said I, "what we have here could not be a line error.
|
|
Failure to communicate, perhaps -- it's late and getting later --
|
|
But I've never seen a greater unsolved mystery to explore."
|
|
Then I knew I'd never rest until I solved his semaphore ...
|
|
"Who am I, the Prisoner?"
|
|
|
|
But the Maven didn't answer; no more data did he transfer,
|
|
So I wheeled my Herman Miller office chair across the floor;
|
|
Then upon the plastic sinking, I betook myself to linking
|
|
Logic unto logic, thinking what this ominous bard of yore --
|
|
What this unknown, unseen, unsung, unrepentant bard of yore
|
|
Meant in typing "#4?!"
|
|
|
|
This I sat engaged in guessing, but no syllable expressing
|
|
To the dour and cryptic Maven now whose words I puzzled o'er;
|
|
This and more I sat divining, with my head at ease reclining
|
|
On the seat back's plastic lining that the lamp-light fluoresced o'er,
|
|
But whose flattened plastic lining with the lamp fluorescing o'er
|
|
Shall compress, ah, little more!
|
|
|
|
All at once my thoughts grew clearer -- as if looking in a mirror,
|
|
Now at last I understood where I had sent the number 4!
|
|
"Look," I typed, "I was just testing -- did you think that I was jesting?
|
|
Why was it so interesting that I typed the number 4?
|
|
Did you think that you were chatting to some foolish sophomore?"
|
|
Quoth the Maven, "... #4?"
|
|
|
|
"Maven!" said I, "Great defender! Venerable comprehender!
|
|
Whether you began this chat, or were a victim of error,
|
|
Mystified, and yet undaunted, by this quandary confronted," --
|
|
(Could my terminal be haunted?) -- "tell me truly, I implore --
|
|
Can you understand my message? -- tell me, tell me, I implore!"
|
|
Quoth the Maven, "#4!"
|
|
|
|
"Maven!" said I, "Great pretender! Ancient Jewish moneylender!
|
|
By the Source that now connects us -- by the holy Oath you swore --
|
|
Tell me in your obscure wisdom if, within your distant modem,
|
|
You receive my words unbroken by backspace or underscore --
|
|
Tell me why my Teletype prints nothing but the number 4!"
|
|
Quoth the Maven, "#4?"
|
|
|
|
"Be that word our sign of parting,bard or friend!"I typed,upstarting
|
|
"Get back to your aimless chatter and obnoxious Mavenlore!
|
|
Leave no token of your intent -- send no message that you repent!
|
|
Leave my terminal quiescent! -- Quit the chat hereinbefore!
|
|
Type control-P (or escape), and quit this chat forevermore!"
|
|
Quoth the Maven, "#4..."
|
|
|
|
And the Maven, notwithstanding,still is chatting,still is chatting
|
|
Over my misunderstanding of his cryptic "#4?";
|
|
And I calmly pull the cover and remove a certain lever
|
|
From the 33ASR, which I never shall restore;
|
|
And a certain ASCII number that lies broken on the floor
|
|
Shall be printed -- nevermore!
|
|
|
|
(with no apologies whatsoever to anyone) .the Dragon
|
|
|
|
-==--==--==-<>-==--==--==-
|
|
|
|
HOW TO WRITE TO LEN ROSE
|
|
|
|
I recently spoke with Len Rose.
|
|
|
|
He asked that I post his address for anyone who would care
|
|
to write:
|
|
|
|
LEN ROSE,
|
|
FPC 27154-037,
|
|
Seymour Johnson AFB,
|
|
Caller Box 8004,
|
|
PMB 187
|
|
Goldsboro, NC, 27531-5000
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michael Kosmin
|
|
|
|
root@lsicom2.UUCP
|
|
|
|
-==--==--==-<>-==--==--==-
|
|
|
|
THE WORST USER INTERFACE IN KNOWN SPACE
|
|
|
|
From: smith@sctc.com (Rick Smith)
|
|
|
|
mathew@mantis.co.uk (Industrial Poet) writes:
|
|
|
|
>There's something I've been meaning to ask. Has anyone ever made a
|
|
>concerted effort to develop the *worst* user-interface?
|
|
|
|
I think I saw a manual describing The Worst User Interface once in a
|
|
previous job. I think it's called "TACFIRE" and it's a computer based
|
|
system the Army uses (or used to use) for fire control in artillery
|
|
batallions.
|
|
|
|
You're faced with about 16 lines of text, each at least 60 characters
|
|
long. This display is filled with dozens of little mnemonics,
|
|
each followed by a colon and then a (usually numeric) value.
|
|
The displayed data represents various things like where a target
|
|
is, who's shooting at it, what you need to do to shoot at it yourself,
|
|
ammo inventory, ammo to use, amount of powder to use, etc, etc, etc.
|
|
|
|
Different users of different kinds (observers, planners, gun crews,
|
|
etc) would be able to modify different fields according to their
|
|
role and situation; the results were all sent to some central
|
|
site and then used to update other screens.
|
|
|
|
The system is decades old, so it's "evolved" into something that
|
|
borders on unusable. An ex artillery officer told me that they
|
|
hated to let well trained TACFIRE people go on extended
|
|
vacations (more than a week or so) because they'd forget
|
|
how to make it work by the time they got back.
|
|
|
|
-==--==--==-<>-==--==--==-
|
|
|
|
How Many People Read the EFF Groups?
|
|
|
|
|
|
From: reid@decwrl.DEC.COM (Brian Reid)
|
|
Newsgroups: news.lists
|
|
Subject: USENET Readership report for Jun 91
|
|
|
|
This is [not] the full set of data from the USENET readership report
|
|
for Jun 91. Explanations of the figures are in a companion posting
|
|
[in news.lists].
|
|
|
|
+-- Estimated total number of people who read the group, worldwide.
|
|
| +-- Actual number of readers in sampled population
|
|
| | +-- Propagation: how many sites receive this group at all
|
|
| | | +-- Recent traffic (messages per month)
|
|
| | | | +-- Recent traffic (kilobytes per month)
|
|
| | | | | +-- Crossposting percentage
|
|
| | | | | | +-- Cost ratio: $US/month/reader
|
|
| | | | | | | +-- Share: % of newsrders
|
|
| | | | | | | | who read this group.
|
|
V V V V V V V V
|
|
331 24000 390 79% 448 968.9 5% 0.04 1.5% comp.org.eff.talk
|
|
615 12000 195 77% 2 26.2 100% 0.00 0.7% comp.org.eff.news
|
|
691 9400 153 46% 169 376.3 1% 0.03 0.6% alt.comp.acad-freedom
|
|
.talk
|
|
|
|
-==--==--==-<>-==--==--==-
|
|
|
|
NOTES FROM THE SUN
|
|
|
|
The final version of "Building the Open Road: The NREN as a Testbed for
|
|
the National Public Network" by Mitchell Kapor is available by anonymous
|
|
ftp from eff.org as pub/docs/open.road.
|
|
|
|
We are also working on an FTP service that will allow file transfer via
|
|
email. More on this soon.
|
|
|
|
In other news, this September's Scientific American is devoted almost
|
|
entirely to computer-based communications. Among many wonderful articles
|
|
is Mitchell Kapor's "Civil Liberties in Cyberspace." This is an issue
|
|
worth reading from cover to cover We are trying to get a large number of
|
|
copies to give to our members.
|
|
|
|
-==--==--==-<>-==--==--==-
|
|
|
|
MEMBERSHIP IN THE ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION
|
|
|
|
In order to continue the work already begun and to expand our efforts
|
|
and activities into other realms of the electronic frontier, we need the
|
|
financial support of individuals and organizations.
|
|
|
|
If you support our goals and our work, you can show that support by
|
|
becoming a member now. Members receive our quarterly newsletter,
|
|
EFFECTOR, our bi-weekly electronic newsletter, EFFector Online (if you
|
|
have an electronic address that can be reached through the Net), and
|
|
special releases and other notices on our activities. But because we
|
|
believe that support should be freely given, you can receive these
|
|
things even if you do not elect to become a member.
|
|
|
|
Your membership/donation is fully tax deductible.
|
|
|
|
Our memberships are $20.00 per year for students, $40.00 per year for
|
|
regular members. You may, of course, donate more if you wish.
|
|
|
|
Our privacy policy: The Electronic Frontier Foundation will never, under
|
|
any circumstances, sell any part of its membership list. We will, from
|
|
time to time, share this list with other non-profit organizations whose
|
|
work we determine to be in line with our goals. But with us, member
|
|
privacy is the default. This means that you must actively grant us
|
|
permission to share your name with other groups. If you do not grant
|
|
explicit permission, we assume that you do not wish your membership
|
|
disclosed to any group for any reason.
|
|
|
|
>>>---------------- EFF@eff.org MEMBERSHIP FORM ---------------<<<
|
|
|
|
Mail to: The Electronic Frontier Foundation, Inc.
|
|
155 Second St. #10
|
|
Cambridge, MA 02141
|
|
|
|
I wish to become a member of the EFF I enclose:$__________
|
|
$20.00 (student or low income membership)
|
|
$40.00 (regular membership)
|
|
|
|
[ ] I enclose an additional donation of $___________
|
|
|
|
Name:______________________________________________________
|
|
|
|
Organization:______________________________________________
|
|
|
|
Address: __________________________________________________
|
|
|
|
City or Town: _____________________________________________
|
|
|
|
State:_______ Zip:________ Phone:( )_____________(optional)
|
|
|
|
FAX:( )____________________(optional)
|
|
|
|
Email address: ______________________________
|
|
|
|
I enclose a check [ ].
|
|
Please charge my membership in the amount of $_____________
|
|
to my Mastercard [ ] Visa [ ] American Express [ ]
|
|
|
|
Number:____________________________________________________
|
|
|
|
Expiration date: ____________
|
|
|
|
Signature: ________________________________________________
|
|
|
|
Date:______________________
|
|
|
|
I hereby grant permission to the EFF to share my name with
|
|
other non-profit groups from time to time as it deems
|
|
appropriate [ ].
|
|
Initials:___________________________
|
|
|
|
------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
************************************************************
|
|
The EFF is a non-profit, 501c3 organization.
|
|
Donations to the EFF are tax-deductible.
|
|
|
|
Godwin's Rule of Nazi Analogies:
|
|
As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison
|
|
involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one.
|
|
|
|
Sircar's Corollary:
|
|
If the Usenet discussion touches on homosexuality or Heinlein, Nazis
|
|
or Hitler are mentioned within three days. [Your propagation may
|
|
vary.]
|
|
|
|
Downloaded From P-80 International Information Systems 304-744-2253
|