840 lines
35 KiB
Plaintext
840 lines
35 KiB
Plaintext
|
|
Computer underground Digest Wed Sep 3, 1998 Volume 10 : Issue 48
|
|
ISSN 1004-042X
|
|
|
|
Editor: Jim Thomas (cudigest@sun.soci.niu.edu)
|
|
News Editor: Gordon Meyer (gmeyer@sun.soci.niu.edu)
|
|
Archivist: Brendan Kehoe
|
|
Shadow Master: Stanton McCandlish
|
|
Shadow-Archivists: Dan Carosone / Paul Southworth
|
|
Ralph Sims / Jyrki Kuoppala
|
|
Ian Dickinson
|
|
Field Agent Extraordinaire: David Smith
|
|
Cu Digest Homepage: http://www.soci.niu.edu/~cudigest
|
|
|
|
CONTENTS, #10.48 (Wed, Sep 3, 1998)
|
|
|
|
File 1--Changes in DNS administration and control
|
|
File 2--TRUSTe responds
|
|
File 3--Internet information from Russia
|
|
File 4--Gross Errors
|
|
File 5--Cu Digest Header Info (unchanged since 25 Apr, 1998)
|
|
|
|
CuD ADMINISTRATIVE, EDITORIAL, AND SUBSCRIPTION INFORMATION ApPEARS IN
|
|
THE CONCLUDING FILE AT THE END OF EACH ISSUE.
|
|
|
|
---------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: ronda@PANIX.COM(Ronda Hauben)
|
|
Subject: File 1--Changes in DNS administration and control
|
|
Date: 4 Sep 1998 17:15:58 -0400
|
|
|
|
The Internet an International Public Treasure: A Proposal
|
|
ronda@panix.com
|
|
|
|
In testimony before the House Subcommittee on Basic Research of
|
|
the Committee on Science of the U.S. Congress on March 31, 1998,
|
|
Robert Kahn, co-inventor of TCP/IP, indicated the great
|
|
responsibility that must be taken into account before the U.S.
|
|
Government changes the administrative oversight, ownership and
|
|
control of essential aspects of the Internet that are part of
|
|
what is known as the Domain Name System (DNS)*.
|
|
|
|
Kahn indicated that "the governance issue must take into account
|
|
the needs and desires of others outside the United States
|
|
to participate." His testimony also indicated a need to maintain
|
|
"integrity in the Internet architecture including the management of
|
|
IP addresses and the need for oversight of critical functions."
|
|
He described how the Internet grew and flourished under
|
|
U.S. Government stewartship (before the privatization - I wish to
|
|
add) because of 2 important components.
|
|
|
|
1) The U.S. Government funded the necessary research
|
|
and
|
|
2) It made sure the networking community had the responsibility
|
|
for its operation, and insulated it to a very great extent from
|
|
bureaucratic obstacles and commercial matters so it could
|
|
evolve dynamically.
|
|
|
|
He also said that "The relevant US government agencies should
|
|
remain involved until a workable solution is found and, thereafter
|
|
retain oversight of the process until and unless an appropriate
|
|
international oversight mechanism can supplant it."
|
|
|
|
And Kahn recommended insulating the DNS functions which are critical
|
|
to the continued operation of the Internet so they could be
|
|
operated "in such a way as to insulate them as much as possible
|
|
from bureaucratic, commercial and political wrangling."
|
|
|
|
When I attended the meeting of the International Forum on
|
|
the White Paper (IFWP) in Geneva in July, which was a meeting
|
|
set up by the U.S. Government to create the private organization
|
|
to take over these essential DNS functions September 30, 1998, none
|
|
of the concerns that Kahn raised at this Congressional hearing
|
|
were indicated as concerns by those rushing to privatize
|
|
these critical functions of the global Internet. I wrote a report
|
|
which I circulated about the political and commercial pressures that
|
|
were operating in the meeting to create the Names Council that
|
|
I attended. (See "Report from the Front", Meeting in Geneva Rushes
|
|
to Privatize the Internet DNS and Root Server Systems". The URL
|
|
is http://www.columbia.edu/~rh120/other/ )
|
|
|
|
But what is happening now with the privatization plan of the
|
|
U.S. Government involves privatization of the functions that
|
|
coordinate the International aspects of the Internet and thus
|
|
the U.S. Government has a very special obligation to the technical
|
|
and scientific community and to the the U.S. public and
|
|
the people of the world to be responsible in what it does.
|
|
|
|
I don't see that happening at present.
|
|
|
|
A few years ago I met one of the important pioneers of the
|
|
development of time-sharing, which set the basis for the research
|
|
creating the Internet. This pioneer, Fernando Corbato, suggested I
|
|
real a book "Management and the Future of the Computer" which
|
|
was edited by Martin Greenberger, another time-sharing pioneer.
|
|
The book was the proceedings of a conference about the Future of
|
|
the Computer held at MIT in 1961 to celebrate the centennial
|
|
anniversary of MIT. The British author, Charles Percy Snow made
|
|
the opening address at the meeting and he described the
|
|
importance of how government decisions would be made about the
|
|
future of the computer.
|
|
|
|
Snow cautioned that such decisions must involve people who
|
|
understood the problems and the technology. And he also
|
|
expressed the concern that if too small a number of people were
|
|
involved in making important government decisions, the more
|
|
likely it would be that serious errors of judgment would be made.
|
|
|
|
Too small a number of people are being involved in this important
|
|
decision regarding the future of these strategic aspects of the
|
|
Internet and too many of those who know what is happening and are
|
|
participating either have conflicts of interest or other reasons
|
|
why they are not able to consider the real problems and
|
|
technological issues involved. (About the 1961 conference, see
|
|
chapter 6 of Netizens at http://www.columbia.edu/~rh120)
|
|
|
|
What is happening with the process of the U.S. Government
|
|
privatization of the Domain Name System is exactly the kind
|
|
of danger that C.P. Snow warned against.
|
|
|
|
I have been in contact with Ira Magaziner, Senior advisor to
|
|
the U.S. President on policy with these concerns and he asked
|
|
me to write a proposal or way to put my concerns into some
|
|
"operational form." The following draft proposal for comment
|
|
is my beginning effort to respond to his request.
|
|
|
|
*I am requesting help circulating this proposal among the
|
|
Internet community and asking for comments and discussion both on
|
|
the proposal and on the issues involved with the U.S.
|
|
government plan to privatize these essential functions of
|
|
the Internet by September 30, 1998.
|
|
|
|
Also we will be starting a mailing list for those interested
|
|
in discussing this and it would be good if a newsgroup would be
|
|
created on Usenet about this issue as well. For too long these
|
|
issues have been carried out where most people online and off do not
|
|
know of what is happening or are being told it isn't
|
|
important, or where it is hard for interested people to find a
|
|
way to participate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Please write me at
|
|
|
|
ronda@panix.com with any comments on the proposal.
|
|
|
|
The draft proposal for comment follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Draft Proposal
|
|
toward an international public
|
|
administration of essential
|
|
functions of the Internet - the Domain Name System
|
|
ronda@panix.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recently, there has been a rush to find a way to change
|
|
significant aspects of the Internet. The claim is that there
|
|
is a controversy that must be resolved about what should be the
|
|
future of the Domain Name System.
|
|
|
|
It is important to examine this claim and to try to figure out
|
|
if there is any real problem with regard to the Domain Name
|
|
System (DNS) that has to be solved.
|
|
|
|
The Internet is a scientific and technical achievement of great
|
|
magnitude. Fundamental to its development was the discovery of a
|
|
new way of looking at computer science.(1) The early developers
|
|
of the ARPANET, the progenitor of the Internet, viewed the
|
|
computer as a communication device rather than only as an
|
|
arithmetic engine. This new view, which came from research
|
|
conducted by those in academic computer science, made the
|
|
building of the ARPANET possible.(2) Any changes in the
|
|
administration of key aspects of the Internet need to be guided
|
|
by a scientific perspective and principles, not by political or
|
|
commercial pressures. It is most important to keep in mind that
|
|
scientific methods are open and cooperative.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Examining the development of the Internet, an essential problem
|
|
that becomes evident is that the Internet has become
|
|
international, but the systems that allow there to be an Internet
|
|
are under the administration and control of one nation. These
|
|
include control over the allocation of domain names, over the
|
|
allocation of IP addresses, over the assignment of protocol
|
|
numbers and services, as well as control over the root server
|
|
system and the protocols and standards development process
|
|
related to the Internet. These are currently under the control
|
|
and administration of the U.S. Government or contractors to it.
|
|
|
|
Instead of the U.S. Government offering a proposal to solve the
|
|
problem of how to share the administration of the DNS, which
|
|
includes central points of control of the Internet,
|
|
it is supporting and encouraging the creation of a new private
|
|
entity that will take over and control the Domain Name System.
|
|
This private entity will magnify many thousands fold the
|
|
commercial and political pressures and prevent solving the
|
|
genuine problem of having an internationally shared protection
|
|
and administration of the DNS, including the root server system,
|
|
IP number allocations, Internet protocols, etc.
|
|
|
|
Giving these functions over to a private entity will make it
|
|
possible for these functions to be changed and for the Internet
|
|
to be broken up into competiting root servers, etc. It is the DNS
|
|
whose key characteristic is to make the network of networks one
|
|
Internet rather than competing networks with competing root
|
|
server systems, etc.
|
|
|
|
What is needed is a way to protect the technology of the Internet
|
|
from commercial and political pressures, so as to create a means
|
|
of sharing administration of the key DNS functions and the root
|
|
server system.
|
|
|
|
The private organization that the U.S. Government is asking to be
|
|
formed is the opposite of protecting the Internet. It is encouraging
|
|
the take over by a private, non accountable corporate entity of
|
|
the key Internet functions and of this International public
|
|
resource.
|
|
|
|
In light of this situation, it is important to draft a proposal
|
|
which will help to establish a set of principles and
|
|
recommendations on how to create an international cooperative
|
|
collaboration to administer and protect these key functions of
|
|
the Internet from commercial and political pressures. This draft
|
|
is offered as a beginning of this process.
|
|
|
|
The first essential requirement is that the U.S. Government stop
|
|
the process it is involved in, including the International Forum
|
|
on the White Paper (IFWP) whose objective is to create a private
|
|
organization to be given the key Domain Name System including
|
|
the root server system by September 30, 1998.
|
|
|
|
The second essential requirement is that the U.S. Government
|
|
create a research project or institute (which can be in
|
|
conjunction with universities, appropriate research institutes,
|
|
etc.) The goal of this project or institute is to sponsor and
|
|
have carried out the research to solve the problem of what should
|
|
be the future of the DNS and its component parts including the
|
|
root server system. The U.S. should invite the collaboration
|
|
(including funding, setting up similar research projects, etc.)
|
|
of any country interested in participating in this research. The
|
|
researchers from the different nations will work collaboratively.
|
|
|
|
A collaborative international research group will undertake the
|
|
following:
|
|
|
|
1) To identify and describe the functions of the DNS system that need
|
|
to be maintained. (The RFC's or other documents that will help
|
|
in this need to be gathered and references to them made available
|
|
to those interested.)
|
|
|
|
2) To look first at the Internet and then at how the DNS system and
|
|
root server system is serving the diverse communities and users
|
|
of the Internet, which include among others the scientific
|
|
community, the education community, the librarians, the technical
|
|
community, Governments (National as well as local), the
|
|
university community, the art and cultural communities, nonprofit
|
|
organizations, the medical community, the communications
|
|
functions of the business community, and most importantly the
|
|
users whoever they be, of the Internet.
|
|
|
|
3) To maintain an online means of input into their work and of
|
|
reporting on what they are doing.(This should include as many of
|
|
the open processes used in the development of Usenet and the
|
|
ARPANET as possible, including appropriate Usenet newsgroups,
|
|
mailing lists, RFC's etc.)
|
|
|
|
4) To produce a proposal at the end of a specified finite period
|
|
of time. The proposal should include:
|
|
|
|
a) an accurate history of how the Internet developed and how the
|
|
Domain Name System developed and why.
|
|
|
|
b) a discussion of the vision for the future of the Internet that
|
|
their proposal is part of. This should be based on input
|
|
gathered from the users of the Internet, and from research
|
|
of the history and development of the Internet.
|
|
|
|
c) a description of the role the Domain Name System plays in the
|
|
administration and control of the Internet, how it is functioning,
|
|
what problems have developed with it.
|
|
|
|
d) a proposal for its further administration, describing how the
|
|
proposal will provide for the continuation of the functions and
|
|
control hitherto provided by U.S. Government agencies like NSF
|
|
and DARPA. Also, problems for the further adminstrations
|
|
should be clearly identified and proposals made for how to
|
|
begin an open process for examining the problems and solving
|
|
them.
|
|
|
|
e) a description of the problems and pressures that they see
|
|
that can be a danger for the DNS administration. Also
|
|
recommendations on how to protect the DNS administration
|
|
from succumbing to those pressures. (For example from
|
|
pressures that are political or commercial.) In the early
|
|
days of Internet development in the U.S. there was an
|
|
acceptible use policy (AUP) that protected the Internet and
|
|
the scientific and technical community from the pressures
|
|
from political and commercial entities. Also in the U.S.,
|
|
Government funding of a sizeable number of people who were the
|
|
computer science community also protected those people from
|
|
commercial and political pressures.
|
|
|
|
f) a way for the proposal to be distributed widely online, and the
|
|
public not online should also have a way to have access to it.
|
|
It should be made available to people around the world
|
|
who are part of or interested in the future development
|
|
of the Internet. Perhaps help with such distribution can come
|
|
from international organizations like the ITU, from the Internet
|
|
Society, the IETF, etc.
|
|
|
|
g) comment on what has been learned from the process of doing
|
|
collaborative work to create the proposal. It should identify as
|
|
much as possible the problems that developed in their
|
|
collaborative efforts. Identifying the problems will help
|
|
clarify what work has to be done to solve them.
|
|
|
|
h) It will be necessary to agree to some way to keep this
|
|
group of researchers free from commercial and political
|
|
pressures -- government funding of the researchers is one
|
|
possible way and maybe they can be working under an agreed
|
|
upon Acceptable Use Policy for their work and funding.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Please let me know any thoughts or comments you have on this
|
|
draft proposal as it is a beginning effort to figure
|
|
out what is a real way to solve the problem that is the essential
|
|
problem in the future adminstration of the Internet, and
|
|
that if the principles can be found to solve this problem,
|
|
the same principles will help to solve other problems of Internet
|
|
adminstration and functioning as well.
|
|
|
|
------------------
|
|
Notes:
|
|
|
|
(1) See Michael Hauben, "Behind the Net: The Untold Story of the
|
|
ARPANET and Computer Science", in "Netizens: On the History and
|
|
Impact of Usenet and the Internet", IEEE CS Press, 1997, p. 109.
|
|
See also "Internet, nouvelle utopie humaniste?" by Bernard Lang,
|
|
Pierre Weis and Veronique Viguie Donzeau-Gouge, "Le Monde",
|
|
September 26, 1997, as it describes how computer science is a new
|
|
kind of science and not well understood by many. The authors
|
|
write: "L'informatique est tout a la fois une science, une
|
|
technologie et un ensemble d'outils....Dans sa pratique
|
|
actuelle, l'introduction de l'informatique a l'ecole, et
|
|
malheureusement souvent a la'universite, est critiquable parce
|
|
qu'elle entretient la confusion entre ces trois composantes."
|
|
|
|
(2) Ibid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ronda
|
|
ronda@panix.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
An updated copy of this proposal, as well as other related material
|
|
will be available at
|
|
|
|
http://www.columbia.edu/~rh120/other
|
|
|
|
I will also try to have copies available at
|
|
http://lrw.net/hauben
|
|
|
|
|
|
Netizens: On the History and Impact
|
|
of Usenet and the Internet
|
|
http://www.columbia.edu/~hauben/netbook
|
|
also in print edition ISDN 0-8186-7706-6
|
|
|
|
Last Updated: September 4, 1998
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1998 14:56:16 -0400
|
|
From: Jamie McCarthy <jamie@mccarthy.org>
|
|
Subject: File 2--TRUSTe responds
|
|
|
|
Source - fight-censorship mailing list
|
|
|
|
(To: Susan Scott; fight-censorship mailing list.)
|
|
|
|
TRUSTe posted a press release last week:
|
|
|
|
http://www.truste.org/webpublishers/pr/geocities.html
|
|
|
|
> For Immediate Release
|
|
>
|
|
> Contact Information:
|
|
>
|
|
> Susan Scott
|
|
> Executive Director
|
|
> TRUSTe
|
|
> 650/856-1525
|
|
>
|
|
> To TRUSTe Licensee
|
|
>
|
|
> TRUSTe addresses the FTC and Geocities settlement
|
|
>
|
|
> Palo Alto, CA, August 19, 1998 - Last week, the FTC and GeoCities
|
|
> announced a settlement regarding the federal government's first
|
|
> Internet privacy enforcement action against an online company. The
|
|
> FTC alleges that in fall 1997 GeoCities made false statements to its
|
|
> users, claiming that the site would not share registration
|
|
> information collected online. It's important to note that GeoCities
|
|
> has denied the allegations contained in the FTC's complaint.
|
|
>
|
|
> As many of you know, GeoCities joined TRUSTe this spring and has
|
|
> been a member in good standing. The TRUSTe oversight process
|
|
> includes mechanisms designed to alert us to practices inconsistent
|
|
> with those outlined in the licensee's posted privacy statement. For
|
|
> instance, one way that we monitor use of personal information is by
|
|
> inserting unique identifiers into our licensees' databases, enabling
|
|
> us to track its use. Any licensee whose actions are contrary to the
|
|
> claims it makes in its privacy statement will be immediately subject
|
|
> to TRUSTe's progressive escalation process. The escalation process
|
|
> is designed to preserve the integrity of the TRUSTe trustmark and to
|
|
> provide licensees' the opportunity to respond to TRUSTe's inquiries.
|
|
>
|
|
> While we are confident that our oversight process would have alerted
|
|
> us to practices such as the ones alleged by the FTC, TRUSTe has
|
|
> instituted an additional measure of protection into our licensing
|
|
> agreement. A clause was added that requires an applicant to disclose
|
|
> whether it has been or is the subject of a government inquiry. If
|
|
> such disclosure is made, TRUSTe will conduct a thorough review of
|
|
> the matter at hand, and acceptance into the program will be decided
|
|
> on a case-by-case basis.
|
|
>
|
|
> The privacy stakes are getting higher, and TRUSTe is here not only
|
|
> to ensure that online privacy is protected but also to assist our
|
|
> licensees. As always, your questions and comments are always
|
|
> welcome.
|
|
|
|
Ms. Scott,
|
|
|
|
Ignoring for a moment the irony of a private organization founded to
|
|
protect corporations from government investigation admitting that they
|
|
will add the fact-finding question "are you currently under government
|
|
investigation?" to future interrogations, this press release makes it
|
|
sound like TRUSTe was not even _aware_ that GeoCities was being
|
|
investigated by the FTC until early August.
|
|
|
|
Why did it take over a week after the FTC settlement was made public,
|
|
before TRUSTe even spoke on this matter? The fact that GeoCities was
|
|
under investigation was made public in June.
|
|
|
|
I asked some questions on the fight-censorship mailing list last
|
|
Wednesday which still have not been answered. Perhaps you could
|
|
clarify:
|
|
|
|
Was TRUSTe, or was it not, aware in June that GeoCities was under
|
|
investigation by the FTC?
|
|
|
|
If not -- and it sounds like it was not -- would you not agree that
|
|
this is a dreadful lapse? To not even know what was already public at
|
|
the time, regarding one of TRUSTe's own clients?
|
|
|
|
Has TRUSTe's vaunted "progressive escalation process" _ever_ been
|
|
invoked against one of its paying clients?
|
|
|
|
Why does your press release not mention that one of TRUSTe's
|
|
Contributing Sponsors is related by investment to GeoCities? Is that
|
|
not a conflict of interest, especially given GeoCities' recent IPO?
|
|
|
|
If I read between the lines, the press release appears to come down on
|
|
GeoCities' side, which doesn't surprise me very much considering that
|
|
that's where TRUSTe gets its money. Still, all that was said as "the
|
|
FTC alleges" and "GeoCities denies."
|
|
|
|
_Alleges_!? Isn't the ostensible purpose of TRUSTe, to decide these
|
|
matters, instead of reporting them like a newspaper? If I wanted to
|
|
know who "alleged" and who "denies," I would read, say, the New York
|
|
Times (which ran two articles on GeoCities and privacy).
|
|
|
|
TRUSTe should engender trust, not summarize a "he said -- she said"
|
|
squabble. Assuming the above press release was all that your
|
|
organization intends to emit, it appears that TRUSTe will not confirm
|
|
or deny whether GeoCities actually abused its users' trust in matters
|
|
of privacy.
|
|
|
|
Let me repeat that:
|
|
|
|
TRUSTe refuses to confirm or deny whether GeoCities actually
|
|
abused its users' trust.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TRUSTe very clearly dropped the ball on this one, its first big test.
|
|
You were scooped by the government and you show no regrets. Adding a
|
|
sentence or two to your licensing agreement -- an extra box on the form
|
|
that your paying clients must tick off -- is not a response that will
|
|
reassure us, your users, of your investigative tenacity.
|
|
|
|
No, your failure to take action looks more like a message you are
|
|
sending to your paying corporate clients. If I were a potential client
|
|
of yours, I would read that message as: "join us -- we'll lobby
|
|
against the government for you -- and unlike the government, we won't
|
|
bite."
|
|
|
|
Please Cc responses to the fight-censorship mailing list. Thank you.
|
|
--
|
|
Jamie McCarthy
|
|
jamie@mccarthy.org http://www.holocaust-history.org/
|
|
http://jamie.mccarthy.org/ http://www.censorware.org/
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1998 12:05:13 -0500
|
|
From: Cu Digest <cudigest@sun.soci.niu.edu>
|
|
Subject: File 3--Internet information from Russia
|
|
|
|
((MODERATORS' NOTE: James * sent over the a URL for a site that
|
|
offers a variety of articles on Internet and related technology in
|
|
Russia. Many of the articles are in Russian, but some are in
|
|
English and provide insights into the tension between Net freedom,
|
|
technological development in a quasi-stable society, and
|
|
opposition to government control. The first excerpt below is from
|
|
an article describing Russian Government plans to monitor the net.
|
|
The second extract is the site's page listing some of the articles
|
|
available in English)).
|
|
|
|
=====================
|
|
|
|
source: http://www.fe.msk.ru/libertarium/ehomepage.html
|
|
|
|
The Moscow Times, Wednesday, July 29, 1998 Russia Prepares To
|
|
Police Internet
|
|
|
|
By Julia Solovyova Staff Writer
|
|
|
|
Big Brother could be making a comeback, this time in hi-tech
|
|
form. Russia's secret services are drafting a new regulation
|
|
that will allow them to monitor electronic mail and Internet
|
|
communications in real time and without having to apply for a
|
|
warrant, Internet users groups warned this week.
|
|
|
|
If it comes into effect, the project, codenamed Sorm, will
|
|
allow the Federal Security Service to track every credit card
|
|
transaction, e-mail message or visit to a web site without the
|
|
user ever knowing he is being watched, critics of the plan
|
|
claim.
|
|
|
|
Sorm, which stands for "system of ensuring investigative
|
|
activity," will require providers of Internet services to
|
|
install a "black box" or special snooping device in their main
|
|
computers and build a high-speed communication link to channel
|
|
data from the providers to the Federal Security Service, or
|
|
FSB.
|
|
|
|
The link will allow the FSB's operators to "download the
|
|
information, incoming and outgoing for individual subscribers
|
|
of each network," according to a leaked copy of the draft
|
|
regulation, which was posted on the Internet.
|
|
|
|
The FSB could not be reached for comment but a consultant in
|
|
the State Duma's committee on information policy, who said he
|
|
had taken part in discussions with the Duma's security
|
|
committee, the FSB and the State Communications Committee, or
|
|
Goskomsvyaz, about the draft regulation, confirmed that such
|
|
plans did exist. The source in the Duma, parliament's lower
|
|
house, said the regulation could come into force in two months'
|
|
time.
|
|
|
|
The government is believed to be pushing for the regulation to
|
|
augment its fight against tax evasion and other economic
|
|
crimes.
|
|
|
|
<snip>
|
|
|
|
((And from the hompage at:
|
|
http://www.fe.msk.ru/libertarium/ehomepage.html
|
|
|
|
_________________________________________________________________
|
|
MOSCOW LIBERTARIUM
|
|
|
|
on WWW since 3 august '94 - more then 4 years in a web!
|
|
|
|
Moscow Libertarium is a project aimed at the information support of
|
|
social activity and scientific research on the problems of classical
|
|
liberalism (also called libertarianism) and classical liberal conscience
|
|
in digital world.
|
|
|
|
The project is coordinated by the Institute for Commercial
|
|
Engineering. More detailed info you can get from the Project's
|
|
description (1994 year document!).
|
|
|
|
BE AWARE - MOST MATERIALS ARE IN RUSSIAN!
|
|
|
|
_________________________________________________________________
|
|
|
|
NEW: - SORRY, BUT ENGLISH PART OF LIBERTARIUM RENEW 10 TIMES RARE THAN
|
|
RUSSIAN AND 100 TIMES SMALLER IN VOLUME!
|
|
|
|
SORM -- Russian Internet wiretap project
|
|
*
|
|
FSB (Russia analog of USSR KGB) original DRAFTS OF "SORM"
|
|
(wiretapping) DOCUMENTS (version from 22nd july 98)
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
Russian Web site fights government monitoring effort - CNN, August
|
|
11, 1998, from Correspondent Mike Hanna. (with photos and video).
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
Cyber-snoops threaten Russia's new 'praivesi' -- STREET LIFE,
|
|
SAMOTECHNY LANE, MOSCOW (The Independent, 11 august 1998, UK)
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
Russian Legislation Strikes Fear on the Net By Jeanette Borzo, IDG
|
|
News, August 05, 1998. Extensive review of SORM.
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
A comment on SORM from a high rank WorldBank official (3 aug '98)
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
Russia Considering Internet Surveillance Policy. Proposal would
|
|
allow government to eavesdrop on all digital communication passing
|
|
through Russian ISPs. By Jeanette Borzo, IDG News Service, Paris
|
|
Bureau (via PCWORLD 29 jul '98).
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
Cyberspies Spin Russian Web; Russian FAPSI is NSA Counterpart --
|
|
(The St. Peterburg Times, July 24, 1998).
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
Russia Prepares To Police Internet (The Moscow Times, Wednesday,
|
|
July 29, 1998, By Julia Solovyova, Staff Writer).
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
KGB spins its Web even in afterlife -- .jpg, 197Kb -- (James Meek,
|
|
Guardian Newspaper (UK), 21st July 98). The Guardian is a major
|
|
daily UK national newspaper renowned for its independent thinking.
|
|
Online version:
|
|
http://www.mercurycenter.com/breaking/headline2/065854.htm.
|
|
* Russia may force ISPs to tip Big Brother (Tasty Bits from the
|
|
Technology Front, 29-jun-98) - they was first in a West to publish
|
|
this news.
|
|
|
|
Coordinator on SORM project at Moscow Liberitarium: liberty@ice.ru
|
|
|
|
They have similar problem in Thailand: Internet Freedom In
|
|
Thailand The Royal Thai Police Department's mounting frustration
|
|
with its inability to monitor the online activities of Thai
|
|
internet users has prompted the department to insist that Internet
|
|
Service Providers give them access to tracking information about
|
|
their users.
|
|
_____________________________________________________________
|
|
|
|
Libertarium includes: (The following materials are in RUSSIAN!)
|
|
+ SORM - Internet wiretapping project. Economics and
|
|
regulations -- updated11 august 1998G.
|
|
+ E-documents law draft (to Duma drafting process) -- updated
|
|
28 july 1998G.
|
|
+ Seminar "New forms of financial instruments" -- updated 24
|
|
july 1998G.
|
|
+ Technology of standards and rules development -- updated 20
|
|
july 1998G.
|
|
+ Freedom (libertarian) party -- updated 9 august 1998G.
|
|
+ Regulation and contract jurisdiction - updated 1 august
|
|
1998G.
|
|
+ Libertarium library -- updated may 1998G.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Please tell us if the translation is worth the effort so that we can
|
|
decide whether to continue translation. Also notice that this Project
|
|
has English description too. The contact info is at the end of this
|
|
page.
|
|
|
|
CALL FOR PAPERS
|
|
|
|
Moscow Libertarium accepts for accommodation in "Libertarium Library"
|
|
the texts, which promotes classical liberal philosophy. Moscow
|
|
Libertarium reserves the right to itself the publications or rejection
|
|
of the publication of the sent texts. Sent work not are reviewed.
|
|
|
|
The work are accepted in ASCII, MS Word or HTML format. The request
|
|
also to send the brief curriculum vitae of the author for
|
|
accommodation it in the appropriate Libertarium section.
|
|
|
|
Address for correspondence: liberty@fe.msk.ru
|
|
_________________________________________________________________
|
|
|
|
We will be glad to receive your comments and suggestions on our
|
|
WWW-server: write to webmaster@ice.ru.
|
|
|
|
You can also receive the information about Moscow Libertairum activity
|
|
by e-mail (address liberty@ice.ru); by phone or by fax: (+7 095)
|
|
333-2022; (+7 095) 333-5134.
|
|
_________________________________________________________________
|
|
|
|
(C) 1998, Institute for Commercial Engineering Rambler's Top100
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1998 10:55:32 -0700 (PDT)
|
|
From: Lisa Mann <lisam@oreilly.com>
|
|
Subject: File 4--Gross Errors
|
|
|
|
For Immediate Release
|
|
September 3, 1998
|
|
For more information contact:
|
|
Lisa Mann lisam@oreilly.com
|
|
(707) 829-0515 or
|
|
Ben Ezzell (707) 869-3414
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross Errors
|
|
O'Reilly's Windows Error Contest Reveals the Ugly and Inexplicable
|
|
Underside of Windows Programming
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sebastopol, CA--O'Reilly and Associates has announced the winners (and
|
|
the errors submitted) in their Windows Error Message Contest. The
|
|
entries are posted on the O'Reilly web site at: http://www.oreilly.com
|
|
|
|
"The real quandary, of course," said Ben Ezzell, the judge of the
|
|
contest entries "is that I would have loved to have awarded about two
|
|
dozen prizes -each for a separate reason - and I have singled out
|
|
several entries for Honorable Mentions, each for diverse reasons not
|
|
necessarily associated with the contest objective. The sheer variety of
|
|
the entries in the Error Messages contest was a problem in itself --
|
|
partially, the variety of what people saw as 'errors' but partially it
|
|
was that some entries recounted amusing errors, others wished to
|
|
comment on what they saw as bad design and a few were actually serious
|
|
requests for assistance ... and I didn't have answers for all of them."
|
|
|
|
"Mostly, however, the entries were submitted by readers who were
|
|
annoyed, frustrated or simply amused by the sheer absurdity of too many
|
|
of the error messages commonly delivered by applications both today and
|
|
in the past. Hopefully, "Developing Windows Error Messages" may help to
|
|
reduce the number of entries in the future ... if that isn't simply
|
|
foolishly optimistic of me."
|
|
|
|
Here are the rules as stated in when the contest began:
|
|
|
|
We all get 'em. We all hate 'em. Error messages are displayed messages
|
|
that report errors to the user with a simple text message--a very
|
|
simple text message. These tiresome error messages never seem to
|
|
explain or help. Send O'Reilly your favorite (most irritating) error
|
|
message and win books! It's simple. Send in your message (one per
|
|
person) and Ben Ezzell, the author of "Windows Error Messages", will
|
|
choose the best three.
|
|
|
|
Here's how the judging took place:
|
|
|
|
Ben Ezzel, author of the recently released book "Windows Error
|
|
Messages" was the sole judge. In selecting the prize winners, three
|
|
criteria were applied:
|
|
|
|
How pertinent was the entry? i.e., how relevant was the cited error
|
|
message to the topics discussed in "Developing Windows Error
|
|
Messages".
|
|
|
|
How well was the submission explained? That is, did the entrant offer
|
|
a cogent explanation for why they were submitting this entry, why the
|
|
entry occurred and why it was inappropriate or incorrect. (Of course,
|
|
this did not apply in all cases, some were simply too obvious for
|
|
comment.)
|
|
|
|
Is the entry really an inappropriate error? Or is there simply a
|
|
misunderstanding. Also, a number of the errors reported were not
|
|
incorrect although they were, understandably, annoyances.
|
|
|
|
And now, the winners:
|
|
|
|
1st Prize (O'Reilly books valued up to $150) goes to: Nir Arbel for
|
|
Just Who's The Stupid One Here?
|
|
|
|
2nd Prize (O'Reilly books valued up to $75) goes to: Jeff Metzner for
|
|
Too Many Excuses
|
|
|
|
3rd Prize (O'Reilly books valued up to $40) goes to: David McComb for An
|
|
Inintentional Error Message.
|
|
|
|
To read the actual error messages submitted (as well as some computer
|
|
error messages written in Haiku added in just for fun), see the
|
|
O'Reilly web site at: http://www.oreilly.com
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1998 22:51:01 CST
|
|
From: CuD Moderators <cudigest@sun.soci.niu.edu>
|
|
Subject: File 5--Cu Digest Header Info (unchanged since 25 Apr, 1998)
|
|
|
|
Cu-Digest is a weekly electronic journal/newsletter. Subscriptions are
|
|
available at no cost electronically.
|
|
|
|
CuD is available as a Usenet newsgroup: comp.society.cu-digest
|
|
|
|
Or, to subscribe, send post with this in the "Subject:: line:
|
|
|
|
SUBSCRIBE CU-DIGEST
|
|
Send the message to: cu-digest-request@weber.ucsd.edu
|
|
|
|
DO NOT SEND SUBSCRIPTIONS TO THE MODERATORS.
|
|
|
|
The editors may be contacted by voice (815-753-6436), fax (815-753-6302)
|
|
or U.S. mail at: Jim Thomas, Department of Sociology, NIU, DeKalb, IL
|
|
60115, USA.
|
|
|
|
To UNSUB, send a one-line message: UNSUB CU-DIGEST
|
|
Send it to CU-DIGEST-REQUEST@WEBER.UCSD.EDU
|
|
(NOTE: The address you unsub must correspond to your From: line)
|
|
|
|
CuD is readily accessible from the Net:
|
|
UNITED STATES: ftp.etext.org (206.252.8.100) in /pub/CuD/CuD
|
|
Web-accessible from: http://www.etext.org/CuD/CuD/
|
|
ftp.eff.org (192.88.144.4) in /pub/Publications/CuD/
|
|
aql.gatech.edu (128.61.10.53) in /pub/eff/cud/
|
|
world.std.com in /src/wuarchive/doc/EFF/Publications/CuD/
|
|
wuarchive.wustl.edu in /doc/EFF/Publications/CuD/
|
|
EUROPE: nic.funet.fi in pub/doc/CuD/CuD/ (Finland)
|
|
ftp.warwick.ac.uk in pub/cud/ (United Kingdom)
|
|
|
|
|
|
The most recent issues of CuD can be obtained from the
|
|
Cu Digest WWW site at:
|
|
URL: http://www.soci.niu.edu/~cudigest/
|
|
|
|
COMPUTER UNDERGROUND DIGEST is an open forum dedicated to sharing
|
|
information among computerists and to the presentation and debate of
|
|
diverse views. CuD material may be reprinted for non-profit as long
|
|
as the source is cited. Authors hold a presumptive copyright, and
|
|
they should be contacted for reprint permission. It is assumed that
|
|
non-personal mail to the moderators may be reprinted unless otherwise
|
|
specified. Readers are encouraged to submit reasoned articles
|
|
relating to computer culture and communication. Articles are
|
|
preferred to short responses. Please avoid quoting previous posts
|
|
unless absolutely necessary.
|
|
|
|
DISCLAIMER: The views represented herein do not necessarily represent
|
|
the views of the moderators. Digest contributors assume all
|
|
responsibility for ensuring that articles submitted do not
|
|
violate copyright protections.
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
End of Computer Underground Digest #10.48
|
|
************************************
|
|
|