💾 Archived View for gemini.spam.works › mirrors › textfiles › magazines › CUD › cud0625.txt captured on 2022-06-12 at 10:54:22.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Computer underground Digest Wed Mar 16, 1994 Volume 6 : Issue 25
ISSN 1004-042X
Editors: Jim Thomas and Gordon Meyer (TK0JUT2@NIU.BITNET)
Archivist: Brendan Kehoe (He's Baaaack)
Acting Archivist: Stanton McCandlish
Shadow-Archivists: Dan Carosone / Paul Southworth
Ralph Sims / Jyrki Kuoppala
Ian Dickinson
Koppa Ediqor: Phirho Shrdlu
CONTENTS, #6.25 (Mar 16, 1994)
File 1--Documenting the Rigged & Deadly Cultural Context of Info Age
File 2--Privacy, Communications, and Cryptography
File 3--How Citizens can Pursue Net Grassroots Polit. Action
File 4--Gray Areas (Magazine) and The Computer underground
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
FTP: UNITED STATES: etext.archive.umich.edu (141.211.164.18) in /pub/CuD/
aql.gatech.edu (128.61.10.53) in /pub/eff/cud/
EUROPE: nic.funet.fi in pub/doc/cud/ (Finland)
nic.funet.fi
ftp.warwick.ac.uk in pub/cud/ (United Kingdom)
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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 1994 23:44:29 CST
From: Vigdor Schreibman - FINS <fins@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
Subject: File 1--Documenting Rigged & Deadly Cultural Context of Info Age
FINS SPECIAL REPORT MARCH 7, 1994
================================================================
FINS INFORMATION AGE LIBRARY ADDITIONS
Documenting the Rigged & Deadly Cultural
Context of the Emerging Information Age
Washington, DC--Fins Information Age Lib will release, Mar 8, 1994, a new
online directory: Periodicals_and_Newspapers. This directory will contain
thoughtful, thorough, and provocative articles of special relevance to the
emerging Information Age. In this undertaking, Fins intends to track the
antidemocratic propaganda model of the mass media developed by American
business that has been discussed by writers during the last half of the
twentieth century (Arendt, 1950; Lindblom, 1977; Herman & Chomski, 1988).
Special emphasis will be placed on the technological imperative of the
Information Age now being pursued by the "one-eyed prophets" of the
Clinton-Gore Administration, which threaten totalitarian dangers of the
"Technopoly" described by communications critic Postman (1992). Finally,
articles that discuss alternative possibilities that can sustain and enhance
democracy will also be highlighted.
The articles now presented in the Periodicals_and_Newspapers directory
disclose the rigged and lopsided competition of core ideas, and deadly
cultural context of the emerging Information Age. In addition to several
articles previously released in electronic format there are two articles new
to the Internet. This includes a three-part series on "The Capital and
Capitol Hill," written by Vigdor Schreibman, which describes the core values
and systemic foundation for soaring youth homicide in the United States,
nested in an economic system with undue reliance placed upon the ethic of
profit maximization, guided by narrow individualism and the morality of the
marketplace. The directory also contains an original article by Schreibman
on, "Preservation of an American Heritage," which discusses the conflict
between technology and the preservation of America's cultural
heritage. The article was originally scheduled for publication by
Washington's HILL RAG, Mar 4, 1994, but was killed without
explanation. It is now included online in
Fins_Information_Age/Periodicals_and_Newspapers/Fins-PaN-05.
Now included in Periodicals_and_Newspapers are the following
selections:
Fins-PaN-01 Vigdor Schreibman, "The Politics of Cyberspace"
(Fins ed., Jan 1994) (Figures 1-3, of this work are included in
separate files, uuencode version: Fins-PaN-01a to 01c)
Fins-PaN-02 Richard E. Sclove, "Democratizing Technology," in
THE CHRONICLE OF HIGHER EDUCATION, Jan 12, 1994, pp. B1-B2
Fins-PaN-03 Patryk Silver, Bell Atlantic-TCI: Merger Mania,
and Edward S. Herman, Peter Pangloss Predicts, and Herbert I.
Schiller, The Corporate Pipeline Into Our Heads, in LIES OF OUR TIMES,
January-February 1994
Fins-PaN-041 Vigdor Schreibman, Part 1, "The Capital and
Capitol Hill: Propagating a counter-culture of madness" (Fins ed.,
Mar 1994) (Figure 1, of this work is included in a separate file,
uuencode version: Fins-PaN-04b)
Fins-PaN-042 Vigdor Schreibman, Part 2, "The Capital and
Capitol Hill: A setting for madness (Fins ed., Mar 1994) (Table 1, of
this work is included in a separate file, uuencode version:
Fins-PaN-04b)
Fins-PaN-043 Vigdor Schreibman, Part 3, "The Capital and
Capitol Hill: The triumph of Jeffersonian Democracy (Fins ed., Mar
1994)
Fins-PaN-05 Vigdor Schreibman, "Preservation of an American
Heritage" (Fins ed., Mar 1994)
Follow these directions to browse the Fins Information Age Lib:
If you have a Gopher client :
gopher to inform.umd.edu
and go to the directory
Educational_Resources/Computers_and_Society/Fins_Information_Age
If you have ftp :
ftp to inform.umd.edu
cd to inforM/Educational_Resources/Computers_and_Society/Fins_Information_Age
===========================================================================
BECOME A MEMBER OF FINS--COLLABORATE IN PROTECTING THE SPIRIT OF CYBERSPACE
+-------------------------------------------------------------------
Membership rate: $30.00 a year. United States and International members
receive 24 issues of Fins News Columns a year; plus networking, or print
reproduction rights in primary markets; plus Fins Information Age Library.
+-------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Information News Syndicate, Vigdor Schreibman, Editor & Publisher,
18-9th St. NE #206, Washington, DC 20002. Internet: fins@access.digex.net.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 1994 22:12:58 -0500 (EST)
From: "Shabbir J. Safdar" <shabbir@PANIX.COM>
Subject: File 2--Privacy, Communications, and Cryptography
Have you ever wondered why so many people get caught talking on
their cellular phones?
Or perhaps why people laugh when they talk about the security of
electronic mail?
The reason we cannot assure the privacy of our personal communications
is because the government places strict controls on the only
technology that protects our privacy: cryptography.
Cryptography can assure our privacy unlike anything else in history.
Let's say you are given a driver's license by the state of NY. If
you do something to annoy the state, you can lose your driver's
license.
Cryptographic privacy cannot be taken away. A tyrannical government
or a rogue police dept. cannot eavesdrop on your well-encrypted
conversations or read your well-encrypted email by stealing your
computer.
However cryptographic technology in recent years has been carefully
controlled by the government. Anyone who wanted to build a product
with real privacy built into it, such as an encrypting cellular
telephone, would be subjected to a litany of absurd government
regulations. Ultimately they would be limited to producing their
product for US use only. The legal fees just to get this far
may still be daunting enough to have discouraged most manufacturers
from putting cryptographic technology into their products. Their
markets would be automatically diminished to be US-only, perhaps
not enough to warrant developing the product for market.
The gov't. claims this is done in the interest of national
security. Can this be true? Many of these products are
available outside the US already. In fact many stronger products
are available outside the US both from vendors and on the Internet
anonymous ftp sites.
US companies are constrained by these regulations since they cannot
compete with other international companies in the global
marketplace. US citizens lose their privacy because their own
firms are unable to provide them with the products they need.
You can change this!
Rep. Maria Cantwell has introduced legislation (cryptographic export bill
HR 3627) that would fix the cryptographic export laws to allow
businesses to produce eqiupment with strong cryptography for sale
in the global marketplace.
This will mean more privacy-enhancing products for ordinary citizens
like you and me.
HR 3627 currently has five co-sponsors. The current co-sponsors are:
Shepherd - Utah
Wyden - Oregon
Orton - Utah
Manzulo - Illinois
Edwards - California
Can one person make a difference? Sure, just ask Colin Campbell
from Utah. He wrote Rep. Karen Shepherd and asked her to co-sponsor
Rep. Cantwell's bill. Rep. Shepherd's office had been thinking about
the bill, and between constituent support, her own good judgement,
and good advice from several software companies she decided to
co-sponsor the bill.
Would she have co-sponsored if Colin hadn't written his letter?
Perhaps not. In the last election (1992) Shepherd (who is now only a
freshman legislator) defeated her challenger, Enid Greene with only a
2% margin (52% vs. 48%). Had she thought that this might be a
sensitive issue with voters, she might have merely passed it up, like
so many other pieces of legislation that get filed every year and go
nowhere.
Help your legislator make this difference. Ask them to co-sponsor
or support HR 3627. It's very very easy. All you do is call, write,
or fax (you bought that fax modem for a reason, right?!) your
representative. Ask them to support HR 3627 because its good for
privacy and its good for business.
Once when working in another state, I asked a state legislator what sort of
mail they got. One said "five letters is a landslide". Although
US reps and Senators get significantly more, it shows how much of an
impact one group of individuals can have.
HERE'S WHAT TO DO
Act now! This bill will be in "mark-up" next week! The last step
before it is reported to the House floor!
1. Find out your legislator's name or number. You can do this by calling
the League of Women Voters in your area, or by calling the
City Board of Elections. If you're truly lazy, you can write to
me with your city and I'll find it for you. (If you recognize
your legislator's name or district, ftp the current list of
Reps and Senators from una.hh.lib.umich.edu in the directory
/socsci/poliscilaw/uslegi/congdir
2. Call/write/fax your representative and tell them you would like them
to support HR 3627. Colin Campbell's letter below is a good
example. (It's a success story!) Let me know what his/her
reaction is by dropping me a line at shabbir@panix.com.
3. Continue reading EFFector Online, Computer Underground Digest, and
other publications for progress announcements.
4. If you want to help coordinate the legislators in your state,
join the mailing list ad_hocracy@panix.com. It's dedicated to
passing HR 3627 and other similar legislation. Join and send
mail saying, "I'll make sure <state> gets taken care of!"
Attachments:
Colin Campbell's successful letter
A copy of HR 3627
============================================================================
[excerpt of email from Colin Cambpell]
I faxed a message to Rep. Karen Shepherd on Feb 16 (see below for
text). A member of her staff called me on the telephone a few days
later. I can't quote verbatim, but he said:
1) Rep. Shepherd hadn't been aware of the issue previously.
2) After receiving my letter, they did some research and
decided the Cantewll bill was a good idea. I got the
impression that they contacted some software industry
associations.
3) She will be co-sponsoring the bill.
A copy of what I faxed to her is attached. You may use my name and
city publicly, as well as any of the text of my letter.
Glad to help a worthy cause,
Colin Campbell
;;; text of Fax sent Feb 16, 1994
Rep. Karen Shepherd
U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, DC
Dear Rep. Shepherd:
I would like to register my strong support for H.R. 3627, Legislation
to Amend the Export Administration Act of 1979. The bill proposes to
end the ban on the export of privacy and data-security software from
the U.S.
As a longtime worker in the software industry, I can attest to the
senseless and counter-productive effects of the current export
restrictions on cryptographic software.
For me, the issue is simple:
1) The current ban is ineffective. There is no way to control
the availability of privacy software in other countries.
Software is not a commodity that is consumed and continually
reexported to replenish supply; it is information and technology.
The encryption technology in question is already fully available
wherever there are computers. Whether we like it or not,
the genie is out of the bottle and will not be put back.
2) The U.S. software industry is severely hampered by not
being able to export products with privacy
and data-security features. This is about jobs.
I think cryptography has a bit of an image problem. I think it is
inaccurately associated in popular thinking with secrecy, espionage
and even crime or terrorism. In fact, privacy software is just an
electronic "envelope." It is as common and unexotic as paper
envelopes or locking file cabinets.
I regularly send my mail sealed in envelopes made of opaque paper, and
no one would interpret this practice as evidence of criminal intent.
Similarly, I file my business documents in a locking file cabinet. In
the future, nearly all electronic communication will be enclosed in
secure, software "envelopes." This is proper, natural and in no way
suspect. And it is a growth industry for the U.S., if we are only
sensible enough to recognize and take advantage of the opportunity.
I believe that the arguments of national security offered by opponents
of the proposed legislation are not compelling. I suspect that many
in the law enforcement and national security communities, who pursued
the majority of their careers with the technology and politics of the
Cold War, regret the wide availability of electronic privacy;
undeniably, it does make their job harder. However, whether or not we
allow privacy software to be exported will not change this.
Classifying privacy software as a "munition" makes about as much sense
as classifying personal computers and photocopy machines as implements
of war. Are we willing to forbid the export of personal computers and
photocopy machines for national security reasons as well?
Now is an opportunity for progressive, forward-thinking approaches to
electronic communications and the software industry. Our national
policy should reflect the realities of the technology and the public
interest. Needlessly crippling one of our most vital industries with
a policy which is ineffective at meeting its stated goals is not in
that interest. I urge you to support and even co-sponsor H.R. 3627. As
you know, Utah is one of the country's major centers of software
development. This is an issue that is very important to the software
community.
If there is any way I can help you in your effort pass HR 3627,
please let me know.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely yours,
Colin Campbell
============================================================================
Below is a copy of the Cantwell bill. It and much more valuable
information about pending legislation is also available at ftp.eff.org
in /pub/Policy/Legislation.
103D CONGRESS H.R. 3627
1ST SESSION
---------------------------------------
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
MS. CANTWELL (for herself and ___) introduced the following bill which
was referred to the Committee on __________.
---------------------------------------
A BILL
To amend the Export Administration Act of 1979 with
respect to the control of computers and related equipment.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America in Congress Assembled,
SECTION 1. GENERALLY AVAILABLE SOFTWARE
Section 17 of the Export Administration Act of 1979
(50 U.S.C. App. 2416) is amended by adding at the end
thereof the following new subsection:
``(g) COMPUTERS AND RELATED EQUIPMENT.---
``(1) GENERAL RULE.---Subject to paragraphs
(2) and (3), the Secretary shall have exclusive au-
thority to control exports of all computer hardware,
software and technology for information security
(including encryption), except that which is specifi-
cally designed or modified for military use, including
command, control and intelligence applications.
``(2) ITEMS NOT REQUIRING LICENSES.---
No validated license may be required, except pursuant
to the Trading With The Enemy Act or the Inter-
national Emergency Economic Powers Act (but only
to the extent that the authority of such act is not
exercised to extend controls imposed under this act),
for the export or reexport of---
``(A) any software, including software with
encryption capabilities, that is---
``(i) generally available, as is, and is
designed for installation by the purchaser; or
``(ii) in the public domain or publicly
available because it is generally accessible
to the interested public in any form; or
``(B) any computing device soley because
it incorporates or employs in any form software
(including software with encryption capabilities)
exempted from any requirement for a validated
license under subparagraph (A).
``(3) SOFTWARE WITH ENCRYPTION CAPABILITIES.
--- The Secretary shall authorize the export or
reexport of software with encryption capabilities for
nonmilitary end-uses in any country to which ex-
ports of software of similar capability are permitted
for use by financial institutions not controlled in fact
by United States persons, unless there is substantial
evidence that such software will be---
``(A) diverted to a military end-use or an
end-use supporting international terrorism;
``(B) modified for military or terrorist end-
use; or
``(C) reexported without requisite United
States authorization.
``(4) DEFINITIONS.---As used in this subsection---
``(A) the term `generally available' means,
in the case of software (including software with
encryption capabilities), software that is offered
for sale, license, or transfer to any person with-
out restriction through any commercial means,
including, but not limited to, over-the-counter
retail sales, mail order transactions, phone
order transactions, electronic distribution, or
sale on approval;
``(B) the term `as is' means, in the case of
software (including software with encryption ca-
pabilities), a software program that is not de-
signed, developed, or tailored by the software
company for specific purchasers, except that
such purchasers may supply certain installation
parameters needed by the software program to
function properly with the purchaser's system
and may customize the software program by
choosing among options contained in the soft-
ware program;
``(C) the term `is designed for installation
by the purchaser' means, in the case of soft-
ware (including software with encryption capa-
bilities)---
``(i) the software company intends for
the purchaser (including any licensee or
transferee), who may not be the actual
program user, to install the software pro-
gram on a computing device and has sup-
plied the necessary instructions to do so,
except that the company may also provide
telephone help line services for software in-
stallation, electronic transmission, or basic
operations; and---
``(ii) that the software program is de-
signed for installation by the purchaser
without further substantial support by the
supplier;
``(D) the term `computing device' means a
device which incorporates one or more
microprocessor-based central processing units
that can accept, store, process or provide out-
put of data; and
``(E) the term `computer hardware', when
used in conjunction with information security,
includes, but is not limited to, computer sys-
tems, equipment, application-specific assem-
blies, modules and integrated circuits.''
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 1994 14:31:04 -0800
From: Jim Warren <jwarren@WELL.SF.CA.US>
Subject: File 3--How Citizens can Pursue Net Grassroots Polit. Action
Mar.14, 1994
((This is a slightly-modified version of will appear in my "Access to
Government" column in the April, 1994, issue of BOARDWATCH magazine,
the oldest rag for bulletin-board sysops and users; 8500 W. Bowles Ave
#210, Littleton CO 80123; 800-933-6038;
email/subscriptions@boardwatch.com . ]
HOW CITIZENS CAN PURSUE PRACTICAL, POTENT, GRASSROOTS POLITICAL
ACTION - NET-BASED, COMPUTER-AIDED
by Jim Warren
(c) 1994. May be copied-in-full at any time after Apr.15, 1994, in any form,
provided this notice is included and no fee is charged for the specific copy
nor for a paper publication of which it is a part.
This details how individuals can personally pursue powerful, effective
political action. I am convinced that its use will explode in the '96
presidential elections and will mature by 1999.
Delightfully, this only works for positions that have broad public support,
though usually among disorganized and geographically scattered citizens. It's
useless for covert special interests; in fact, it can overpower their
insiders' clout.
Let me not understate this:
*I believe that the mature version of this approach will dominate
irresistable citizen-based political action in the 21st Century.*
There are two reasons for wanting access to government: