Computer underground Digest Sun Mar 23, 1997 Volume 9 : Issue 23 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, #9.23 (Sun, Mar 23, 1997) Subject: Jacking in from the "Man Behind the Curtain" port (fwd) Subject: "Software Blocking" Bill introduced in Texas Subject: Vietnam to Censor Net Subject: Bell Atlantic Calls for Coopertion against Fraud Subject: Wired News/Reuters: Bill tries to ban Internet gambling Subject: Internet Gambling Prohibition Act of 1997 Subject: Cu Digest Header Info (unchanged since 13 Dec, 1996) CuD ADMINISTRATIVE, EDITORIAL, AND SUBSCRIPTION INFORMATION APPEARS IN THE CONCLUDING FILE AT THE END OF EACH ISSUE. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 13 Mar 1997 08:44:05 EST From: Martin Kaminer Subject: Jacking in from the "Man Behind the Curtain" port (fwd) Thought you might be interested in this. Martin Kaminer --------- Sent from: Brock N. Meeks CyberWire Dispatch // Copyright 1997 // March 1997 Jacking in from the "Man Behind the Curtain" port: Here... March This by Lewis Koch CWD Special Correspondent Chicago --You better not hack, better not phreak -- The President's Commission on Critical Infrastructure Protection [http://www.pccip.gov] is coming to town. This behind closed doors Commission holds the key to America's most precious civil liberty chastity belt: Privacy. And now it's going on tour. That right, the Commission is coming to a town near you, a dog-and-pony road trip whose tour jackets are read: MADE in the NSA. The Commission's goal during the tour is to hear from the people, to collect ideas about how to protect the critical infrastructure from... >from... why the newest threat (ominous music) to our national well being now that the Sovs are gone, Saddam's waiting for a bullet and the Chicoms are turning capitalists -- (scary music swells) -- "cyber-terrorists" attacking our so-called "critical infrastructures" through devious computer hacking raids. Honest. And yet, even as members of the Commission smile politely and nod their graying heads, they are busy trying to figure out (read: Justify) just how to rewrite U.S. laws which would lift, or at least modify, the decades old ban that keeps our nation's top spooks from the National Security Agency from gathering intelligence on you and me. Which is not to say these kats don't have an ironic sense of humor. One of their first public debuts will be in San Francisco during next week's Computers, Freedom and Privacy conference. Of course, if you can make it to CFP, you might try the Los Angeles, California, Public Works Hearing Room, City Hall, room 350, third floor, starting at 10 a.m. and if you can't grok with the freaks in L.A. or the cypherpunks in San Francisco, perhaps you can make it to Commission's other scheduled stops in Atlanta, Houston, St. Louis or Boston. (Call now, operators are standing by, 202-828-8869, ask for Liz.) Between all his strenuous fund raising efforts, President Clinton last July found the time to form a this Commission to inquire into the question of whether this nation has protected its precious physical and cyber innards, namely electric power, gas and oil, telecommunications, banking and finance, transportation, water supply, emergency services, and of course, continuity of government services, and...the Internet. By this time the Government has caught on to the fact that the Internet is no longer a fun toy for academics and young people but rather but serious business for people who bustle around or sleep over at the White House. There is money to be made on the Net, power to be wielded. There are also some big bucks to be spent, billions maybe, on what will almost certainly be efforts to "make things safe" from cyberterrorism. The most important job this Commission, however, will be to direct attention away from the real issues: who was/is responsible for developing weak, vulnerable infrastructures in this country in the first place. (Pay no attention to the men behind the curtain, the men who built the crumbling infrastructures of Internet Central in the first place.) Second, while it would be foolish to deny that problems exists with thieves who use computers and cyberspace, where some child pornography and a whole hell of a lot of money laundering takes place, cyberspace is merely a reflection of society, the good and the bad and a lot in between. What then, do "cyber threats "actually look like? Who might carry them out. How? Where? And who will lead the effort to gather, collate, fold and staple all this valuable information? A recognized Internet expert? Someone with extensive experience in networks and cross-platform computing? Nope... not for Bill Clinton. Just wouldn't do. No, sir, what we need to combat terrorism is, well, a goddamn, real life combat veteran, by gwad! Enter Robert T. March, chairman of this Infrastructure Protection Task Force. You can call him "Bob" or simply "The General" will do because, well, that's what he did most of his life and besides, it has a real nice ring to it. The executive order creating this Commission states that the chairman be "from outside the Federal government," which Marsh is, technically, since he retired from the military in 1989. He still collects his "inside" the Federal government military retirement pay though. Question is, do you want someone who might played a part creating the mess, now deciding how to fix it? The background information on General Marsh is kinda skimpy, at least for someone who spent the vast majority of his adult life, rising to the rank of General. He's 73, a West Point graduate, a resident Alexandria, a tony Virginia suburb a stone's throw from Washington, D.C. "His last assignment was serving as the commander of the Air Force Systems Command, where he directed the research, development, test and acquisition of aerospace systems for the Air Force," reads his brief bio on the Web page. So we can at least legitimately guess that he was heavy into some kinds of high tech R&D and Procurement stuff, pushing paper and awarding big time contracts. It seems that following his retirement, Marsh marched right back into research, development, test and acquisition, only, well, on the other side. "He served as the first chairman of Thiokol Corp [http://www.thiokol.com/]," his bio reads, "as it transitioned from Morton-Thiokol in 1989 to separate company status." (Remember the Challenger Disaster in 1986? [http://www.fas.org/spp/51L.html] Can you spell O-rings? If you click on the company's Web page history section, [http://www.thiokol.com/History/History.htm#HistoryOfCompany] this seems to be a non-event. Could there have been two Morton-Thiokol companies?) Marsh is a very active senior, serving on the board and as a stockholder active in a surprising number of other high tech ventures, some or all of which could conceivably wind up providing all kinds of high priced of technical goodies to combat bad guys bent on physical and cyber destruction of our dear, up-until-now unprotected infrastructures. And according to public information office of the Commission, Marsh intends on keeping his corporate goodies "but at a reduced compensation" because he was merely "designated" by the President -- which in White House jargon means...whatever the hell one wants it to mean -- as long as you don't have to give up the stock and the options and the director's fees (Being "designated" means never having to say I'm sorry.). Marsh also has strong ties to CAE Electronics, [http://www.cae.ca/cae_electronics_inc/cae_electronics_inc.html] a new U.S. company which markets high tech stuff. CAE has a Canadian papa, which, among the high tech goodies it markets are "Air Traffic Management Systems" and "Engineering and Software Support for Weapons Systems." So, having someone on the Director's payroll in the States, someone with 35 years of experience in the United States Air Force, makes good, er, business sense. Marsh also owns 40,000 shares and makes $8,000.00 a year plus expenses for his directorship in Teknowledge, [http://www.teknowledge.com/company/company.html] a Palo Alto high tech firm parked behind a fence and leafy trees. Teknowledge is very interested in communications and the Department of Defense. Here is how the company describes some of what it does: "Since the DoD and many commercial businesses plan to conduct large-scale operations over international computer networks similar to the Internet, much of the Teknowledge's current and future project focus is in providing network associate systems to make access to knowledge easier, and network accelerators to make knowledge access over networks faster and more cost effective." So, we're taking marketing here, not rocket science; it's easy to see how Teknowledge might be a "good fit" for any computer infrastructure "hardening" contracts. Cyberwarriors already have a name for it: "Minimum Essential Information Infrastructure (MEII) also known as "emergency lanes on the information highway." Marsh is also a director of Comverse Government Systems Corp.[http://www.cis.comverse.com/]. Among the things that Comverse makes are digital monitoring systems for law enforcement and intelligence agencies. Oh? Yes. Digital wiretapping, monitoring, as in...why...yes...of course. The perfect party gift for the FBI in search of the hackers who put on those nasty things on the Justice Department Web site. Marsh also is a trustee of MITRE Corp, which, we see [http://www.fast.org/irp/contract/m.htm], is into air defense and other command, control, communications, and intelligence systems used by department of Defense clients. The company's ties to the defense intelligence community go back to the late 1950, with project code names such as HAVE STARE and STEEL TRAP. And when the General takes his World Tour back home D.C. will we ever see it's findings? The Commission isn't bound by the Freedom of Information Act, so we don't have those thumb screws to turn. However, the Commission is governed by the Federal Advisory Committee Act, which, in part, is there to "to open to public scrutiny the manner in which government agencies obtain advise from private individuals." Of course, this situation being one of vital national security interest, cyber-terrorists and all tha t, don't expect a flood of documents and sunshine from the General. Apart from the General, there's an interesting internal conflict on the Commission. You see, though it's headed by a "civilian," it's run by the FBI, which doesn't get along with the CIA and neither get along with all that well with the NSA. It's a schizophrenic role for the FBI, to be sure. Actually, there are people in the FBI who at least know the right questions to ask, that's a start. The problem is whether their questions can be heard over the din of furious, clueless answers shouted out by Dir. Louis Freeh, James Kallestrom and others in their own agency. So, come on out and give the General a few choice thoughts... and don't forget to call to reserve your spot in line... government operators are standing by, ahem, from the hours of 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. EST only, of course. But hurry, this country is not sold in stores. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Mar 1997 19:46:28 EST From: Martin Kaminer Subject: "Software Blocking" Bill introduced in Texas Sent from: Joe Corcoran The following is a bill being introducted to the Texas State Legislature. It may be of interest to you. - ----------------------------------------- Introduce version- Bill Text H.B. No.1300 By Corte 75R4899 SRC-D A BILL TO BE ENTITLED AN ACT Relating to the provision of certain software to persons who access the Internet; providing penalties. BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS: SECTION 1. Chapter 35, Business & Commerce Code, is amended by adding Subchapter I to read as follows: SUBCHAPTER I. PROVISION OF SOFTWARE TO BLOCK OR SCREEN INTERNET MATERIAL Sec. 35.101 DEFINTIONS. In this subchapter: (1) "Freeware" means software that is distributed to a person free of charge regardless of whether use of the software is subject to certain restrictions. (2) "Internet" means the largest nonproprietary nonprofit cooperative public computer network, popularly known as the Internet. (3) "Interactive computer service" means any information service or system that provides or enables computer access by multiple users to the Internet. (4) "Shareware" means copyrighted software in which the copyright owner sets certain conditions for its use and distribution, including requiring payment to the copyright owner after a person who has secured a copy of the software decides to use the software, regardless of whether the payment is for additional support or functionality for the software. Sec. 35.102 SOFTWARE THAT RESTRICTS ACCESS TO CERTAIN MATERIAL ON INTERNET. (a) A person who provides an interactive computer service to another person for a fee shall provide free of charge to each subscriber of the service in this state a fully functional shareware, freeware, or demonstration version of software that enables the subscriber to automatically block or screen material on the Internet and that provides cost-free usage for at least 30 days. (b) A provider is considered to be in compliance with this section if the provider places, on the provider's first page of text information accessible to a subscriber, a link to the software descried by Subsection (a). (c) This section does not apply to an institution of higher education, as that term is defined by Section 61.003, Education Code that provides interactive computer Service. Sec. 35.103 CIVIL PENALTY. (a) A person who violates Section35.102 is liable to the state for a civil penalty not to exceed $10,000 for each violation. (b) The attorney general may institute a suit to recover the civil penalty. Sec. 35.104 CRIMINAL PENALTY (a) A person commits an offense if the person violates Section 35.102. (b) An offense under this section is a Class C misdemeanor. SECTION 2. This Act takes effect September 1,1997, except that a civil or criminal penalty for a violation of Section 35.102, Business & Commerce Code, as added by this Act, may be imposed only for a violation that occurs on or after January 1, 1998. SECTION 3. The importance of this legislation and the crowded condition of the calendars in both house create an emergency and an imperative public necessity that the constitutional rule requiring bills to be read on three several days in each house be suspended, and this rule is hereby suspended. - ----------------------------------------------------------------- - ----------------------------------------------------------------- The Internet Tax Freedom Act Introduced in the Senate March 13, 1997 By Senator Wyden (for himself and Senator Kerry): S. 442. A bill to establish a national policy against State and local government interference with interstate commerce on the Internet or interactive computer services, and to exercise Congressional jurisdiction over interstate commerce by establishing a moratorium on the imposition of exactions that would interfere with the free flow of commerce via the Internet, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. See bill, Wyden's statements and section-by-section analysis at: http://jya.com/s442.htm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Mar 1997 08:13:38 -0800 (PST) From: Declan McCullagh Subject: Vietnam to Censor Net Source - fight-censorship@vorlon.mit.edu [The China model. --Declan] ---------- Forwarded message ---------- 03/11/97 - 01:47 PM ET - Click reload often for latest version Via USA Today Web Site Vietnam to censor the Net HANOI, Vietnam - All information coming into Vietnam through the Internet will be censored and the government announced Tuesday it will control who has access to online services. It also will limit the gates through which Internet servers in Vietnam are linked to the world's largest information network. The new regulations, to take effect next week, were widely publicized in state-controlled media. The controls were issued in a decree by Prime Minister Vo Van Kiet, who said information servers must be based in Vietnam. This will ensure that information entering and leaving Vietnam goes through a government-filtered gateway, the Communist Party newspaper, The People, reported. The government has been looking for efficient ways to allow Internet service, while restricting its contents. By The Associated Press ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Mar 1997 00:47:05 -0500 (EST) From: "noah@enabled.com" Subject: Bell Atlantic Calls for Coopertion against Fraud -Noah ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date--Mon, 3 Mar 1997 16:43:23 -0500 From--Bell Atlantic NEWS RELEASE ********************************************************* ******************************************************** BELL ATLANTIC FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: March 3, 1997 Paul Miller 804-772-1460 iller@ba.com BELL ATLANTIC CALLS FOR INDUSTRY COOPERATION TO 'OUTFOX' $4-BILLION-A-YEAR PHONE FRAUD ARLINGTON, Va.- With telephone fraud in the United States costing $3.7 billion a year and rising at double-digit rates, Bell Atlantic today called on industry rivals nationwide to band together to develop ways to stop the menace. In an unprecedented call for cooperation, the company urged all telecommunications carriers to join the Alliance to Outfox Phone Fraud. Created three years ago, the alliance is a broad-based international group of telecommunications companies and related businesses whose goal is to create consumer awareness about telephone fraud and its prevention. The animated character Freddie the Phone Fraud Fox(r) serves as the official mascot for the public awareness campaign. In addition to Bell Atlantic, alliance members include The American Public Communications Council, Bellcore, Communications Fraud Control Association, Hewlett-Packard, Illinois Consolidated Telephone Co., Intelligent Switched Systems-Canada, NYNEX, Pacific Bell, Park Region Mutual Telephone Co., Pennsylvania Telephone Association, Public Service Telephone Co. and Southwestern Bell. "The alliance is a key way for the growing number of carriers in the nation to pool their resources and share information about phone fraud occurrence and tips on prevention," said Mary Chacanias, director of fraud prevention in Bell Atlantic's Carrier Services organization. The Telecommunications Reform Act of 1996 has brought hundreds of new carriers into the marketplace, multiplying the opportunities for criminals to commit phone fraud. The fast growth of the wireless industry is one factor accounting for the rise in fraud in recent years. Also, the advent of portable computing has made it easier for ingenious criminals to commit phone fraud with less risk. Phone fraud has gone beyond "tumbling," or guessing at, wireless phone numbers to cloning of wireless phones. The latest and fastest-growing type of fraud is subscription fraud, which affects both wireline and wireless carriers.. Such fraud can occur when a user provides the carrier with a false address, identification, or credit rating and then makes long distance phone calls on that account. The most effective perpetrators of phone fraud stay one step ahead of the law by placing their calls quickly before telephone operators and law enforcement agencies can catch them. "All telecommunications companies must be faster and more skilled at chasing the crooks who know too well how to take advantage of our networks," Chacanias said. "An aggressive, well-organized anti-fraud program can stop the theft of millions of dollars in phone service. "With the cooperation of all the carriers, we can put an enormous dent in phone fraud," she said. "In the short time our alliance has been functioning, we've been able to make a difference in this problem." For more information about the alliance or to join, those interested should call 800-9-OUTFOX. The alliance can also be reached at www.gnat.net/outfox on the worldwide web. Bell Atlantic Corp. (NYSE: BEL) is at the forefront of the new communications, entertainment and information industry. In the mid-Atlantic region, the company is the premier provider of local telecommunications and advanced services. Globally, it is one of the largest investors in the high-growth wireless communication marketplace. Bell Atlantic also owns a substantial interest in Telecom Corporation of New Zealand and is actively developing high-growth national and international business opportunities in all phases of the industry. #### INTERNET USERS: Bell Atlantic news releases, executive speeches, news media contacts and other useful information are available at Bell Atlantic's News Center on the World Wide Web (http://www.ba.com). To receive news releases by e-mail, visit the News Center and register for personalized automatic delivery of Bell Atlantic news releases. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Mar 1997 07:02:45 -0800 (PST) From: Declan McCullagh Subject: Wired News/Reuters: Bill tries to ban Internet gambling Source - fight-censorship@vorlon.mit.edu [I haven't read the text of the bill yet -- I'm having it faxed to me now -- but I wonder whether it would even work. That is, I'm curious whether it affects companies within the *jurisdiction* of the FCC, or companies that are actively being *regulated* by the FCC. Beginning with Computer II, the FCC has defined "enhanced" service providers as firms *not* providing standard voice offerings, a category that includes Internet providers and is not subject to regulation under Title II of the Communications Act. --Declan] ************** Reuters // U.S. Bill To Ban Internet Gambling Introduced WASHINGTON - A bill to ban all forms of gambling on the Internet has been introduced in the U.S. Senate. "Given the tremendous potential for abuse, addiction and access by minors, online gambling should be prohibited," Sen. Jon Kyl, an Arizona Republican, said. He was joined by two other Republicans and three Democrats in offering the bill. Currently, only computer gambling on sports events is prohibited. The legislation would extend criminal penalties to companies who offer all types of computer gambling. Communications companies regulated by the U.S. Federal Communications Commission would be required to discontinue services to any companies they carry that offer gambling. Kyl said the bill also eliminates ambiguity about the definition of bets and wagers to make any form of online betting illegal. The bill was introduced on the same day as the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments about a 1996 law banning transmission of sexually explicit material on the Internet to anyone younger than 18. The Clinton administration argued that the law should be upheld to protect young children. Opponents said it violated free-speech rights of adult Internet users and should be found unconstitutional. A decision in the case is due by July. ************** Wired News ACLU: Gambling Bill Would Turn ISPs Into Cops by Ashley Craddock 6:03pm 20.Mar.97.PST A new bill that would outlaw Internet gambling in the United States was attacked Thursday for a provision that the American Civil Liberties Union says would force Internet service providers to act as online cops. Online gambling, which defies traditional state jurisdictions, has caught the Department of Justice with its pants down. So far, the department has been unable to establish any adequate plan to police cyberwagers. While the Interstate Wire Act of 1961 prohibits the use of phone lines to place bets across state lines, the question of whether the act applies to online gambling remains unsettled. The issue is further complicated by the fact that many online casinos have moved their operations offshore. The bill introduced Thursday, the Internet Gambling Protection Act by Senator Jon Kyl (R-Arizona), tries to give teeth to government prohibitions against online wagers. Besides criminalizing all gambling and specifying that virtual casinos cannot evade gambling laws by offering "prizes" rather than cash, the bill holds ISPs liable for providing access to gambling sites once state or local law enforcement agencies have notified the ISPs that such activities are taking place. Prosecuting crime on the Internet "is extremely difficult," says Vincent Sollitto, a spokesman for Kyl. "This is one mechanism to help law enforcement keep a clamp on some of the offshore activity that's making it impossible to restrict online bets." Although only a handful of online casinos currently exist, the phenomenon has been generating a good deal of heat and light in the form of press coverage and concern from politicians who fear that home gambling will eat away at America's moral fiber. "Gambling erodes values of hard work, sacrifice, and personality," Kyl said as he introduced his anti-gambling bill. But however small the current universe of online casinos, proprietors of the gaming industry, who rake in US$550 billion-a-year, are eagerly looking to plumb the Internet's financial possibilities, which at least one analyst has predicted could amount to $10 billion a year by 2000. But critics charge that making service providers responsible for providing access to Web sites places them in the position of policing content rather than simply acting as carriers. [...] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Mar 1997 11:57:50 -0400 From: Michael Sims Subject: Internet Gambling Prohibition Act of 1997 Source - fight-censorship@vorlon.mit.edu [Full text of the bill is not yet available on-line. Perhaps Declan's fax machine is faster than my mouse, though. In any case, here's a few words from our sponsors. From other commentary on the bill, it appears that the bill would place all ISPs under the regulatory ability of the FCC. Hooray.] By Mr. KYL (for himself, Mrs. Feinstein, Mr. Graham, Mr. Hutchinson, Mr. Grassley, and Mr. Johnson): S. 474. A bill to amend sections 1081 and 1084 of title 18, United States Code; to the Committee on the Judiciary. THE INTERNET GAMBLING PROHIBITION ACT OF 1997 Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Internet Gambling Prohibition Act of 1997. It will outlaw gambling on the Internet. I believe it will protect children from logging on to the Internet and being exposed to activities that are normally prohibited to them. And for those people with a gambling problem, my bill will make it harder to gamble away the family paycheck. Gambling erodes values of hard work, sacrifice, and personal responsibility. Although the social costs of gambling are difficult to quantify, research indicates they are potentially staggering. Gambling is a growing industry in the United States, with revenues approaching $550 billion last year--three times the revenues of General Motors Corp. In 1993, more Americans visited casinos than attended a major league baseball game. The problem can only grow worse with online casinos. Now it is no longer necessary to go to a casino or store where lottery tickets are sold. Anyone with a computer and a modem will have access to a casino: Internet users can access hundreds of sites for blackjack, craps, roulette, and sports betting. Gambling addiction is already on the rise. Online gambling will only increase the problem. Why is this bill necessary? It dispels any ambiguity by making clear that all betting, including sports betting, is illegal. Currently, nonsports betting is interpreted as legal. The bill also clarifies the definition of bets and wagers. This ensures that those who are gambling cannot circumvent the law. For example, virtual gaming businesses have been known to offer prizes instead of money, in an attempt to evade the law. Additionally, my bill clarifies that Internet access providers are covered by the law. As the National Association of Attorneys General [NAAG] task force on Internet Gambling reported, `this is currently the most important section to State and local law enforcement agencies, because it provides a civil enforcement mechanism.' FCC-regulated carriers notified by any State or local law enforcement agency of the illegal nature of a site are required to discontinue services to the malfeasor. NAAG believes that this can be a very effective deterrent. The bill includes interactive computer-service providers among those entities required to discontinue such service upon notice. Federal, State, and local law enforcement entities are explicitly authorized to seek prospective injunctive relief against continued use of a communications facility for purposes of gambling . The Internet Gambling Prohibition Act makes explicit the intent of Congress to create extraterritorial jurisdiction regarding Internet gambling activities. Too often, illicit operators of virtual casinos set up shop in friendly jurisdictions beyond the direct application of U.S. law. It will also require the DOJ to report on the difficulties associated with enforcing the statute. Finally, it places some burden on the bettor. The Internet has great potential to promote both educational opportunities and business expansion in this country. At the same time, the Internet is fast becoming a place where inappropriate activities such as gambling , pornography, and consumer fraud thrive. Recently, many businesses have welcomed law enforcement's involvement in cracking down on consumer fraud. We must find a constitutional way to deal with the other problems raised by this revolution in communications. I believe that it is possible to impose some conditions, as we have in other areas, without violating free speech rights. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 Dec 1996 22:51:01 CST From: CuD Moderators Subject: Cu Digest Header Info (unchanged since 13 Dec, 1996) 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 (815-753-0303), 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) 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) (860)-585-9638. CuD is also available via Fidonet File Request from 1:11/70; unlisted nodes and points welcome. In ITALY: ZERO! BBS: +39-11-6507540 In LUXEMBOURG: ComNet BBS: +352-466893 UNITED STATES: etext.archive.umich.edu (192.131.22.8) in /pub/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 #9.23 ************************************