
Computer underground Digest    Sun Apr 12, 1992   Volume 4 : Issue 17

       Editors: Jim Thomas and Gordon Meyer (TK0JUT2@NIU.BITNET)
       Associate Editor: Etaion Shrdlu, Jr.
       Arcmeisters: Brendan Kehoe and Bob Kusumoto

CONTENTS, #4.17 (Apr 12, 1992)
File 1--Panel Discussion on Computer Crime & First Amendment
File 2--Bogus News Release - Computers and Children
File 3-- Addendum to "News Release - Computers and Children"
File 4--"Hacker "Profiles" May Curb Computer Frauds"
File 5--CPSR FOIAs FBI
File 6--FBI Wants to Tap Phone Firms to Eavesdrop (Reprint)
File 7--Electr.CivLib - model candidate's statement & ideas
File 8--JIM WARREN nominated to the Consumers Union Board of Dirs
File 9--MONDO 2000 poem

Issues of CuD can be found in the Usenet alt.society.cu-digest news
group, on CompuServe in DL0 and DL4 of the IBMBBS SIG, DL1 of LAWSIG,
and DL0 and DL12 of TELECOM, on Genie, on the PC-EXEC BBS at (414)
789-4210, and by anonymous ftp from ftp.eff.org (192.88.144.4),
chsun1.spc.uchicago.edu, and ftp.ee.mu.oz.au.  To use the U. of
Chicago email server, send mail with the subject "help" (without the
quotes) to archive-server@chsun1.spc.uchicago.edu.
European distributor: ComNet in Luxembourg BBS (++352) 466893.

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 as long as the source
is cited.  Some authors do copyright their material, 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: Mon, 06 Apr 92 10:18:49 EST
From: "John F. McMullen (at Marist)" <KNXD%MARISTB.BITNET@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>
Subject: Panel Discussion on Computer Crime & First Amendment

There will be a 2-hour panel discussion on "Computer Crime & First
Amendment Concerns" at 10:30AM on Sunday, April 12th at the 17th
annual Trenton Computer Festival (TCF'92). I will moderate the panel
which will be composed of Donald Delaney, New York State Police Senior
Investigator responsible for computer crime and telecommunications
fraud; Mike Godwin, in-house counsel, Electronic Frontier Foundation
(EFF); Emmanuel Goldstein, editor & publisher - "2600:The Hacker
Quarterly; and Phiber Optik, well-know hacker (previously arrested by
Delaney).

TCF is the oldest computer festival/show in the world, preceding even
the legendary "West Coast Computer Faire". It is held on Saturday &
Sunday, April 11 & 12th at Mercer County College, outside of Trenton,
NJ It will contain over 170 commercial exhibits, the largest computer
flea market on the East Coast (8 acres) and 2 days of seminars, talks
and panel discussions. The keynote speaker (Saturday - 3:00PM) is Paul
Grayson, CEO of Micrografx.

The New York Amateur Computer Club (NYACC), on of the festival's
co-sponsors, is providing bus service from New York City to and from
TCF. A bus leaves 11th Street and 6th Avenue at 8:00AM on Saturday and
8:30 on Sunday (The Sunday bus originates in Long Island). For
details, call Lewis Tanner (212 928-0577 between 7&9PM).

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 30 Mar 92 09:29:10 EST
From: 34AEJ7D@CMUVM.BITNET
Subject: Bogus News Release - Computers and Children

The  "News Release"  in the  latest  CUD looks  entirely  bogus to me.
It  is unlikely   that  ANY   group   would  release   a legitimate
news   release anonymously,e.g., even terrorist groups like the  ALF,
PLO and IRA issue their news releases under thier own banner. Anything
less defeats the entire purpose and propaganda objective of making such
a "release" at all.

So what is the purpose of this release? Perhaps it is a "prank"
perpetrated by someone who gained access to someone else's account
carelessly left logged in.  Perhaps it is an  attempt at harassment of
the person  mentioned at the bottom of the release, akin to the "send
Mr. X 10 copies of the encyclopedia" tactic some Usenetters favor when
miffed. Or perhaps it is a lead in to a pitch for a donation to a
"cause".

Whatever the case, as published it is highly suspect, IMHO.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 8 Apr 92 22:31:01 CST
From: Jim Thomas <jthomas@well.sf.ca.us>
Subject:  Addendum to "News Release - Computers and Children"

In mid-March, Ron Hults, of the Fresno (Calif.) police Public
Information Office, released a press release announcing a news
conference to be held on March 19.  The above poster, as have many
others, found the press release, which dramatized a BBS link to
pedophilia and other extreme activity, sufficiently incredible to
doubt its authenticity.  The press release indicated that it was the
product of the Fresno Police Department's PIO. The release generated
passionate discussion on comp.org.eff.talk as a reflection of "the
ignorance of law enforcement." In this case, however, Fresno police
seem to themselves have become victims of their own writer's
sensationalism.

Detective Frank Clark, who held the news conference advertised by the
release, intended only to present a summary of the possible forms of
computer abuse to which children are vulnerable. These ranged across
the gamut of activities, from the most benign to the most extreme.
Detective Clark indicated that the extreme sex offenses to which the
release referred constituted about 3 minutes of a 45 minute
presentation.  The PIO office, as well as the media covering the news
conference, focused on the extreme sex-related incidents and ignored
the rest.  Detective Clark indicated that his purpose was to remind
parents of the importance of familiarizing themselves with their
children's computer activity. He also used the conference to raise the
issue of computer courtesy and ethics, and to identify local resources
(schools, classes, and other forums) available for obtaining further
information about computer use. The release and subsequent coverage
downplayed this.

He did not write the release and was unable to review the final text.
He was quite unhappy with it, and recognizes (and apologized for) the
offense it caused some people. He was quite explicit that, while
opposing the use of computers to prey on others, he nonetheless shares
many of the concerns about protection of civil and Constitutional
rights.

The problem with the Fresno PIO press release, as with similar media
coverage, is the tendency of writers to find the dramatic angle and
ignore the real issues. Perhaps we should all begin to more
aggressively contact publishers and other media personnel to educate
them on the issues when we find such gross distortion.

------------------------------

From: Net Wrider <nwrider@uanonymous.uunet.uu.net>
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 9:00:25 EDT
Subject: "Hacker "Profiles" May Curb Computer Frauds"

             Hacker 'Profiles' May Curb Computer Frauds
       Source:  THE INDEPENDENT March 21, 1992, Saturday (p. 6)
               By SUSAN WATTS, Technology Correspondent

THE Federal Bureau of Investigation is dealing with  computer hackers
as it would rapists and murderers - by building "profiles" of their
actions.

Its  computer  researchers have discovered that, in the same way that
other offenders often favour the same weapons, materials or times of
day to perpetrate their crimes,  hackers  prefer to use trusted
routines to enter  computer systems, and follow familiar paths once
inside. These patterns can prove a rich source of information for
detectives.

The FBI is developing a modified version of detection software from
SRI International - an American technology research organization.
Teresa Lunt, a senior  computer  scientist at SRI, said  hackers would
think twice about breaking into systems if they knew  computer
security specialists were building a profile of them. At the very
least, they would have to constantly change their hacking methods. Ms
Lunt, who is is seeking partners in Britain to help develop a
commercial version of the software, believes  hackers  share with
psychotic criminals a desire to leave their hallmark.

"Every  hacker  goes through a process peculiar to themselves that is
almost a signature to their work," she said. "The FBI has printed out
long lists of the commands  hackers  use when they break in.  Hackers
are surprisingly consistent in the commands and options they use. They
will often go through the same routines. Once they are in they will
have a quick look around the network to see who else is logged on,
then they might try to find a list of passwords."

SRI"s software, the development of which is sponsored by the US
Defense Department, is "intelligent" - it sits on a network of
computers  and watches how it is used. The software employs
statistical analysis to determine what constitutes normal usage of the
network, and sets off a warning if an individual or the network
behaves abnormally.

A more sophisticated version of the program can adapt itself daily to
accommodate deviations in the "normal" behaviour of people on the
network.  It might, for example, keep track of the number of temporary
files created, or how often people collect data from an outside source
or send out information.

The program could even spot quirks in behaviour that companies were
not expecting to find.

The idea is that organizations that rely on sensitive information,
such as banks or government departments, will be able to spot
anomalies via their computers.  They might pick up money being
laundered through accounts, if a small company or individual carries
out an unusually large transaction.

------------------------------

From: David Sobel <dsobel@WASHOFC.CPSR.ORG>
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 15:37:37 EDT
Subject: CPSR FOIAs FBI

                            CPSR FOIAs FBI

In response to the FBI's recent proposal that digital communications
networks be configured so as to more easily facilitate electronic
surveillance, Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (CPSR)
has filed a request under the

Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) seeking:

     copies of all records regarding the Bureau's
     decision to seek new legislative authority for wire
     surveillance in the digital communications network.

And following published reports that the FBI is developing a "hacker
profile," CPSR has also requested:

     copies of all records regarding the Bureau's
     creation of a "profile" of computer "hackers" or
     others who  seek unauthorized access to computer
     systems.  This request  includes, but is not limited
     to, information concerning the FBI's relationship with
     SRI International and its use of SRI software.

We will post the results of these requests ... but it could be a while.

David Sobel
CPSR Legal Counsel
dsobel@washofc.cpsr.org

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 12 Apr 92 14:52:02 CDT
From: <wt.70317@linknet.uunet.uu.net>
Subject: FBI Wants to Tap Phone Firms to Eavesdrop (Reprint)

     "FBI Wants to Tap Phone Firms for New Eavesdropping Devices"
        Source: Chicago Tribune, April 12, 1992 (Sect. 7: 9b)

NEW YORK (Reuters)--The FBI wants the nations telephone companies to
stop rolling out advanced digital phone systems that stymie the
agency's practice of listening in on criminal conversations.

At stake is the future of the wiretap, one of the bureau's most
effective investigative tools, which is getting harder to engineer as
phone systems grow more complex.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation says modern telephone networks,
which rely on digital and fiber-optic systems, are making it difficult
to eavesdrop on phone calls in criminal investigations.

So the bureau has drafted legislation that would require phone
companies to stop deploying digital technology until they can come up
with a way for the bureau to preserve the wiretap.

For regional and long-distance phone companies that have spent
billions of dollars to upgrade systems and galvanize the U.S. lead in
telecommunications, the FBI proposals are late at best and
anti-competitive at worst.

"It is late...this stuff is already out there," said Ken Pitt, a chief
spokesman for Bell Atlantic Corp., one of seven regional telephone
companies, known as the Baby Bells, formed by the breakup of American
Telephone & Telegraph Co.

AT&T and the Baby Bells, as represented by the U.S. Telephone
Association, oppose the draft bill as written.

Researcher Douglas Conn, associate director of Columbia University's
Institute for Tele-Information, said the dispute could threaten the
U.S. position in global communications.

"It is a very, very touch and difficult issue. On the one side is the
very real concern of the FBI. On the other are the telephone companies
and organizations that support using an advanced telecommunications
network to compete internationally," Conn said.

But the FBI is pressing forward.

FBI Director William Sessions recently wrote a column for the New York
Times about the potential threat to the effectiveness of law
enforcement.

"Wiretapping is one of the most effective means of combating drug
trafficking, organized crime, kidnaping and corruption in government,"
Sessions wrote in the column, which was published last month.

"The Federal Bureau of Investigation does not want the new digital
technology that is spreading across America to impair this crucial
law-enforcement technique."

The FBI says it uses telephone wiretaps in just 1 percent of its
investigations and only with a court warrant.  But those cases tend to
be major  ones involving organized crime and drug traffickers.

By law, telephone companies are required to assist the FBI in
court-approved wiretapping.

But company officials say they are baffled that the FBI, long known for
inventing ingenious investigative tools, expects them to develop the
wiretap technology.

The Federal Communications Commission, which regulates
telecommunications, is also worried about the proposed legislation.

"Our most overriding concern is the potential negative impact this
could have on the development of the telecommunications
infrastructure," said James Spurlock, a top FCC official.

"There are real public policy questions here."

FCC Chairman Alfred Sikes wants U.S. phone companies to speed up their
use of digital systems and fiber optics to compete with technologies
surfacing in Japan, France and Germany.

Regional phone companies are on the threshold of deploying digital
equipment in the local service loops that take in residential
customers, the same leg of the service that the FBI uses in
wiretapping.

But with the coming installation of Integrated Services Digital
Network systems into homes and residences, conventional wiretapping
devices may produce little more than an incomprehensible jumble of
sound.

James Kallstrom, chief of the FBI's engineering and technical services
division, says the bureau proposal would mean only one more
requirement among hundreds that phone companies write into their
systems.

"We are looking for them to take in our requirements as they take in
hundreds of other requirements when they design these things," he
said.

"The have hundreds of internal design requirements to account for
billing and routing and new services. This would be another."

Kallstrom also disputed the argument that the FBI's proposals would
impede technological development or impose big costs, saying changes
could be designed into software or manufactured into switches.

Officials from BellSouth Corp., Bell Atlantic, Nynex Corp., among
other Baby Bells, as well as telecommunications companies American
Telephone & Telegraph Co. and GTE Corp., have met with FBI technicians
at an FBI training center to hammer out the problem.

"These meetings are better refining the issue" and easing some of the
adversity, said BellSouth spokesman Bill McCloskey. But the session
resolved little.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 9 Apr 92 21:17:54 PDT
From: jwarren@AUTODESK.COM(Jim Warren)
Subject: POSSIBLE INTEREST: Electr.CivLib - model candidate's statement & ideas

Hi,
    This concerns practical efforts to assure that traditional
constitutional rights and protections remain clearly guaranteed, even in
the context of modern technology -- in the "Information Age" and across
the "Electronic Frontier."

    For this 1992 election-year, the following offers possible models for
do-it-yourself citizen-based political action.  Please "copy, post and
circulate" this 3-part document wherever and to whomever you wish.  Please
feel free to modify Parts 2 and 3 however you wish -- over your own signature.
 After all, freedom always *has* been a
do-it-yourself project.

This introduction is PART-1 of three parts.

PART-2 provides a model cover-letter & facts you might use:
    1.  First, it *briefly* mentions the electronic civil liberties issues.
    2.  Its next part is intended to get the attention of a candidate and/or
their campaign staff by illustrating cheap, effective net communications.
    3.  The next part illustrates that a great number of people (candidate-
translation: "voters") are involved.
    4.  *Very important*: It outlines our ability to communicate with masses
of people/voters -- at little or no cost.
    5. Equally important -- it requests *specific commitment to act* from a
candidate.
    6.  It offers a matching commitment to publicize their position.

PART-3 is a model candidate's statement committing to specific action.
  Note:  All successful politicians have mastered the art of *sounding* like
they are supportive of the hundreds or thousands of causes and pleas that
are urged upon them.  Good-sounding, vaguely-supportive statements are worth
virtually nothing.  Anything less than their issuing a public position
statement committing to explicit action must be considered as meaningless.

    Election season is the one time when we have our best chance at
efficient and effective citizen action.  All it takes is time and effort.
(And, I walk it like I talk it -- I have forwarded customized versions of
the cover-letter and model-statement to several state and federal candidates
-- all of whom are seeking re-election or election to higher office.)
    I would be happy to help others working on these issues, time permitting.

    The more people who send this cover letter and model statement to
candidates -- and phone campaign headquarters and ask questions at
candidates' forums; the more sensitized they will become to this
constituency and these fundamental issues of a free society.
    Speak and write, now; speak and write, often.
    "The price of freedom ..."

--Jim Warren, Electronic Civil Liberties Initiative,
  345 Swett Road, Woodside CA 94062; fax/415-851-2814
  email/ jwarren@well.sf.ca.us
[ For identification purposes only: organizer/chair of First Conference on
Computers, Freedom & Privacy (1991), first-year recipient of Electronic
Frontier Foundation Pioneer Award (1992), MicroTimes contributing editor &
columnist, Autodesk Board of Directors member, founding of InfoWorld,
founding editor of Dr. Dobb's Journal, past chair of ACM, SIGMICRO and
SIGPLAN chapters, etc.,  blah blah blah. ]

=============== PART-2, MODEL COVER-LETTER TO CANDIDATE(S) ================

Dear [candidate],

    A growing percentage of the 12-16 million people who are "online" --
using networked computers -- are expressing increasing concern about
protecting traditional civil liberties and personal privacy in the
"Information Age."  (People are "coming online" at a rate much faster than
the explosive growth of personal computing in the past fifteen years.)
    As they use networked computers for electronic-mail, teleconferencing,
information exchange and personal records, they are reporting increasing
threats to electronic "speech," "press," "assembly" and personal privacy.

Electronic messages can have massive, persuasive impact.
    For instance:  In 1990, a single notice sent out across computer nets
prompted 30,000 complaints about Lotus Corporation's plans to sell personal
data on 20-million consumers.  Lotus quickly withdrew their "Marketplace"
product before sales ever began.
    Or:  In Spring, 1991, a single message sent into the computer nets
prompted thousands of complaints to Senators Biden and DeConcini.  It
concerned legislation they had introduced, reportedly requested by the FBI
via Senator Thurmond, that would have crippled secure voice and data
communications for U.S. citizens and business.  The Senators withdrew the
proposal with three weeks of the net-circulated note.

Who and how many are interested?
    Almost all users are adults.  Most are well-educated.  Most have upscale
incomes.  Most have significant discretion for spending and contributions.
    Recent published research indicates there are about 14.2-million people
sharing 1.3-million "host" computers on the "Internet" network.  This
includes about 960,000 people using 12,000+ home/personal computers as shared
BBSs -- networked electronic "bulletin board systems."  These offer free or
almost-free teleconferencing and electronic-mail.  [Matrix News, Feb., 1992,
1120 S. Capitol-of-Texas Hwy., Bldg. 2-300, Austin, TX 78746.]
    (In addition, there are also the commercial systems such as CompuServe,
Prodigy, GEnie and MCImail -- but they have only several million users and
are costly in comparison to the much larger Internet computer matrix.)

Mass-discussions of freedom and privacy concerns are escalating.
    Almost-instant mass-circulated online "newspapers" and "news-groups,"
plus numerous popular teleconferences, increasingly carry reports of
electronic civil-liberties and privacy concerns.  Credit-data abuses,
covert employer surveillance, corporate espionage, seizure of electronic
publications, searches of entire electronic post offices, and government
opposition to secure communications are greatly escalating these concerns.
  These issues are rapidly penetrating the public press and television.
Example:  The First Conference on Computers, Freedom and Privacy (1991),
prompted well in excess of 80 pages of press, including the New York Times,
Los Angeles Times, Wall Street Journal, Time Magazine, Business Week,
Scientific American, Germany's Der Spiegel, etc..  [For copies, contact
CFP#1 chair, Jim Warren, 345 Swett Road, Woodside CA 94062; 415-851-7075.]

Functionally-free, almost-instantaneous mass communication is available.
    It is trivial for anyone to "broadcast" comments or information across
the nets to thousands of people, almost immediately and for free or perhaps
costing $15-$20/month.  Over a million people read news-groups in USENET,
which is just one of thousands of electronic "newspapers."
    And, system-owners and system-operators -- those often most-deeply
concerned about these civil liberties, privacy and content-liability issues
-- can have every user of their system receive whatever message they choose,
perhaps only once, or perhaps every time each person logs-in.  Without cost.
Various of these "sysops" are agreeing to inform every one of their users --
often numbering in the thousands -- about candidates who commit to act to
protect civil liberties and privacy against new, technology-based threats.

We ask for your commitment.
    A number of people who are well-known across this huge network are
asking candidates to commit to specific action, to make clear that
constitutional protections unquestionably apply across this new "electronic
frontier."  We ask that you issue a formal position statement, committing to
act on these matters.  (We recognize that an informal statement of general
principles is of minimal value without specifics or commitment to action.)
    We ask that you commit to protecting Constitutional freedoms, regardless
of technology.  Enclosed is a "model" that you might use as a starting point.
(It illustrates some of the issues that many people feel are most important.)

Commitment is reciprocal.
    If you commit to act, we will promptly broadcast it far and wide across
this massive, high-speed network.  And, if your opponent(s) who receive this
request, avoid explicit commitment -- by inaction, ambiguous statement or by
specific refusal -- we will publicize that with equal vigor.
    Additionally, some of us are prepared to assist committed candidates to
publicize/discuss all of their positions and issues -- not just these online
issues -- via this free, fast, pervasive mass-medium.
    And finally, candidates who address these issues first can generate
notice in the public press and television -- especially re protecting freedom
of speech, press, assembly and personal privacy.  Numerous reporters have
shown active interest in these issues, to say nothing of 300-400 computer
trade periodicals.  Some of us have lists of lay and trade reporters
interested in these issues and would be happy to assist your p.r. staff
in publicizing your commitment.

    I appreciate your attention to these comments and requests, and look
forward to your timely reply.

<<signature & affiliation, if any>>

=================== PART-3, MODEL CANDIDATE'S STATEMENT ====================

           Guaranteeing Constitutional Freedoms into the 21st Century

Preface
    Harvard Law Professor Laurence H. Tribe, one of the nation's
leading Constitutional scholars, views technological threats to our
traditional constitutional freedoms and protections as so serious that --
for the first time in his career -- he has proposed a Constitutional
Amendment:
    "This Constitution's protections for the freedoms of speech, press,
petition and assembly, and its protections against unreasonable searches and
seizures and the deprivation of life, liberty or property without due
process of law, should be construed as fully applicable without regard to
the technological method or medium through which information content is
generated, stored, altered, transmitted or controlled."
    -- First Conf. on Computers, Freedom & Privacy, 3/27/91, Burlingame CA

    In the absence of such a constitutional clarification, legislation and
regulation are the only alternatives to assure that citizens are protected
from technological threats against their constitutional rights and freedoms.


                    Candidate's Commitment to Action
                           (model statement)

    Preface:  It has been over two centuries since our Constitution and Bill
of Rights were adopted.  The great technological changes in the interim --
especially in computing, telecommunications and electronics -- now pose a
clear and present danger to the rights and protections guaranteed in those
great documents.  Therefore:
    Commitment:  In the first legislative session after I am [re]elected, I
will author or co-author legislation reflecting the following specifics, and
I will actively support and testify in favor of any similar legislation as
may be introduced by others.  Further, I will actively seek to include in
such legislation, explicit personal civil and/or criminal penalties against
any agent, employee or official of the government who violates any of these
statutes.  And finally, I will keep all citizens who express interest in
legislative progress on these matters fully and timely informed.

    The protections guaranteed in the Constitution and its Amendments shall
be fully applicable regardless of the current technology of the time. This
particularly includes, but is not limited to:
    Speech:  Freedom of speech shall be equally protected, whether by voice
or in written form as in the 18th Century, or by electronic transmission or
computer communication as in the 20th Century and thereafter.
    Press:  Freedom of the press shall be equally protected, whether its
information is distributed by print as in the 18th Century, or by networked
computers or other electronic forms, as in the 20th Century and thereafter.
Liability for content:  Just as a printer is not liable for content of
leaflets printed for a customer, so also shall the owner or operator of a
computer or electronic or telecommunications facility be held harmless for
the content of information distributed by users of that facility, except as
the owner or operator may, by contract, control information content.  Those
who author statements and those who have contractual authority to control
content shall be the parties singularly responsible for such content.
    Assembly:  Freedom of assembly shall be equally protected, whether by
face-to-face meeting as in the 18th Century, or by computer-based electronic-
conference or other teleconference as in the 20th Century and thereafter.
The right to hold confidential meetings shall be equally protected, whether
they be by personal meeting in private chambers, or by computer-assisted or
electronic-based means.
    Self-defense:  The right of the people to keep and use computers and
communications connections shall not be abridged by the government.
    Search & seizure:  The right of the people to be secure in their papers
and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall be fully
applicable to their electronic mail, computerized information and personal
computer systems.
Warrants:  No warrants for search or seizure shall issue for computerized
information, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and
particularly describing the computer system to be searched and the specific
information to be seized.
Secure information vaults:  Just as search and seizure of letters in a post-
office, and papers in a bank-vault lock-box, and surveillance of telephone
conversations by wire-tap, each require a separate warrant for each postal
address, lock-box and telephone line, so also shall a separate warrant be
required for each electronic-mail address and/or computer files of each
suspect, when stored in a computer facility or archive shared by others.
And further, computer files stored in a shared facility or archive by or for
a citizen who is neither named in a warrant nor associated with a suspect
so-named, may not be used against that un-named citizen, if seized or
discovered during legal search of or for files of a suspect.
    Self-incrimination:  No person shall be compelled in any civil or
criminal case to be a witness against himself or herself, nor be compelled
to provide information retained only in their mind, nor otherwise be
compelled to assist the translation or decoding of information that he or
she believes may be self-incriminating.
    Property: Private property shall not be taken for public use without
just compensation, nor shall such property be used nor sold by any
government agency for less than fair market value, in which case all such
proceeds shall promptly derive singularly to its last owner prior to
government seizure.
    Speedy release:  Anyone not accused of a crime shall enjoy the right to
a speedy release and return of all of their property, as may be seized
under any warrant, particularly including their computerized information.
The government shall be fully liable for any damage befalling property or
information they have seized.


[signed] _____________________________________    [date] _________________
        _________________________ [please print or type]
        _________________________ title / current office / office sought
        _________________________ address
        _________________________
        _________________________
        _________________________ campaign-office voice-phone number
        _________________________ campaign-office fax number
        _________________________ campaign-office electronic-mail address

[ Additional copies of this model candidate's position commitment are
available from:
  Jim Warren, Electronic Civil Liberties Initiative,
  345 Swett Road, Woodside CA 94062; (415)851-7075, fax/(415)851-2814;
  electronic-mail/ jwarren@autodesk.com -or- jwarren@well.sf.ca.us . 4/4/92
For identification purposes, only:  Warren was the Chair of the First
Conference on Computers, Freedom & Privacy held in March, 1991, a recipient
in 1992 of one of the Electronic Frontier Foundation's first Pioneer Awards,
is a Contributing Editor and "futures" columnist for MicroTimes, a member of
the Board of Directors of Autodesk (one of the nation's half-dozen largest
software companies), founded several trade periodicals, and is a writer
and entrepreneur, well-known across the computer industry. ]

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 12 Apr 92 12:12:32 CDT
From: Moderators <tk0jut1@mvs.cso.niu.edu>
Subject: JIM WARREN nominated to the Consumers Union Board of Dirs

The Consumer Union has recently nominated JIM WARREN as a candidate
for election to their Board of Directors. Jim is one of 13 candidates
for six seats on the Board.  Candidates are elected by CONSUMER
REPORTS subscribers, who are receiving their ballots this month.

CuD readers who subscribe to CONSUMER REPORTS should be especially
interested in Jim's nomination and consider him as one of their six
choices for several reasons:

For years, Jim has been a leader in fighting for inexpensive access to
computer technology and on-line services. He has also been a primary
figure in addressing broader consumer issues, such as consumer rights,
credit reporting, and consumer tracking.

Jim is a recipient of the Electronic Frontier Foundation's PIONEER
award for his sustained contributions to the computer community. In
summarizing Jim's accomplishments, Mitch Kapor wrote:

     Jim Warren has been active in electronic networking for many
     years.  Most recently he has organized the First Computers,
     Freedom and Privacy Conference, set-p the first online
     public dialogue link with the California legislature, and
     has been instrumental is assuring that rights common to
     older mediums and technologies are extended to computer
     networking.

Jim's knowledge of and commitment to the issues of consumer rights
would make him a valuable addition to the CU Board.  If you subscribe
to Consumer Reports (or know anybody who does), think about asking
them to vote for JIM WARREN as a way of expanding cyberspace
representation where it can have an impact.

------------------------------

Date: 03 Feb 92 17:33:41 EST
From: The Mad Poet <71110.4334@COMPUSERVE.COM>
Subject: MONDO 2000 poem

       DOES SHE DO THE VULCAN MIND MELD ON THE FIRST DATE?
                         By Nick Herbert
          From MONDO 2000, the magazine for cyberspace

                I want your bra size, baby,
                Fax number, E-mail address,
                Modem com code, ID,
                Phone machine access.

                Give me your thumb print, password,
                Blood type and credit check;
                Give me your antibody spectrum,
                Your immune response spec.

                Let's break bread together, baby,
                Exchange cryptographic primes;
                Let's link up our parallel ports;
                And go on-line in real-time.

                Let's indulge in covalent bondage;
                Let's communicate in C.
                Let's merge our energy bodies
                And bob in the quantum sea.

                I wanna swim in your gene pool, mama;
                Snort your pheromones up close range;
                Tune in your neurotransmitters,
                Introduce you to Doctor Strange.

                I wanna surf in your quantum potentia;
                Mess with your thermostat;
                Wanna tour your molecular orbits;
                Wanna feed your Schrodinger cat.

                Let's surgically merge our organs;
                Our kidneys, our lungs and our hearts;
                Let's read physics journals together
                And laugh at the dirty parts.

                Let's Bell-connect our bellies
                With some quantum-adhesive glue;
                Let's do new stuff to each other
                That Newton never knew.

                I wanna feel your viscosity, honey,
                Melt my rheological mind;
                Let your female force-field vortex
                Deform my male spacetime.

------------------------------

End of Computer Underground Digest #4.17
************************************

