Computer underground Digest Sun Nov 10, 1996 Volume 8 : Issue 79 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 Field Agent Extraordinaire: David Smith Shadow-Archivists: Dan Carosone / Paul Southworth Ralph Sims / Jyrki Kuoppala Ian Dickinson Cu Digest Homepage: http://www.soci.niu.edu/~cudigest CONTENTS, #8.79 (Sun, Nov 10, 1996) File 1--The Emperor's New Suit, from Balt City Paper, by Joab Jackson File 2--Taking Technology To The Street File 3--ACLU Files Supreme Court Motion Over CDA File 4--Free Speech. Literally. File 5--Another Point of view (in re: FLAMETHROWER Declan McCullagh) File 6--USENIX Annual Conference & USELINUX, January 6-10, 1997 (fwd) File 7--Blocking Web Censorship File 8--Press Release: second MIDS legal article File 9--Cu Digest Header Info (unchanged since 7 Nov, 1996) CuD ADMINISTRATIVE, EDITORIAL, AND SUBSCRIPTION INFORMATION ApPEARS IN THE CONCLUDING FILE AT THE END OF EACH ISSUE. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 1 Nov 1996 01:13:03 -0500 (EST) From: Declan McCullagh Subject: 1--The Emperor's New Suit, from Balt City Paper, by Joab Jackson >From -- fight-censorship@vorlon.mit.edu ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date--Tue, 29 Oct 1996 20:15:31 -0500 From--Joab Jackson The Emperor's New Suit ------------------------------------------------------------------------ The Strange World of Tapu would make a grown crypto-anarchist, unabombin', cellular-phone crackin', antisocial cyberpunk weep in awe. This Web page is truly an achievement. It's the one-stop directory for all manner of shady business. I wish I could provide the address to the spot, but I can't. Not because it would be illegal. There's nothing even vaguely illegal on Tapu's site; it consists almost entirely of links to other Web sites. Yet if we printed that URL, City Paper and yours truly might find themselves on the receiving end of a lawsuit from the Software Publishers Association, the trade organization for the desktop business-software industry. Last week I wrote about the SPA's initiative aimed at cracking down on Internet piracy (Cyberpunk, 10/23). What is interesting about this approach is that the association is not going after those who post illegal copies of software, but rather those whose Web pages contain pointers to "warez" sites. Whether those pointers infringe on copyright laws is questionable. One of the SPA campaign's first targets was the Strange World page, which included such links. Tapu informed me by E-mail that on September 26 she received a call from Jeff McGough, president of Intergate, Tapu's Internet service provider (Tapu prefers not to give out her last name or where she lives). McGough said he was destroying all of Tapu's Web pages, even those unconnected to the Strange World page, at the behest of the SPA, which threatened a lawsuit if he didn't take action within 24 hours. "It was ludicrous," McGough says. "But neither I nor Tapu had the money to tell them to take a flying leap." "I was shocked," Tapu writes. "It was pretty confusing, because my page was pretty content-free, nothing but links.." (Ironically, once word got around that Tapu's page was removed, it mysteriously popped up in 23 other locations-in at least eight different countries-courtesy of on-line sympathizers. At least a few of these copies can be found pretty easily through a Yahoo search.) At first glance the SPA's actions may seem a bit tangential, like the FBI prosecuting the publishers of the telephone book which held the Ryder ad that Timothy McVeigh allegedly referred to when shopping for a truck to drive to Oklahoma in. Naturally this case has the civil libertarians up in arms. They see SPA's action as a serious threat to free speech. Robert Costner of Electronic Frontiers Georgia, an advocacy group for on-line civil liberties, notes that the decision to remove material "was made not on the merits of the case, but on the threat of civil action. . . . This is the most chilling aspect of the SPA's actions." However, Joshua Bauchner, SPA litigation coordinator, argues that using the right to free speech to defend the existence of warez sites is simply irrelevant. "Copyright infringement is not protected by the First Amendment, just like the First Amendment does not give anyone the right to sell drugs," he tells me. This is a valid point. But here is the SPA's dirty little secret: There is no law forbidding the direct promotion of piracy. You can search the U.S. Code 17, chapter one-the section covering copyright law-but you won't find a trace of it. (The code can be found on the Web site of Cornell University's Legal Information Institute) Even the U.S. Supreme Court has noted, "The Copyright Act does not expressly render anyone liable for infringement committed by another" (Sony Corporation v. Universal City Studios, 464 U.S. 436). Which is not to say someone can't possibly lose their shirt over it. In the legal world, Bauchner says, there is a fairly well-known concept called "contributory infringement," and it's what SPA is basing its suit on. Contributory infringement, as defined by William Patry in the well-regarded Copyright Law and Practice, occurs when "the defendant induces, causes, or materially contributes to a third party's infringing activity." The SPA is arguing that the creation of sites that have pointers to sites with "warez," "hacker," or "cracker" information is promoting or "materially contributing" to infringement. SPA is leaning heavily on Patry's definition, which was formed entirely in connection with cases dealing with older media forms, such as Supreme Court opinions on the legality of taping television shows at home and of record stores allowing in-house taping of music. Bauchner also sites a case in which a department-store chain was successfully sued for allowing an independent vendor to sell bootleg records in its stores. As much as Bauchner feels the SPA has a pretty strong case based on these precedents, he admits there hasn't been a defining case on the matter as it applies to cyberspace. How applicable the concept of contributory infringement is to the Web depends largely on how well it is accepted in the legal community in the next few years. So heads up. As for Tapu, she remains unable to put up her home page. "I guess I didn't realize that anybody can just threaten people with a frivolous lawsuit," Tapu writes. "If the victim doesn't have any money, they pretty much have to do whatever the perpetrator wants." ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 01:37:47 -0700 (PDT) From: Audrie Krause Subject: 2--Taking Technology To The Street NetAction Notes ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Published by NetAction Issue No. 5 October 10, 1996 Repost where appropriate. See copyright information at end of message. * * * * * * * Taking Technology To The Street Last week NetAction sponsored a week-long experiment in making Internet technology more accessible. With the help of many volunteers, we literally took the Internet to the street. The unique event brought together people with technical expertise and non-profit groups focused on creating access to technology, teaching computer skills and/or advocating on technology policy. This all-volunteer effort would be easy for Internet activists to duplicate in other communities where there is interest in promoting more widespread access to technology and/or building coalitions around technology policy. For six days, volunteers staffed a storefront kiosk in San Francisco's Civic Center area that offered residents and visitors free demonstrations of the Internet and the opportunity for a hands-on lesson in accessing the World Wide Web, E-mail and news groups. By week's end, about 100 people had visited the kiosk, which was staffed from 10 a.m. to 8 p.m. daily by a total of 26 volunteers. In addition to NetAction, 17 organizations and businesses participated as co-sponsors. While some visitors were already online and came with very specific questions, others had never operated a computer. Many visitors stayed for an hour or more, and had a real hands-on lesson in accessing the Internet. Many of the volunteers offered to help again if NetAction organizes another demo, which I certainly hope to do. The experience has me convinced that public demonstrations in locations with significant pedestrian traffic are a viable means of promoting access to information technology. The event also helped promote effective citizen action by linking people who have technical skills with organizations in the community that provide information technology access, training, and/or policy advocacy. Publicity about the Internet demo helped raise public awareness of the many organizations and businesses that participated, and the event provided a positive and meaningful volunteer experience for those who participated. Internet technology was put to use in organizing the event. A majority of the volunteers who staffed the demo were recruited by announcements sent to E-mail lists and posted on web sites. The event was publicized on the web as well as through more traditional media. Activists interested in organizing similar events in other communities are welcome to contact me for further advice at: akrause@igc.org. The Internet demo served serveral purposes: - People who were already are online were able to get answers to specific technical questions. - People who have computers but are not online were introduced to the web, E-mail, and news groups, and provided with referrals to organizations and businesses that could help with training, and with identifying and contacting Internet service providers. - People who had not previously used computers had a chance to see what the technology offered and learn about resources in the community that could help them get started. - People with technical expertise had opportunities to share their knowledge with others. - Community organizations working to promote technology access and/or advocate on technology policy received positive exposure. - Community groups seeking to incorporate technology into their work turned to NetAction for assistance. One volunteer with technical expertise was connected to a grassroots group seeking assistance in developing a web site, and a local business contacted NetAction about donating several used computers to a community technology center. The non-profit co-sponsors included: Berkeley Mac Users Group (http://www.bmug.org) California Voter Foundation (http://www.calvoter.org) Computers & You (http://www.glide.org) Digital Queers (http://www.planetout.com) Electronic Frontier Foundation (http://www.eff.org) Impact Online (http://www.impactonline.org) Institute for Global Communication (http://www.igc.org) Media Alliance (web site under development). Co-sponsoring businesses included: A Clean Well Lighted Place for Books (http://www.bookstore.com) America Online (http://www.aol.com) HotWired (http://www.hotwired.com) ManyMedia (http://www.manymedia.com) Pacific Bell (http://www.pacbell.com) Rosebowl Florist (http://www.rosebowlflorist.com) Upside Magazine (http://www.upside.com) Yahoo (http://www.yahoo.com) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 04 Nov 1996 09:01:54 EST From: "J. Richard Wilson Subject: 3--ACLU Files Supreme Court Motion Over CDA WASHINGTON -- In an October 31 press release, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) announced that it had filed a motion with the U.S. Supreme Court to affirm a lower court's decision that declared the Communications Decency Act (CDA) unconstitutional government censorship of the Internet. The ACLU's motion, which was in response to the Government's appeal of the District Court's June ruling, requests that the Supreme Court issue a "summary affirmation", which would mean that the Court upholds the lower court's decision without any further inquiry. Although such a decision by the Court is rare in instances where federal statutes are in question, the ACLU argues that the lower court's findings were not only extensive and undisputed by the Government, but that the Government has not raised "any legitimate argument against summary affirmance." A second brief was filed the same day by the American Library Association (ALA) on behalf of the nearly 30 organizations and more than 50,000 individual Internet users it is representing. The brief acknowledges that summary affirmance would be appropriate, but also notes that it would not oppose a review of the case by the Court. The ACLU also stated that it is fully prepared for such a hearing. After the court's decision, the Government had 30 days to file a Notice of Appeal with the District Court. Following that, the Goverment then had 60 days to file its appeal, called a Jurisdictional Statement, with the Supreme Court. At the end of that period, the Government requested and was granted a 30 day extension. Interestingly enough, the Goverment does not contest the findings of the lower court or the constitutionality of its decision, nor does it request a "summary reversal", which would mean the Supreme Court reverses the lower court's ruling without further examination. Instead, the Government offers an entirely new argument not previously presented to the District Court: that the CDA only applies to individuals who "knowingly" transmit "indecent" material to minors. The Goverment's new interpretation of the CDA is inconsistent with previous arguments in which it had suggested that the use of site-rating software and age-verification could protect legitimate speakers from prosecution. The question raised is: if the CDA only applies to individuals who knowingly break the law, then why is there a need to protect "legitimate speakers"? As it was written, the Communications Decency Act makes it unlawful for individuals to transmit or make available material that is "indecent" or "patently offensive" on computer networks, most notably the Internet, if that material can be viewed by a minor. Punishment for violation of the CDA can result in up to two years in jail and/or fines up to $250,000. "The stakes in this case are undeniably high," said Christopher Hansen, the ACLU lawyer who argued the case before the three-judge court in Philadelphia. "Whatever the Supreme Court decides will determine the government's ability to regulate a technology that will undoubtedly serve as the basis for global communication into the 21st century." The ACLU's brief can be found at http://www.aclu.org/court/renoaffirm.html. -- J. Richard Wilson (an030@detroit.freenet.org) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 18:14:22 -0700 (PDT) From: HotWired Announcements Subject: 4--Free Speech. Literally. Do you like to chat online? Do you prefer the easy-to-use interfaces of chat systems like AOL to the hassles of IRC, but hate paying by the minute? Come to Talk.com, a new, totally free Web chat space, open 24 hours a day for HotWired members only, at http://www.talk.com/ Create your own rooms and nicknames. Hang out for as long as you like without having to keep an eye on the clock. Meet friends and pick up new ideas in live chat events with guests like Brian Eno, Ann Beeson, Nicholas Negroponte, Laurie Anderson, or Senator Patrick Leahy. And unlike AOL and other chaperoned pay-as-you-play systems, Talk.com is free of meddlesome "guides." But the best thing about Talk.com is you - HotWired members worldwide, half a million strong. Where else are you going to find a cooler group of people to schmooze with? (Talk.com's interface works on Java-capable browsers across all platforms. Members with 14.4 Kbps connections may experience 3-to-4 minute loading times when they first visit. Talk.com can also be accessed through Marimba's Castanet tuner at http://trans.talk.com/) See you online! About this message: You're receiving this information because you've registered as a member of the HotWired Network. Periodically we send mail to our members to announce new sites and services we are offering. If you'd like to be removed from this mailing list, simply reply to this message with the words "unsubscribe hotwired announce" in the body of the message. Our Support Services Department will take your email address off the list and send a confirmation back to you. Sincerely, Marsha Hunter http://www.talk.com Membership Services ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 11:23:01 -0600 From: Jim Taylor Subject: 5--Another Point of view (in re: FLAMETHROWER Declan McCullagh) Jim Taylor (jtaylor@tcd.net) Another Point of view on the message from "FLAMETHROWER Declan McCullagh (declan@well.com)" >Private businesses pose the more sinister threat to >free expression on-line. >Take America On-line (AOL), which now boasts over six million members. >In a move akin to the paranoid antics of a kindergarten schoolmarm, >AOL this summer started deleting messages posted in Spanish and >Portuguese since its monitors can't understand them. Undercover AOL >cops continue to yank accounts of mothers who talk about breast >feeding and mention the word "nipple." The company's gapingly broad >"terms of service" agreement allows it to boot anyone, anytime, for >any reason. To me I would interpret this as quit AOL, Compuserve, or any on-line service that censors its customers. Join up with any of the thousands of Internet Service Providers (ISP) that don't censor, but just give you a standard SLIP or PPP type account. >Don't forget net-filtering software. While busily touting itself as >anti-censorship, CyberSitter quietly blocks the National Organization >of Women and Queer Resources Directory web sites. CyberPatrol prevents >teen pornhounds from investigating animal and gun rights pages -- and, >inexplicably, the Electronic Frontier Foundation's censorship archive. >NetNanny cuts off AIDS resources including the sci.med.aids and >clari.tw.health.aids newsgroups. SurfWatch bans domestic partner web >pages and Columbia University's award-winning "Health Education and >Wellness" site. Yes, this is correct, for those that are controlled under net-filtering software. The majority of people affected are children and employees at some company. Since all of the above software come with a setable password, parents can set up what sites they want their children to see. It is not static, and can be setup with different degrees of restriction. Most companies don't provide net access for employees to "surf", but to gather pertinent information. It is the companies, or parents right to control access to information. As for employees, they can AND SHOULD get their own Internet accounts at home so they can see what is in cyberspace, on their own time, and in a non censored way. If we as netizens don't provide a way to control access to children, the government will do it for us, or at least try real hard, as they did with the Communications Decency Act (CDA). >If [censorship] happens, netizens will find their rosy vision of the Net as >the birthplace of a new form of democracy overwhelmed by the sad >reality of a new media oligarchy aborning. Yes I entirely agree, The net as a whole should be censor free, but filters should be in place to protect, those that need it, ie children. The same way I support Alcohol should be able to be purchased by an Adult, but we put restrictions on children from purchasing Alcohol, like it should be. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 12:12:03 -0300 From: Jeffrey Hinchey To: "'cudigest@sun.soci.niu.edu'" Dear Sirs, In Cu Digest #8.73, you included a note from Slim Simpson, warning of a potential scam of some sort by a company by a Fastfoto of Pomano Beach, Florida. In the header the author suggested that he was unsure of whether it was appropriate for the CU-Digest or not, and personally I think it was not. Obviously Mr. or Ms. Simpson, was frustrated at the inability to lash out at the person who had spammed their mailbox. Lately, with more an more newcomers to the net, I have noticed that one thing they seem to find out quickly is their supposed right to be spamless, and their little private electronic domain, called their mailbox. Many of these same people invite advertising material like flyers, magazines, coupons, to their household door or mailbox on a daily basis, but never confront these advertisers. Advertising material created by the decimation of forests, pollution of the environment by the processing of such, and ending up as filler for our garbage dumps. Amazingly only 4% of the recipients will ever be interested in the message that these advertising materials contain. Yet this person will strike out from their armchair, in their little form of civil protest against an action they do not agree with, in relative obscurity. Mean while they sit passively while shots are fired outside their home, children are being abused, homeless people starve, and guard the sanctity of their mailbox. The bottom line is they could have just deleted the note, went on their merry way and ignored the invasion of privacy. Instead they chose to track this down, and highlight it in some sort of shroud of scam and sent it in to CU-Digest, after their inability to express their displeasure to the offending party. Personally I would accept my mailbox having a few useless nuisance messages, from recyclable electrons if it meant stopping the destructive process of our current advertising means. Maybe it was not a spam. Maybe they just left their email address off to protect themselves from individuals who want to stop this method of advertising Maybe they thought they might end up scanning material of a questionable nature, considering the way certain individuals are communicating with other individuals today. Maybe they should have added the word Adult, then their obscurity would make more sense There were people who did not like the introduction of the printing press at one time either, and of course they are no longer living. I just think that this message was NOT appropriate for the CU-Digest, but hopefully will spark debate. The thousands of people who regularly send a message to someone who has spammed them, just has to lighten up, and learn how to use some filtering software. Then maybe everyone can communicate without destroying our environment. This is just my opinion, on recyclable material I might add, :)). Jeffrey Hinchey ------------------------------ From: Noah Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 23:45:11 -0600 (CST) Subject: 6--USENIX Annual Conference & USELINUX, January 6-10, 1997 (fwd) >From -Noah ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date--Thu, 31 Oct 1996 12:05:54 -0500 (EST) From--The Professor January 6-10, 1997 USENIX 1997 TECHNICAL CONFERENCE Anaheim, California, Marriott Hotel USELINUX Linux Applications Development & Deployment Conference Co-located with USENIX 1997 Technical Conference Co-sponsored by Linux International Attendees may pay one fee and attend both conferences. There are 20 day-long tutorials offered on January 6-7. Topics include: IPv6 Kerberos Approach to Network Security Secure Java Programming Introduction to Java Windows NT and Windows 95 UNIX Network Programming How Networks Work Topics in System Administration Web Security System and Network Performance Tuning Inside the Linux 2.0 Kernel Java Applets and the AWT UNIX Security Tools CGI and WWW Programming in Perl Administering a Web Server Device Drivers under Linux Solaris System Administration Beginning Perl Programming Writing Secure Code Creating Effective User Interfaces Java, the Web, Intranets, Security, Windows NT are among the topics of the Technical Program which takes place January 8-10. It begins with a keynote address by James Gosling, a creator of Java. 23 refereed papers present up-to-the-minute research. A second track of invited talks cover cryptography, Inktomi and AltaVista Search Engines, IPv6, benchmarks, and a new networked operating system from Bell Labs that offers unprecedented portability for applications and services. Linux Torvalds speaking on the future of Linux, is one of the highlights at the Linux Applications Development and Deployment Conference. USELINUX will offer tutorials and technical presentations for developers. Concurrently, those interested in the Linux marketplace may attend case studies and expert presentations on how to create a Linux-based business. An Exhibition on January 8-9 offers presentations of the latest hardware, software, and networking products from 55 vendors. ADMISSION TO THE EXHIBITION IS FREE. If you cannot make it to the conference but would like to visit the exhibition, please contact Cynthia Deno at 408 335 9445 or cynthia@usenix.org. For more program and registration information: Access our Resource Center on the World Wide Web--http://www.usenix.org Email to: info@usenix.org. In the body of your message state "send usenix97 conference" ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 19:40:38 -0800 From: "Glen L. Roberts" Subject: 7--Blocking Web Censorship I have two items to block web censorship: 1) Web pages via email. Send a url (in body, not subject) to: web@glr.com. It returns the web page via email. Blank email for more info. Password protected pages can be accesses, as well as raw html or text can be returned. This was written up in cnet news and the Atlanta Jouranl & Constitution. The ACLU finds it a mixed blessing... 2) I have setup a web page with programs / instructions for defeating the client based blocking programs, Net Nanny, Cyber Patrol, etc. http://pages.ripco.com:8080/~glr/nurse.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 08:05:58 -0500 (CDT) From: pr@mids.org Subject: 8--Press Release: second MIDS legal article _MIDS publishes second legal article, examining InterNIC domain dispute policy in detail. For Immediate Release _Matrix Information and Directory Services (MIDS) publishes second in a series of legal articles._ 11 October 1996, Austin, Texas The TLD Problem Your domain, if it is under COM, ORG, or NET, can be taken away if anyone anywhere in the world claims a trademark on it. Top level domains (TLDs) are basic technical features of the Domain Name System (DNS), and they have recently become focusses of lots of money and big controversy . The New Legal Article To help clarify this TLD problem, MIDS has just published the second article in its series of legal articles . John S. Quarterman, President of MIDS, says, ``MIDS is frequently asked about the TLD problem, so we sought qualified legal counsel to produce opinions on aspects of it. We found Mikki Barry, who, with her Georgetown Law degree, experience as counsel for an Internet software company, and writing ability, has just the right qualifications for the task.'' This second article is entitled: ``A detailed analysis on the InterNIC's dispute policy.'' It covers legal aspects of the InterNIC's domain registration policy in detail, with analysis. It is available for $250 from MIDS. The introductory article is still available for free, but this second article and the rest of the articles in the series are $250 each. Quarterman remarks, ``We like to give things to the Internet community, so we released the first article for free. However, we think the second one is very economically priced at $250.'' Outline o What is at Stake? o The Domain Name Dispute Policies o Why is This Domain Dispute Policy a Bad Thing? o Use of "May" Instead of "Will" o Lack of Procedure o NSI Is Not the Arbiter of Disputes o Notice of Policy Changes o Indemnification o Trademarks and Domain Names o The InterNIC and Trademarks o International Issues o Who Wins? o What Does "On Hold" Mean? o How Do You Prevent Your Name From Going "On Hold?" o So, What is Your Best Defense? About the Author Mikki Barry is an attorney with Internet Policy Consultants. She is a co-founder and former Vice President and Chief Counsel of InterCon Systems Corporation. Barry graduated from Georgetown University Law Center where she was Editor in Chief of the *Journal of Law and Technology*. Research thanks go to Lorelle Anderson of Georgetown University Law Center. Other MIDS Publications In addition to this new series, Matrix Information and Directory Services (MIDS) publishes *Matrix News*, *Matrix Maps Quarterly* and the *MIDS Internet Weather Report*. MIDS president John Quarterman is the author or co-author of six books, including *The Matrix* (1990), and has been featured in many periodicals, including *Newsweek*, *Internet World*, *MicroTimes*, *The Boston Globe*, *Internet Australia*, *The Economist*, *Boardwatch*, *The San Jose Mercury News*, *Communications of the Association for Computing Machinery*, and *The New York Times*. Press contact: Kristi Rudy 512-451-7602 fax: 512-452-0127 MIDS ------------------------------ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 22:51:01 CST From: CuD Moderators Subject: 9--Cu Digest Header Info (unchanged since 7 Nov, 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. EUROPE: In BELGIUM: Virtual Access BBS: +32-69-844-019 (ringdown) 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 #8.79 ************************************