Computer underground Digest Sun Oct 11, 1998 Volume 10 : Issue 50 ISSN 1004-042X Editor: Jim Thomas (cudigest@sun.soci.niu.edu) News Editor: Gordon Meyer (gmeyer@sun.soci.niu.edu) Archivist: Brendan Kehoe Shadow Master: Stanton McCandlish Shadow-Archivists: Dan Carosone / Paul Southworth Ralph Sims / Jyrki Kuoppala Ian Dickinson Field Agent Extraordinaire: David Smith Cu Digest Homepage: http://www.soci.niu.edu/~cudigest CONTENTS, #10.50 (Sun, Oct 11, 1998) File 1--CuD Publication Delay Explained File 2--error message haiku File 3--Islands in the Clickstream. Getting Real. September 19, 1998 File 4--(fwd) ALAWON, #7/105 - ALA ARGUES AGAINST FED FILTERS File 5--SLAC Bulletin, September 20, 1998 File 6--Comment on House Resolution 525 File 7--Pentagon cuts back its Internet data File 8--CA anti-spam Bill File 9--Defamation Suit against pro-union site File 10--Cu Digest Header Info (unchanged since 25 Apr, 1998) CuD ADMINISTRATIVE, EDITORIAL, AND SUBSCRIPTION INFORMATION ApPEARS IN THE CONCLUDING FILE AT THE END OF EACH ISSUE. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 12:28:44 -0500 (CDT) From: Computer underground Digest Subject: File 1--CuD Publication Delay Explained Many of you have asked about CuD's quiescence over the past four weeks. All is well. Time crunches, a few pressing deadlines, and a heavy teaching schedule ate up a month. There are quite a few posts in the chute, and we'll try to run them all. So, a few of the "Date:" lines will be a bit old. We hope to be back on schedule within a week or two. jt ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1998 17:03:39 -0700 (PDT) From: Phil Agre Subject: File 2--error message haiku ((MODERATORS' NOTE: Last issue, we printed some computer Haiku that we rec'd from an unknown poster. Thanks to Phil Agre for pointing us to the original source)). The origin of the error message haiku is: http://www.salonmagazine.com/21st/chal/1998/02/10chal2.html You might want to acknowledge them. Phil Agre ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 21 Sep 1998 15:32:30 -0500 From: Richard Thieme Subject: File 3--Islands in the Clickstream. Getting Real. September 19, 1998 Islands in the Clickstream: Getting Real The themes of the digital world often involve fantasy and reality, illusions and truths, game-playing and "getting real." In cyberspace, we traffic in abstractions, digital images and symbols that represent printed text - these words, for example - which represent writing which represents speech which represents thoughts and affective states. These images become as fixed in our memory as photographs once were "fixed" in a chemical solution. We mistake our representations for the "real thing," the truth of our own experience, which devolves into an elusive, mythical being like a unicorn or the firebird. Recent studies suggest that many complex organisms - not just human beings - represent the world to themselves. This is easier to visualize when we think of monkeys, for example, always using one sound to mean "danger in the sky" and another to mean "danger on the ground." Our nervous systems seem to have evolved so we can present to ourselves those representations of streaming photonic data that we call "experience." But when we live in a world that is more manufactured than remembered, a world that simulates simulations like computers making recursive calls, it becomes increasingly difficult to know whether we have really experienced something - or not. And yet at the highest level of our experience, we do know when we are being real. I am often a guest on a local radio program hosted by Jean Feraca, an interviewer so accomplished after a dozen years of doing it ten hours a week for Wisconsin Public Radio that her crafty artfulness has dissolved into her technique. She creates a context effortlessly that invites her guests to be forthcoming, anticipating the directions of their thinking intuitively so she can lead them to the next paragraph. Today we spoke about the "outing" of humanity by the digital world, the difficulty of engaging in civil discourse when we all know whatever there is to know about everybody else. The presupposition of the conversation was, of course, the President's recent humbling. Now, separate from the details of the situation, some people hate our American President the way others hated Roosevelt or Nixon, with a lacerating visceral rage. One caller railed at his improprieties and demanded punishment. "Don't you think," he said, "there should be consequences for this kind of behavior?" It seems to be the nature of cause-and-effect in the moral domain that there ARE consequences whether I think there ought to be or not, of which the President's prolonged ordeal is one obvious example. Bill Clinton is reaping a whirlwind and his life is soaked with the anxious perspiration of public humiliation. But the caller wanted more. He wanted blood. Now, I was immersed for years in people's lives at a deep, intimate level as a parish priest, and I learned that we judge and vilify most the things we have done or think of doing. We "whip the whore," as Shakespeare said, while lusting for her body. And when we do, our self-righteous anger has a tone of voice that is unmistakable. When we stop attacking, however, and tell the truth about ourselves instead, the tone of voice changes. It becomes softer more self-effacin= g, more real. All I could ask was, what in the world had the caller done? what real or imagined guilt fueled his pitiless fury? I didn't expect a confession on the air. But there might have been a pause. There might have been that blessed hesitation that discloses that we have become conscious of our own history in a way that tempers our vindictiveness. When that happens, our voices downshift, and we speak from a deeper awareness that the truth includes the rest of us as well as the one we assailed. And when we do, it does. Others are welcomed back into humanity instead of demolished. Civil discourse can't happen without that level of self-knowledge. It's as true of public debate as a disagreement in a marriage. Political discourse does not need to emulate a twelve step meeting in order for the conversation to get real. The details do not need to be part of the dialogue, just the deeper self-knowledge that includes others in the conversation as well as ourselves. Digital symbols, like all abstractions of our experience, are neutral. They simply reflect and refract the truth of our lives. We human beings radiate information all the time. We can't help it. A good observer can spend ten minutes with someone and discern the essential truth of their lives. A few words and gestures does it all. The truth of our lives begins at the core of our experience and being, and however we obscure or disguise that core, it wants to be known. It wants to declare itself to the world, and when it does, the barriers created by our prideful posturing vanish. Whether speech or writing or digital typing, all the levels of abstraction collapse into a single point as if we had jerked the drawstring of a purse. By "getting real," we mean that we speak with humility because we speak first from the truth of ourselves. When we know who we are, we can see clearly who others are. Then we can speak of accountability and compassion in the same tone of voice. The digital world is transparent. Every key I hit declares who I am. The digital world is a Big Toy made up of video and audio and morphing animations which all collapse into light and color when we speak from the heart. The media with which we try to hide ourselves become a magnifying glass for all that we are. "Truth" is a dangerous word. It all depends who says it and how. The real truth is what it always was. And the truth can be said or sung by any voice, any time, any where. In that moment, we break into an invisible communion, and our digital words becomes law in the world because they're congruent with the deeper truth and our larger life. ********************************************************************** Islands in the Clickstream is a weekly column written by Richard Thieme exploring social and cultural dimensions of computer technology. Comments are welcome. Feel free to pass along columns for personal use, retaining this signature file. If interested in (1) publishing columns online or in print, (2) giving a free subscription as a gift, or (3) distributing Islands to employees or over a network, email for details. To subscribe to Islands in the Clickstream, send email to rthieme@thiemeworks.com with the words "subscribe islands" in the body of the message. To unsubscribe, email with "unsubscribe islands" in the body of the message. Richard Thieme is a professional speaker, consultant, and writer focused on the impact of computer technology on individuals and organizations. Islands in the Clickstream (c) Richard Thieme, 1998. All rights reserved. ThiemeWorks on the Web: http://www.thiemeworks.com ThiemeWorks P. O. Box 17737 Milwaukee WI 53217-0737 414.351.2321 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 22:25:00 -0400 From: Jonathan Wallace Subject: File 4--(fwd) ALAWON, #7/105 - ALA ARGUES AGAINST FED FILTERS From--"ALAWASH E-MAIL (ALAWASH E-MAIL)" ___________________________________________________________ ALAWON Volume 7, Number 105 ISSN 1069-7799 September 14, 1998 American Library Association Washington Office Newsline In this issue: (91 lines) ALA ARGUES AGAINST FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS ON INTERNET FILTERING BEFORE HOUSE SUBCOMMITTEE ON TELECOMMUNICATIONS ______________________________________________________________ ALA ARGUES AGAINST FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS ON INTERNET FILTERING BEFORE HOUSE SUBCOMMITTEE ON TELECOMMUNICATIONS On Friday, September 11, Agnes M. Griffen, a member of the ALA Committee on Legislation, testified on behalf of ALA before the House Subcommittee on Telecommunications. The hearing, chaired by Rep. Michael Oxley (R-OH), focused on "Legislative Proposals to Protect Children from Inappropriate Materials on the Internet." Griffen spoke as a working librarian on the practical as well as philosophical issues that many librarians have with the use of blocking and filtering software. ALA's testimony emphasized that the decision whether to employ blocking and filtering software should be made by the local communities through library boards and schools boards, not the federal government. Two of the bills under discussion at the hearing were H.R. 3177, the Safe Schools Internet Act of 1998, and the "Istook" amendment, currently attached to H.R. 4273, the Labor/HHS appropriations bill. H.R. 3177, sponsored by Rep. Bob Franks (R-NJ), would require all schools and libraries receiving e-rate discounts on telecommunications to install filtering or blocking software. Sen. McCain (R-AZ) has sponsored a similar provision now included in S. 2260, Commerce, Justice, State Appropriations. Franks testified in favor of his bill at the hearing. Rep. Ernest Istook (R-OK) testified in favor of his amendment which would require filtering software for any library or school receiving federal funds to purchase computers. Others testifying at the hearing included Sen. Dan Coats (R-IN) and Stephen R. Wiley, Chief of the FBI's Violent Crimes and Major Offenders Section, which investigates online crimes against children. Griffen, director at the Tucson-Pima Public Library in Arizona, testified on the third and final witness panel which included: Jerry Berman, director of the Center for Democracy and Technology, Mr. Lawrence Lessig, professor of law at Harvard University, and Peter Nickerson, CEO of N2H2, a producer of server-based filtering software. Also asked to testify by the House subcommittee was Jeffrey Douglas, executive director of the Free Speech Coalition, a trade association for providers of online adult entertainment. Other witnesses on the panel described adult-verification systems and types of filtering software. A psychiatrist also testified about the detrimental affects of pornography and the risks of becoming a "porn addict." The invitation to testify came only late on Wednesday, September 9. Working in conjunction with the ALA Washington Office and the Office for Intellectual Freedom, Griffen and ALA staff were able to prepare testimony as well as clear schedules and make arrangements for Griffen to get to Washington on such short notice. Based upon this hearing, there may be an attempt to draft an "amalgam" bill on filtering for consideration by the House before this session of Congress ends in early October. There is little time for such an effort. ALAWON will bring you more information if and when it becomes available. ____________________________________________________________ ALAWON is a free, irregular publication of the American Library Association Washington Office. To subscribe, send the message: subscribe ala-wo [your_firstname] [your_lastname] to listproc @ala.org. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.ala.org/washoff/ subscribe.html or send the message: unsubscribe ala-wo to listproc@ala.org. ALAWON archives at http://www.ala.org/ washoff/alawon. Visit our Web site at http://www.alawash.org. ALA Washington Office 202.628.8410 (V) 1301 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, #403 202.628.8419 (F) Washington, DC 20004-1701 800.941.8478 (V) Lynne E. Bradley, Editor Deirdre Herman, Managing Editor Contributors: Carol C. Henderson Lynne E. Bradley Claudette W. Tennant All materials subject to copyright by the American Library Association may be reprinted or redistributed for noncommercial purposes with appropriate credits. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 Sep 1998 11:27:57 GMT From: jw@bway.net Subject: File 5--SLAC Bulletin, September 20, 1998 SLAC Bulletin for September 20, 1998 ----------------------------------------- The SLAC Bulletin is a series of updates to Jonathan Wallace's and Mark Mangan's Sex, Laws and Cyberspace (Henry Holt 1996), on Internet freedom of speech. You can subscribe to (or delete yourself from) the SLAC list at http://www.greenspun.com/spam/home.tcl?domain=SLAC THE INDECENT STARR REPORT By Jonathan Wallace jw@bway.net The Starr Report, which the Republicans in Congress rushed to the Web, clearly would have qualified as "indecent" under the plain terms of the Communications Decency Act. Ironically, many of the politicians who voted for the CDA also voted to post the Starr Report on the Web. In the report, we are treated to a number of explicit accounts, of which the cigar incident is the most memorable. I certainly know more now about our President's philosophy of sexual relations than I would ever have wished to. Why does the Starr Report belong on the Web? It seems to me there are only two ways to categorize this material. It may be purely prurient, and therefore a gross invasion of the President's privacy. In this case, it was placed on the Web only by the pure malice of the President's adversaries. On the other hand, the Starr Report may give crucial insight into the question of whether President Clinton can be trusted to perform the duties of his office. If this is so, then Congress had a duty (which I'm sure was exercised with a heavy heart) to make this material available to the American people. The CDA would not have drawn any distinction: under its plain language, the report was indecent in any event. The act defined indecency as the depiction or description of sexual or excretory acts or organs in a patently offensive fashion. It notably did not add: unless that depiction or description has significant scientific, literary, artistic or political value. The Supreme Court held the CDA unconstititional precisely because it would criminalize Web pages pertaining to AIDS, safe sex, the Holocaust---and the sexual antics of presidents. Is the Starr Report "patently offensive" under the CDA's definition? Clearly it is, to someone---in fact, more than a few someones. The howls of execration directed at the President from certain quarters prove that both the underlying behavior, and the description of it in the report, disgust many Americans. Publication of the Starr report on the Web confirms that public discourse will sometimes include matters unfit for the mind of a small child. This has always been true. How do you deal with it? There are two theories. Either you eliminate the offensive speech from the world, or you supervise the child. Social conservatives have always been in favor of the former, and so was Congress when it passed the CDA. The Supreme Court has held many times, from 1957's Butler v. Michigan through the CDA case, that you cannot reduce adults to reading only what is fit for children. But this is precisely what the CDA would have done. After the CDA failed, the pro-censorship troops concentrated their efforts on mandating the use of blocking software (censorware) in public schools and libraries. If they succeed in forcing a widespread enough adoption of censorware, they will have brought back the CDA through the back door. Three censorware products, Bess, Smartfilter, and Cybersitter, immediately added the Starr report to their blacklists. Each of these is in use in schools and libraries. In the Lakeview, Ohio high school, the journalism class requested the removal of Bess because it prevented the students from doing writing assignments on AIDS and teenage drug use. Smartfilter was adopted by Utah---in that state, adult patrons of some libraries are now unable to get the Starr report. If the Starr Report is a matter of public importance and deserves consideration in our discourse, it should be accessible, in every library. If not, Congress shouldn't have put it on the Web in the first place. Congress can't have it both ways. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1998 22:31:02 -0500 From: cudigest@SUN.SOCI.NIU.EDU(Computer underground Digest) Subject: File 6--Comment on House Resolution 525 It struck me as darkly ironic that the very House Members who've been so vociferous in their efforts to censor the Net, practically tripped over themselves in a headlong rush to Web-publish the Starr Referral/Report, despite a torrent of advance leaks that it contained graphic, lurid detail of sexual high jinks. House Resolution 525, presented by 1995 CDA supporter and Rules Committee Chairman Gerald Solomon [R-NY], was devoid any hint of concern about releasing its content on the Web...without even so much as a parental warning. Nor was there a single suggestion during the floor debate that it might a good idea to include a cautionary note or PICS meta tags...not even from Rep. Bob Franks [R-NJ], sponsor of HR 3177, the so-called `Safe Schools Internet Act of 1998,' which mandates the installation of filtering programs by all federal funds recipient schools and libraries providing Net access. Instead, the 450-plus pages were simply released exactly as received from the independent counsel's office, in all their seamy, salacious and voyeuristic glory...sans warnings, sans any attempt whatsoever to help guard against curious prepubescents taking in every pornographic word. Could it be that, along with "high crimes and misdemeanors," the terms "objectionable material" and "freedom of speech" are now coming to mean only what the House finds it convenient to say they mean on any given day? Or is it just that the word "hypocrisy" is still defined precisely as it always has been? ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1998 08:15:04 -0700 From: Jim Galasyn Subject: File 7--Pentagon cuts back its Internet data Pentagon cuts back its Internet data September 26, 1998 http://www.phillynews.com/inquirer/98/Sep/26/national/PENT26.htm By Laura Myers ASSOCIATED PRESS WASHINGTON -- The Pentagon, fearing that national security was being compromised, ordered sensitive information pulled yesterday from its Internet sites, including troop movements, weapons development, Social Security numbers, and reviews that could reveal secrets to adversaries. The Defense Department's 1,000 publicly accessible World Wide Web sites may be stripped down further by year-end after a Pentagon-wide review of data being put in cyberspace. Deputy Defense Secretary John Hamre, who ordered the review, said he recently became aware that some Web sites were offering "too much detail on DOD capabilities, infrastructure, personnel and operation procedures." ................ The Pentagon has been using the Internet to spread information to members of the military serving around the world, partly to speed up business and eliminate paperwork for contracts and administration. It also said it was aiming to be more open with Americans and the international community. Hamre said the goal now was to manage the Web sites more closely and "to strike a balance between openness and sound security." Enemies of the United States such as terrorists, adversarial governments, members of organized crime, and drug traffickers probably found the Pentagon sites a treasure trove of useful information, said E. Peter Earnest, president of the Association of Former Intelligence Officers, who worked for the CIA before retiring. ................ Some hackers have not been satisfied with the Pentagon's open Web sites and have tried to get into some of the department's 2.1 million computers. In February, Hamre said the Pentagon's unclassified computers were hit by the "most organized and systematic attack" to date, targeting mostly personnel records. Last year, hackers penetrated medical data banks at veterans hospitals and changed blood types in soldiers' records, according to Federal Computer Week magazine, which quoted Art Money, a civilian awaiting nomination as assistant defense secretary for communications and intelligence. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 15:20:36 -0700 (PDT) From: Lisa Mann Subject: File 8--CA anti-spam Bill For Immediate Release For more information, a review copy of "Stopping Spam", photos, or an interview with the authors, contact: Lisa Mann (707)829-0515 ext. 230 lisam@oreilly.com Will HR 3888 nullify California's pending Internet Consumer Protection Act? On August 28, 1998, The California Senate and Assembly approved a bill--The Internet Consumer Protection Act (California Assembly Bill 1629)--that would make it illegal to send e-mail using a forged domain name, and would allow Internet service providers (ISPs) to take spammers to court. "AB 1629 sends a clear message that California stands behind Internet Service Providers who prohibit their users from spamming." said Alan Schwartz, computer security expert and author of the upcoming book, "Stopping Spam", "AB 1629 is a powerful tool for ISPs to enforce their acceptable use policies against spamming by seeking substantial monetary redress against violators. The California bill states that it will become void if federal legislation is passed on the topic, so whether or not HR 3888 intends to preempt state legislation, it reads to me like it would de facto preempt the California bill." said Schwartz. First introduced in January, the California bill was written by Assemblyman Gary G. Miller (R-Diamond Bar) and co-sponsored by Assemblyman Jim Cunneen (R-San Jose) Under the bill, California ISPs may publish a notice forbidding the use of their equipment to send or deliver spam. They may sue anyone who violates this for $50 per message up to $25,000 per day in which the spamming takes place, or actual damages. Attorneys' fees are also recoverable. In addition, under this bill, the unauthorized use of domain names in electronic mail may result in a fine of up $5,000 and/or imprisonment for up to a year. It now must be signed by the governor. AB 1629 is expected to go into effect in September. In a press release, Assemblyman Gary Miller said "I am all for free speech, but it should be illegal to take someone's computer hostage with junk email. Even before I introduced AB 1629, the interest from Internet users and businesses to place some curbs on spam was overwhelming. There is a real sense of urgency to find a solution to this growing problem." The bill is supported by CAUCE (the Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail), Junkbusters, FREE (the Forum for Responsible and Ethical E-mail), ISP/C (the Internet Service Providers Consortium), and various other organizations. AB 1629 is threatened by U.S. H.R. 3888 (the Anti-slamming Amendments Act), which, should it pass in its present form, could pre-empt all new state junk e-mail legislation. HR 3888, authored by Rep. Tauzin (R-Louisiana), would legalize any spam that is labeled as unsolicited commercial email. Ray Everett-Church, Co-Founder and Counsel CAUCE, in an open letter to Chairman Tauzin, wrote: "The preemption of any future state laws relating to unsolicited commercial email is extremely dangerous for ISPs and consumers. Nearly a dozen states are considering laws regarding UCE and this bill would invalidate them. One bill pending in California, for example, would assure ISPs the right to enforce their service agreements, even against those who send UCE in violation of stated contractual terms...as currently written, a state statute which would give an ISP the right to enforce anti-spam provisions would appear to be preempted by H.R. 3888." "The average person is probably aware of what personal inconvenience spam is but doesn't often consider that this inconvenience multiplied by another couple million people is going to cause a lot of trouble going to be for the system and the people who keep the system running as a whole," said Schwartz. "The problem is only getting worse. People need to fight back, and supporting anti-spam legislation is one of the methods we suggest in "Stopping Spam.'" ------------------------------ From: "Terry Lefebvre" Subject: File 9--Defamation Suit against pro-union site Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 21:25:55 -0700 Please excuse this intrusion. The following may be of interest to you and your collegues in regards to a defamation suit on the Internet. Due to the variety of implications regarding the ability of the common man to reveal basic truths and stand up for certain principles i.e. freedom of speech, civil liberties, solidarity and challenge the laws of libel and defamation. You are invited to review and comment on the current litigation in process. The following has been sent or forwarded to a large number of Labour organizations requesting support and assistance. Ladies and Gentlemen, I am appealing for Union Support and Assistance in regards to my website being sued for defamation by the Christian Labour Association of Canada. In that I had personally been affected by their manner of business, I took it upon myself to research and subsequently compile information that has allegedly been detrimental to them. The following quotes are in my belief both credible and worthy of dissemination and appeal for support in maintaining a web presence based on these truths. "CLAC is not a real union," said Mary Rowles, a spokeswoman with the CLC (Canadian Labour Congress). "Their reputation is that they're a company union, invited in by companies to create sub-standard agreements that act as a shield to keep out real unions." "OPEIU Local 378 - They are employer dominated organizations that do not represent the interests of their members in any way shape or form. Please do not post any information here dealing with this trash." "As a union member of a real "Union" CAW Canada. I find this whole situation disturbing and disgusting. It is already hard enough to organize in todays anti union ontario without a right wing fringe group pretending to be a union." John Bowman national representative CAW "Given a free choice workers will be less likely to voluntarily join an inferior sectoral agreement with little or no service. We believe this is the most effective foil for employer dominated organizations such as CLAC and their like." IWA.."We must make it our mission to rid this country of this bogus organization" Labour Relations.."The seemingly undemocratic way in which Mr. Vanderlaan " who the board found to be a less than credible witness"..entered into the purported "collective agreement"...while having total disregard...raises some serious concerns as to the status of this organization as a union" Boilermakers Union "My mission is to prove to the rest of the working world that CLAC is an excuse to syphon money from working people in order to further supress them through lobbying labour legislation (WRF) and to support only the political candidates that hold their decree (Reformers). " United Brotherhood of Carpenters Joiners and Allied Workers"if you and others keep up the attack on CLAC and more come forward we might have their true colours exposed." Anticlac Former Univision Employee.."They were so nice at first, I can hardly believe how they treated us later. CLAC promised us Christian principles, they gave us the Judas treatment, betrayal, treachery, deceit and neglect." Progressive Calvinism League "Why does the CLA fail to operate where its duty is the plainest, namely, in a case where the exploitation is the worst? The answer is, we believe, that it will be unpopular for the CLA to organize a union which will result in costing the members of the Christian Reformed church some money." Please take the time to visit this site and review it's contents. Appreciate any and all assistance and support in this matter. Please forward this message to anyother organizations who you feel would benefit. This is a onetime mailing. Your email address was manually extracted from a variety of Inet concerned websites. Terry Lefebvre 45744 Webb Ave. Chilliwack, B.C. V2R 4E4 1-604-824-0927 1-604-858-0548 fax 1-604-858-0577^ www.wutzon.com/clac^ clacattack@wutzon.com^ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1998 22:51:01 CST From: CuD Moderators Subject: File 10--Cu Digest Header Info (unchanged since 25 Apr, 1998) Cu-Digest is a weekly electronic journal/newsletter. Subscriptions are available at no cost electronically. CuD is available as a Usenet newsgroup: comp.society.cu-digest Or, to subscribe, send post with this in the "Subject:: line: SUBSCRIBE CU-DIGEST Send the message to: cu-digest-request@weber.ucsd.edu DO NOT SEND SUBSCRIPTIONS TO THE MODERATORS. The editors may be contacted by voice (815-753-6436), fax (815-753-6302) or U.S. mail at: Jim Thomas, Department of Sociology, NIU, DeKalb, IL 60115, USA. To UNSUB, send a one-line message: UNSUB CU-DIGEST Send it to CU-DIGEST-REQUEST@WEBER.UCSD.EDU (NOTE: The address you unsub must correspond to your From: line) CuD is readily accessible from the Net: UNITED STATES: ftp.etext.org (206.252.8.100) in /pub/CuD/CuD Web-accessible from: http://www.etext.org/CuD/CuD/ ftp.eff.org (192.88.144.4) in /pub/Publications/CuD/ aql.gatech.edu (128.61.10.53) in /pub/eff/cud/ world.std.com in /src/wuarchive/doc/EFF/Publications/CuD/ wuarchive.wustl.edu in /doc/EFF/Publications/CuD/ EUROPE: nic.funet.fi in pub/doc/CuD/CuD/ (Finland) ftp.warwick.ac.uk in pub/cud/ (United Kingdom) The most recent issues of CuD can be obtained from the Cu Digest WWW site at: URL: http://www.soci.niu.edu/~cudigest/ COMPUTER UNDERGROUND DIGEST is an open forum dedicated to sharing information among computerists and to the presentation and debate of diverse views. CuD material may be reprinted for non-profit as long as the source is cited. Authors hold a presumptive copyright, and they should be contacted for reprint permission. It is assumed that non-personal mail to the moderators may be reprinted unless otherwise specified. Readers are encouraged to submit reasoned articles relating to computer culture and communication. Articles are preferred to short responses. Please avoid quoting previous posts unless absolutely necessary. DISCLAIMER: The views represented herein do not necessarily represent the views of the moderators. Digest contributors assume all responsibility for ensuring that articles submitted do not violate copyright protections. ------------------------------ End of Computer Underground Digest #10.50 ************************************