Computer underground Digest Sun Sep 17, 1994 Volume 6 : Issue 82

Computer underground Digest Sun Sep 17, 1994 Volume 6 : Issue 82
ISSN 1004-042X

Editors: Jim Thomas and Gordon Meyer ([email protected])
Archivist: Brendan Kehoe
Retiring Shadow Archivist: Stanton McCandlish
Shadow-Archivists: Dan Carosone / Paul Southworth
Ralph Sims / Jyrki Kuoppala
Ian Dickinson
Urban Legend Editor: E. Greg Shrdlugold

CONTENTS, #6.82 (Sun, Sep 17, 1994)

File 1--Congressional E-Mail Addresses
File 2--DigTel: EFF Hearing Summary - House Telecom. Subcmt (sep 13)
File 3--NETWORK SECURITY JOURNAL
File 4--GovAccess.055: CQ online; fixing FOIA; Cal info; WWW; un-spam
File 5--Cu Digest Header Information (last changed 14 Sept '94)

CuD ADMINISTRATIVE, EDITORIAL, AND SUBSCRIPTION INFORMATION APPEARS IN
THE CONCLUDING FILE AT THE END OF EACH ISSUE.

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

Date: Thu, 15 Sep 94 14:56 CDT
From: [email protected]
Subject: File 1--Congressional E-Mail Addresses

This is the e-mail list I was referring to a few days ago. It's
a little bit longer than the House Gopher version and arranged by
state rather than name. Any contributions will be welcome.

9-9-94

CONGRESSIONAL E-MAIL ADDRESSES

United States Senate

+------------------------------------------------------------
ST Name E-Mail Address
+----------------------------------------------------------

ID Craig, Larry [email protected].
MA Kennedy, Ted [email protected]
NM Bingaman, Jeff [email protected]
VA Robb, Charles [email protected]
VT Leahy, Patrick [email protected]
VT Jeffords, Jim [email protected]
+-----------------------------------------------------------------

United States House of Representatives

+-------------------------------------------------------------------
ST DS Name E-Mail Address
+--------------------------------------------------------------------
AR 4 Dickey, Jay [email protected]

AZ 1 Coppersmith, Sam [email protected]
AZ 2 Pastor, Ed [email protected]

CA 1 Hamburg, Don [email protected]
CA 7 Miller, George [email protected]
CA 12 Lantos, Tom [email protected]
CA 13 Stark, Pete [email protected]
CA 14 Eshoo, Anna [email protected]

CO 2 Skaggs, David [email protected]

CT 2 Gejdenson, Sam [email protected]
CT 4 Shays, Christopher [email protected]

FL 6 Stearns, Cliff [email protected]
FL 20 Deutsch, Peter [email protected]

GA 6 Gingrich, Newton [email protected]

IL 14 Hastert, Dennis [email protected]

KA 1 Roberts, Pat [email protected]

ME 1 Andrews, Thomas [email protected]

MI 3 Ehlers, Vernon [email protected]
MI 4 Camp, Dave [email protected]
MI 14 Conyers, John [email protected]

MN 3 Ramstad, Jim [email protected]
MN 6 Grams, Rod [email protected]

NC 7 Rose, Charlie [email protected]
NC 11 Taylor, Charles [email protected]
NC 12 Watt, Mel [email protected]

ND Pomeroy, Earl [email protected]

NJ 12 Zimmer, Dick [email protected]

NY 7 Manton, Thomas [email protected]
NY 23 Boehlert, Sherwood [email protected]
NY 27 Paxon, Bill [email protected]

OH 2 Hoke, Martin [email protected]

OK 5 Istook, Jr. Ernest [email protected]

OR 1 Furse, Elizabeth [email protected]
OR 4 DeFazio, Pete [email protected]

PA 16 Walker, Robert [email protected]

TX 3 Johnson, Sam [email protected]
TX 6 Barton, Joe [email protected]

UT 2 Shepherd, Karen [email protected]

VA 6 Goodlatte, Bob [email protected]

VT Sanders, Bernie BSANDERS@IGC,APC.ORG

WA 1 Cantwell, Maria [email protected]
WA 9 Kreidler, Mike [email protected]

U.S. House of Representatives Committees

Education and Labor
Subcommittee on Labor-Management Relations
[email protected]

Natural Resources
[email protected]

Science, Space, and Technology
[email protected]

The above information was compiled from the Senate and House Gophers.

Corrections/additions to [email protected]

9-9-94

CONGRESSIONAL E-MAIL ADDRESSES

United States Senate

+------------------------------------------------------------------
ST Name E-Mail Address
+--------------------------------------------------------------

ID Craig, Larry [email protected].
MA Kennedy, Ted [email protected]
NM Bingaman, Jeff [email protected]
VA Robb, Charles [email protected]
VT Leahy, Patrick [email protected]
VT Jeffords, Jim [email protected]
+------------------------------------------------------------------

United States House of Representatives

+----------------------------------------------------------------
ST DS Name E-Mail Address
+-----------------------------------------------------------------
AR 4 Dickey, Jay [email protected]

AZ 1 Coppersmith, Sam [email protected]
AZ 2 Pastor, Ed [email protected]

CA 1 Hamburg, Don [email protected]
CA 7 Miller, George [email protected]
CA 12 Lantos, Tom [email protected]
CA 13 Stark, Pete [email protected]
CA 14 Eshoo, Anna [email protected]

CO 2 Skaggs, David [email protected]

CT 2 Gejdenson, Sam [email protected]
CT 4 Shays, Christopher [email protected]

FL 6 Stearns, Cliff [email protected]
FL 20 Deutsch, Peter [email protected]

GA 6 Gingrich, Newton [email protected]

IL 14 Hastert, Dennis [email protected]

KA 1 Roberts, Pat [email protected]

ME 1 Andrews, Thomas [email protected]

MI 3 Ehlers, Vernon [email protected]
MI 4 Camp, Dave [email protected]
MI 14 Conyers, John [email protected]

MN 3 Ramstad, Jim [email protected]
MN 6 Grams, Rod [email protected]

NC 7 Rose, Charlie [email protected]
NC 11 Taylor, Charles [email protected]
NC 12 Watt, Mel [email protected]

ND Pomeroy, Earl [email protected]

NJ 12 Zimmer, Dick [email protected]

NY 7 Manton, Thomas [email protected]
NY 23 Boehlert, Sherwood [email protected]
NY 27 Paxon, Bill [email protected]

OH 2 Hoke, Martin [email protected]

OK 5 Istook, Jr. Ernest [email protected]

OR 1 Furse, Elizabeth [email protected]
OR 4 DeFazio, Pete [email protected]

PA 16 Walker, Robert [email protected]

TX 3 Johnson, Sam [email protected]
TX 6 Barton, Joe [email protected]

UT 2 Shepherd, Karen [email protected]

VA 6 Goodlatte, Bob [email protected]

VT Sanders, Bernie BSANDERS@IGC,APC.ORG

WA 1 Cantwell, Maria [email protected]
WA 9 Kreidler, Mike [email protected]

U.S. House of Representatives Committees

Education and Labor
Subcommittee on Labor-Management Relations
[email protected]

Natural Resources
[email protected]

Science, Space, and Technology
[email protected]

The above information was compiled from the Senate and House Gophers.

Corrections/additions to [email protected]

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

Date: Wed, 14 Sep 1994 12:37:37 -0400 (EDT)
From: Stanton McCandlish <[email protected]>
Subject: File 2--DigTel: EFF Hearing Summary - House Telecom. Subcmt (sep 13)

EFF HEARING SUMMARY September 14, 1994
=====================================================================

HOUSE TELECOMMUNICATIONS SUBCOMMITTEE CONSIDERS DIGITAL TELEPHONY PROPOSAL

OVERVIEW
--------

On Tuesday September 13 the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on
Telecommunications and Finance held a hearing to examine the Digital
Telephony legislation. The bill (H.R. 4922/S. 2375), introduced in August
by Representative Don Edwards (D-CA) and Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT),
would require telecommunications carriers to ensure that advanced
technology does not prevent law enforcement from conducting authorized
electronic surveillance. Tuesday's hearing focused mainly on questions of
cost. More specifically, whether all future costs associated with law
enforcement surveillance capability should be borne by private industry or
the government.

Witnesses appearing before the panel:

Louis Freeh, FBI Director
Tom Reilly, Middelsex County (Mass) District Attorney
Richard Metzger, FCC Common Carrier Bureau Chief
Daniel Bart, Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA) V.P.
Jerry Berman, Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) Policy Director
Roy Neel, United States Telephone Association (USTA) Pres. & CEO
Thomas Wheeler, Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association (CTIA)
Pres.

TIA's Dan Bart and USTA's Roy Neel joined EFF's Jerry Berman in questioning
the necessity of any digital telephony legislation, expressing concern that
the FBI has not adequately substantiated its case that its surveillance
efforts are being frustrated by advanced telecommunications technologies.
However, all agreed that the Edwards/Leahy bill is substantially improved
over previous FBI proposals, noting its increased privacy protections,
prohibition of government design authority, and requirements for public
processes. On the issue of cost, TIA's Bart, USTA's Neel, and CTIA's
Wheeler all argued that forcing industry to incur compliance costs may slow
technological innovation and the development of the NII.

EFF's Berman also argued for government reimbursement, adding that, "if
the telecommunications industry is responsible for all future compliance
costs, it may be forced to accept solutions which short-cut the privacy and
security of telecommunications networks". He further noted that linking
compliance to government reimbursement has the benefit of providing public
oversight and accountability for law enforcement surveillance capability.

FBI Director Freeh stated that passage of the digital telephony legislation
this year is a "drop-dead issue for us", and praised the telecommunications
industry for their cooperation and good faith efforts to craft a balanced
compromise. While acknowledging that the costs associated with meeting the
requirements of the legislation remain a significant issue, Freeh indicated
that this question should be left to Congress to determine.

Many Subcommittee members, apparently swayed by the FBI's intense lobbying
campaign for the bill (which included many personal visits by the FBI
Director), praised the privacy protections in the legislation and committed
themselves to working through the remaining issues in order to pass the
bill this year. As Subcommittee Chairman Edward Markey (D-MA) stated in
his opening statement, the task of the Subcommittee is to "come up with a
policy that 1) protects the privacy interests of our citizens, 2) is
mindful of the limited financial resources of taxpayers or ratepayers, 3)
meets the legitimate needs of law enforcement, and 4) does not unduly
interfere with our telecommunications industry, which is racing to the
future with advances in communications technology".

COST -- WHO PAYS FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT CAPABILITY?
------------------------------------------------

At issue are the provisions in the legislation that require
telecommunications carriers to deploy features and services which enable
law enforcement to conduct authorized electronic surveillance. The current
bill authorizes $500 million to cover the cost of upgrading existing
equipment during the first 4 years after the bill is enacted. Carriers
would be required to modify their equipment, at the governments expense, or
face fines of up to $10,000 per day for each day in violation. Although
the FBI maintains that $500 million is enough to cover all upgrade costs,
the industry has repeatedly stated that the costs will be five to ten times
higher. The industry is requesting that their liability under the bill be
linked to government reimbursement -- that the government should get what
it pays for and no more.

After four years, the bill stipulates that carriers must ensure that all
new features and services meet the wiretap requirements. The FBI has
argued that future compliance costs will be minimal, because these costs
will be addressed at the design stage and will be spread throughout the
industry. The industry maintains it is impossible to estimate compliance
costs for technologies which are not even on the drawing boards. If the
costs are substantial, as industry believes, forcing industry to incur
those costs may slow the deployment of advanced technology to the public.
Therefore, the industry believes that the government should be responsible
for all future compliance costs.

PUBLIC ACCOUNTIBILITY OF LAW ENFORCEMENT SURVEILLANCE COSTS IS ESSENTIAL
------------------------------------------------------------

Many members of the Subcommittee stated that law enforcement's ability to
conduct electronic surveillance is an important public good which must not
be denied by advances in technology. However, Subcommittee members also
stressed that the privacy and security of the American public must be
balanced against the legitimate needs of law enforcement, and that the
current bill in no way expands the authority of law enforcement to conduct
electronic surveillance. Both FBI Director Freeh and Middelsex County
(Mass) District Attorney Reilly noted that electronic surveillance is an
essential and vital tool for law enforcement, and that public safety will
be placed in jeopardy if that ability is hindered.

As EFF's Berman stated, the current legislation incorporates significant
new privacy protections, and, in terms of privacy, is substantially
improved over previous FBI proposals. Among the privacy protections in the
current bill, Berman noted:

* The standard for law enforcement access to online
transactional records is raised to require a court order instead
of a mere subpoena

* Law enforcement may not require the capability to receive
information which reveals the location or movement of a subject
from dialed number information.

* Information revealed by pen register devices (equipment which
captures numbers dialed) cannot reveal any information beyond
the telephone number dialed. Law enforcement is prohibited from
receiving any additional information which may be captured (such
as transactions with a bank).

* The bill does not preclude a citizen's right to use encryption

* Privacy interests will be integral to the design process. Just
as law enforcement gains the ability to specify wiretap
capability,the bill requires that privacy interests are
incorporated when technical standards are developed.

* Privacy groups and other concerned citizens are granted the
right to intervene in the administrative standard setting
process if they feel that privacy and security are not being
adequately addressed

* Law enforcement gains no additional authority to conduct
electronic surveillance. The warrant requirements specified
under current law remain unchanged

Berman argued that the important privacy protections in the bill turn on
the question of cost. Asking government to cover compliance costs is the
only way to ensure that industry dose not short-cut privacy by accepting
more invasive solutions; that the law enforcement surveillance expenditures
are accountable to the public, and; that industry will continue to offer
advanced technologies. "In our view," Berman said, "the public interest
can only be served if the government assumes the risk and pays the cost of
compliance".

The Next Steps
--------------

The bill is expected to be considered at a markup of the House Judiciary
Committee on September 20. The Senate Judiciary Committee is expected to
consider the bill shortly thereafter. The House Energy and Commerce
Committee may also hold a markup on the legislation, although no decision
has been made.

Access to Related Documents
---------------------------

Documents from Tuesday's hearing, including Jerry Berman's testimony, will
be placed in EFF's online archives. Berman's testimony is located at

ftp.eff.org, /pub/EFF/OP/eff_091394_digtel_berman.testimony/
gopher.eff.org, 1/EFF/OP, eff_091394_digtel_berman.testimony
http://www.eff.org/pub/EFF/OP/eff_091394_digtel_berman.testimony/
BBS: +1 202 638 6119 (8-N-1), file area: Privacy--Digital Telephony,
file: EFF91494.TES

For the text of the Digital Telephony legislation, related documents, and
more testimony (when available), look in the same areas.

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

Date: 15 Sep 1994 03:21:02 -0400
From: [email protected](Subnso)
Subject: File 3--NETWORK SECURITY JOURNAL

A n n o u n c e m e n t

November 1994 Network Security Observations will be out with its
inaugural issue. Network Security Observations is expected to be the
leading international journal on computer network security for the
science, research and professional community. Every annual volume
contains five issues, each offering ample space for vigorously reviewed
academic and research papers of significant and lasting importance and a
wealth of other network security information, including network security
patches and other technical information, related governmental documents
(international), discussions about ethics and privacy aspects, the
'Clipper chip' and other cryptologic issues, viruses, privacy enhanced
mail, protocols, international data security
and privacy legislation, harmonization of computer security evaluation
criteria, information security management, access management, transborder
dataflow, edi security, risk analysis, mission critical applications,
integrity issues, etc.

Its Editor-in-Chief, Dr. Bertil Fortrie, also the Chairman of
Working Group 11.9 - IT Related Crime Investigations - of the
International Federation for Information Processing, is assisted by a team
of international seasoned experts forming the Journal's prestigeous Review
Board. Among them: Emeritus Prof. Dr. Harold Highland (Editor-in-Chief
Emeritus of Elsevier Advanced Technology's Computers & Security Journal
and President of Compulit Inc., United States), Dr. Willis Ware (Security
Counsel, The Rand Corporation, Santa Monica, United States), Prof. Dr.
William Caelli (Head - School of Datacommunications, Faculty of
Information Technology of the Queensland University of Technology,
Brisbane, Australia), Prof. Eugene Spafford (Faculty of Computer Science
of the Purdue University, West Lafayette, United States), William List
(Partner, The Kingswell Partnership, London, United Kingdom), John Beatson
(Manager Information Security & Risk Management, Databank Systems Ltd.,
Wellington, New Zealand), Ross Paul (Manager Corporate Information
Security, The Worldbank, Washington D.C., United States).

If and when appropriate reports of major international conferences will be
included, as well as information made available by governments, agencies
and international and supranational organizations. Network Security
Observations is published in the English language, and distributed
Worldwide. The publication does not feature commercial announcements.
National and international organizers of dedicated conferences, congresses
and seminars can offer calls for papers and invitations to participate.
Relevant posting from other publishers announcing new books, etc. are
welcomed as well.

Network Security Observations provides the in depth and detailed look that
is essential for the network system operator, network system
administrator, edp auditor, legal counsel, computer science researcher,
network security manager, product developer, forensic data expert,
legislator, public prosecutor, etc., including the wide range of
specialists of the intelligence community, the investigative branches and
the military, the financial services industry and the bank community.
Network Security Observations serves as the primary source of dedicated
information for every governmental department, service, branch and office,
directly or indirectly involved with computer networks, in every country.

Subscriptions are available as of now. The inaugural issue will be
available by November 1, 1994. Applicants ordering subscription by
electronic mail before November 1, 1994 are entitled to a special
inaugural rebate of 30 %, paying only US $ 195. Special
academic/educational discounts and membership discounts for members of
IEEE, IFIP (Technical Committees and Working Groups) and governmental
agencies and branches are available upon request. Since Network Security
Observations is a not-for-profit journal, we are sorry to reject requests
for trial orders.

Order now by sending an email message to [email protected] .

Alternatively applicants may write to: Network Security Observations,
suite 400, 1825 I Street, NW. Washington DC 20006, United States.

Network Security Observations is the only authoritative international
research journal fully dedicated to the security and protection of
computer networks. As a courtesy to your fellow computer network users,
please forward this announcement to any list service and netnews board
available to you.

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

Date: Wed, 14 Sep 1994 22:01:28 -0700
From: Jim Warren <[email protected]>
Subject: File 4--GovAccess.055: CQ online; fixing FOIA; Cal info; WWW; un-spam

CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY NOW ONLINE

>From [email protected] Thu Sep 8 16:37:06 1994

Found the following item in the Educom update. You may already have
heard about it...

CQ STARTS GOPHER SERVICE
Congressional Quarterly now makes its current and archived files available
via a Gopher server. Users can find the current CQ Weekly Report, the
cumulative index, weekly news briefs, the status of major legislation,
results from roll call votes, election updates and more. For information
send e-mail to [email protected] or gopher to gopher.cqalert.com.
(Internet World 10/94 p.14)

-- Chris Yoder Smog, Just say NO!
Acting Director of Academic Computing
[email protected] Drive electric today.

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT: PLUGGING THE ELECTRONIC LOOPHOLE
(From Whats New #3.)

>From [email protected] Fri Sep 2 16:18:11 1994

3. FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT: PLUGGING THE ELECTRONIC LOOPHOLE.
In the hours before recess, the Senate passed a bill offered by
Patrick Leahy (D-VT) to extend the 1966 Freedom of Information
Act to include computer records. You may find it hard to believe
that legislation is needed, but information has been withheld on
the grounds that it's not a "document" unless it's printed on
paper (WN 24 Jun 89). In other cases, agencies supplied CD-ROM
data, but refused to provide access instructions (WN 8 Sep 89)!
The Leahy bill requires computer records to be user-friendly.

((Let's see if this bill has a better fate than Californica's AB 2451 (Bates)
that would have opened up already-computerized state records to online public
access, and SB 758 (Hayden) that would have done the same for campaign-
finance records. In both cases, political insiders killed the bills - either
by lethal injection of massive exemptions for government profit, or simply
by petty personal feuds. Leahy's legislation might have a chance if all of
us flood Congress with support letters. (More details as I get 'em.) --jim ]

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

ACCESSING CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT'S LEGISLATORS & ELECTRONIC INFORMATION

>From [email protected] Sun Sep 4 00:58:44 1994
Though a trifle dated, look in

ftp://cpsr.org/cpsr/states/california/asbly_roster
and
ftp://cpsr.org/cpsr/states/california/senate_roster

Also notice the *excellent* FAQ on California Electronic access
in text form:

ftp://cpsr.org/cpsr/states/california/940901.cal_gov_info_FAQ

Or in hypertext at:

http://www.cpsr.org/cpsr/states/california/cal_gov_info_FAQ.html

I think you can look at the FAQ to learn about sen.ca.gov which
has a gopher server which has current contact info for senators.

--
[email protected] +1-415 322-5411 Tel, -6481 Fax, Box 60, Palo Alto, CA 94302

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

The world-wide web and its point-n-click Mosaic front-end is making massive
amounts of information readily available to non-technoids. With a WWW
connection and a [free] copy of Mosaic client software, it's almost as good
as putting an electric starter in one o' them horseless-carriage thingies
that's been scaring the horses, 'round town. --jim

WORLD-WIDE WEB INFORMATION WITHOUT WORLD-WIDE WEB CONNECTIONS

>From [email protected] Sat Sep 10 13:48:25 1994 <excerpts>
[email protected] (Brad Schrick)
Subject--Re: WWW by email via CERN

It occurred to me that only a fraction of your correspondents have
World-Wide Web access.

This is how to get the stuff from WWW pages by email (you can then look at
it, with a little editing, using a local copy of Mosaic, MacWeb, or
whatever, available free by ftp or BBS). Don't know how long this WWW by
email service will be free, how long it will last, and can't guarantee what
the turnaround will be:

Most people only have email access to the Internet, and are therefore
deprived of interactive access to the World Wide Web.

The good news is that most pages are available by email!

Request WWW pages by sending email to [email protected] . Put your
retrieval commands in the BODY of the mail, like this

www <URL>

Example:

www http://www.biotech.washington.edu/WebCrawler/WebCrawlerExamples.html

That's all. Lean back and wait. You will get a page filled with hints on
how to use the WebCrawler service."
Odd de Presno
<[email protected])

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

NET SELF-CONTROL -or- WE DON' NEED NO STINKINK GOVERNMENT BADGES

((Aside: Plastering advertisements all over the net - called "spamming" -
has prompted some calls for government regulation. Please Mother, we'd
rather do it ourselves. --jim]

>From [email protected] Thu Sep 8 09:43:31 1994
Sender: NEW-LIST - New List Announcements <[email protected]>
From--David Stodolsky <[email protected]>
Subject-- NEW: JUDGES-L - For netnews multiple post judges

JUDGES-L on [email protected] Judges who cancel posts that
or [email protected] threaten to overload NetNews

The JUDGES-L list distributes messages to a panel of judges that
cancel multiple posts to Network News immediately. The list is used
to help judges organize themselves, finalize policy, and set
procedures to enforce rules. It is primarily directed to those who
issue cancels. Secondarily, to those who survey cancels issued, in
order to ensure that the cancel facility is not being abused.
General policy discussion is conducted in the UseNet newsgroup
news.admin.policy. A periodic post in that newsgroup gives the
current policy consensus.

In is not the intention of the judges to regulate the content of
articles posted. The protection of the Network News system from
overload by posts to multiple groups is the focus of the activity.
Widespread posting of off topic material and overloads of individual
newsgroups is a secondary focus of discussion.

Mechanisms for the control of automatic posting software or automatic
cancellation software is within the scope of discussion. Security
mechanisms to facilitate the cancellation of abusive posts is also
within the scope of this distribution list.

Archives of JUDGES-L and related files are stored in the JUDGES-L
FILELIST. To receive a list of files send the command
INDEX JUDGES-L
to [email protected] or [email protected] as the first
line in the BODY of a mail message (NOT the Subject--line).

To subscribe to JUDGES-L, send the command

SUB JUDGES-L your name

to [email protected] or [email protected] via a mail
message (again, as the first line in the BODY of the mail, NOT the
Subject--line).

For example: SUB JUDGES-L John Doe

Owner: David Stodolsky, PhD <[email protected]>

[Note: [email protected] puts out announcements of new online
information-lists, almost daily, as well as occasional queries from those
seeking a discussion of a given topic. Notices are rarely much larger than
this one. --jim]

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

MORE WEB-SPEAK

>From [email protected] Thu Sep 8 12:23:31 1994
Subject--(Fwd) Your very own outside WWW home page

I've just now set up a WWW page for myself on the Ohio State server! I highly
recommended trying out this URL...

--- Forwarded mail from whitaker (Russell Whitaker)

Hey, if any of you wish to set up WWW home pages of your own outside the SGI
firewall, open the following URL:

--- Forwarded mail from [email protected] (Bao Phac Do)

http://www.mps.ohio-state.edu/HomePage/

____
| | Bao Phac Do
| o| Technical Support Engineer
|____| [email protected]

--
Russell Earl Whitaker [email protected]
I.S. Assistance Center 415-390-3826
Silicon Graphics, Inc. Mountain View, CA.

>> Permission herewith granted for unlimited reposting and recirculation.<<
>> Past postings are at ftp.cpsr.org:/cpsr/states/california/govaccess <<
>> To add or drop the GovAccess list, email to [email protected] . <<
>> To add or drop the GovAccess list, email to [email protected] .

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

Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1994 22:51:01 CDT
From: CuD Moderators <[email protected]>
Subject: File 5--Cu Digest Header Information (last changed 14 Sept '94)

Cu-Digest is a weekly electronic journal/newsletter. Subscriptions are
available at no cost electronically.

CuD is available as a Usenet newsgroup: comp.society.cu-digest

Or, to subscribe, send a one-line message: SUB CUDIGEST your name
Send it to [email protected] or [email protected]
The editors may be contacted by voice (815-753-0303), fax (815-753-6302)
or U.S. mail at: Jim Thomas, Department of Sociology, NIU, DeKalb, IL
60115, USA.

Issues of CuD can also be found in the Usenet comp.society.cu-digest
news group; on CompuServe in DL0 and DL4 of the IBMBBS SIG, DL1 of
LAWSIG, and DL1 of TELECOM; on GEnie in the PF*NPC RT
libraries and in the VIRUS/SECURITY library; from America Online in
the PC Telecom forum under "computing newsletters;"
On Delphi in the General Discussion database of the Internet SIG;
on RIPCO BBS (312) 528-5020 (and via Ripco on internet);
and on Rune Stone BBS (IIRGWHQ) (203) 832-8441.
CuD is also available via Fidonet File Request from
1:11/70; unlisted nodes and points welcome.

EUROPE: from the ComNet in LUXEMBOURG BBS (++352) 466893;
In ITALY: Bits against the Empire BBS: +39-461-980493
In BELGIUM: Virtual Access BBS: +32.69.45.51.77 (ringdown)

UNITED STATES: etext.archive.umich.edu (192.131.22.8) in /pub/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/
uceng.uc.edu in /pub/wuarchive/doc/EFF/Publications/CuD/
wuarchive.wustl.edu in /doc/EFF/Publications/CuD/
EUROPE: nic.funet.fi in pub/doc/cud/ (Finland)
ftp.warwick.ac.uk in pub/cud/ (United Kingdom)

JAPAN: ftp.glocom.ac.jp /mirror/ftp.eff.org/

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 #6.82
************************************