Date: Thu, 04 Jun 92 14:55:58 EST Errors-To: Comp-privacy Error Handler From: Computer Privacy Digest Moderator To: Comp-privacy@PICA.ARMY.MIL Subject: Computer Privacy Digest V1#042 Computer Privacy Digest Thu, 04 Jun 92 Volume 1 : Issue: 042 Today's Topics: Moderator: Dennis G. Rears Re: SSN's and blood Re: Privacy in video rental records? Re: [J. Michael Blackford: Re: Privacy is a right] e-mail privacy policy The Computer Privacy Digest is a forum for discussion on the effect of technology on privacy. The digest is moderated and gatewayed into the USENET newsgroup comp.society.privacy (Moderated). Submissions should be sent to comp-privacy@pica.army.mil and administrative requests to comp-privacy-request@pica.army.mil. Back issues are available via anonymous ftp on ftp.pica.army.mil [129.139.160.200]. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Steve Forrette Subject: Re: SSN's and blood Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1992 03:04:06 GMT In article johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) writes: >>The local red cross wanted my ssn when I gave blood. They got really >>ugly when I refused. > >The people at the Red Cross can be remakably dense, particularly >considering that all their blood comes from unpaid volunteers. I donate both >here in Boston and at my beach house near Philadelphia. Both wanted my SSN. In California, there is a statewide database of people who should be excluded from donating blood for any reason. It is of course useful these days for donors with AIDS, but the database predates the AIDS epidemic. If you donate blood and for whatever reason they determine that there is some (permanent) reason that you should not be able to donate, they put your SSN on the list. No reason is kept in the database - only the original bloodbank knows why. All bloodbanks check new donors against the list. It would seem that with all the problems (many of them deadly) that having "bad" blood in the blood supply can cause, that there is a compelling public interest in maintaining such a database. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ From: Steve Forrette Subject: Re: Privacy in video rental records? Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1992 03:16:21 GMT In article bc335@cleveland.freenet.edu (Michael H. Riddle, Esq.) writes: > >In a previous posting, NEELY_MP@darwin.ntu.edu.au (Mark P. Neely, >Northern Territory University)) writes: > >> State Attorney John Tanner (Volusia Co, FL) has subpoenaed the rental >>records of two video shopkeepers to identify the individuals who rented >>one of four named explicit films. >> >> TITLE 18 UNITED STATES CODE >> CHAPTER 121. STORED WIRE AND ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS AND >> TRANSACTIONAL RECORDS ACCESS >> >> s 2710. Wrongful disclosure of video tape rental or sale records BTW, I believe this law was passed in response to the Judge Bork nomination to the Supreme Court. Some reporter trying to dig up some dirt purchased a complete list of all the movies that Judge Bork had rented, and published parts of it in the paper. They were apparently looking for some titles that people would find offensive. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ From: Steve Forrette Subject: Re: [J. Michael Blackford: Re: Privacy is a right] Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1992 03:53:32 GMT In article abc@brl.mil (Brinton Cooper) writes: > >> Interesting ... and the bartender only has the right to know if the >> customer is over a certain age ... but, he usually gets to find out >> the date the customer was born. This is a simple example of a plethora >> of instances wherein our "right to privacy" in infringed upon by a >> requirement for too much information. Why not issue color-coded >> driver's licenses? One color for minors, another for adults? > >In fact, the State of Maryland does just that. I don't think it's >color, but when my son was at the borderline age (circa 21), it was >whether your picture was full-face or profile. Come to think of it, >background color may have been different, too. Can another Marylander >verify? The State of Washington does this. An angled profile shot (45 degrees or so) if you're under 21, and straight on if you're 21 or over. This reminds me of the signs many places that sell alcohol display: "If you're under 25, you must show ID" If you're asked for ID, is it a valid response just to inform them that you're over 25, and thus don't have to show any according to the sign? :-) Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ From: "Allan H. Levy" Subject: e-mail privacy policy Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1992 15:16:04 GMT Recently, the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign promulgated an interim e-mail advisory, which sets forth policies whereby e-mail may be inspected by others than the sender or recipient. I reproduce the policy in its entirety for the information and comments of others interested in this important subject. ****** Electronic Mail Advisory Over the past year, the campus administration has received a number of inquiries about access to files maintained on electronic media. Essentially, the questions focused on the privacy of such communications and the conditions under which someone may look at another person's files. We asked the Advisory Committee on Networking and Computing to study this issue and to develop a policy statement that would guide campus actions. The attached statement is the result of the Committee's efforts. We are issuing the statement as an interim policy in order to allow faculty, staff, and students to "live" with the statement for a few months before it is made final. We would be pleased to receive comments on the interim policy statement. INTERIM E-MAIL ADVISORY The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign participates in a range of computing networks and many members of the community also regularly use computers in their work. Statements in public files in this medium are protected by the same laws and policies, and are subject to the same limitations, as communications in other media. The same holds true for electronic personal files and communications. However, users should exercise caution when committing confidential information to electronic media, because the confidentiality of such material cannot be guaranteed. For example, routine maintenance or system administration of a computer may result in the contents of files and communications being seen. Also, under the Illinois Freedom of Information Act, electronic files are treated in the same way as paper files. The documents in the files of employees of the State of Illinois are considered to be public documents, and may be subject to inspection through FOIA. In such cases, the campus Freedom of Information Officer must inspect files to determine which portions may be exempt from disclosure. Network and system administrators are expected to treat the contents of electronic files as private and confidential. Any inspection of electronic files, and any action based upon such inspection, will be governed by all applicable U. S. and Illinois laws and by University policies. A network or system administrator who is unsure about how to deal with questions about the content of computer files or access to such files should contact George F. Badger, Associate Vice Chancellor for Computing and Communications, at 333-4103 (e-mail: g-badger@uiuc.edu). 04/27/92 ------------------------------ End of Computer Privacy Digest V1 #042 ******************************