Date: Tue, 04 Aug 92 11:45:42 EST Errors-To: Comp-privacy Error Handler From: Computer Privacy Digest Moderator To: Comp-privacy@PICA.ARMY.MIL Subject: Computer Privacy Digest V1#069 Computer Privacy Digest Tue, 04 Aug 92 Volume 1 : Issue: 069 Today's Topics: Moderator: Dennis G. Rears Computer Privacy Digest V1#068 Re: Cellular phone scanners Re: Cellular phone scanners SSNs and Southern California police files Interesting Scientific American article Re: Cellular phone scanners Re: Emerging Privacy Issues in Libraries Re: IRS: ssn for my kids ? 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]. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 30 Jul 92 18:21:57 EDT From: Glen Foster Subject: Computer Privacy Digest V1#068 In Computer Privacy Digest, Volume 1 : Issue: 068, Willis H. Ware says, "...Virginia makes it illegal to OWN, much less operate, a radar detector..." This is no longer true and has not been for at least five years. This statute was challenged and thrown out (I do not remember on what basis). Unfortunately it happened when the House of Delegates was in session and radar detectors were declared "illegal equipment" within a couple of weeks. Of course it is illegal to operate a vehicle upon which illegal equipment is mounted but the police no longer confiscate your fuzz buster when they find one in your car and they have to be able to prove that it was mounted on your car rather than simply being transported. (Powered up counts as mounted, even battery powered with no connection to the car.) In fact, the standard police procedure is to not even "hold it for evidence until trial" and just take down the serial number instead. A side effect: the fine for "possession of a radar detector" was $25 under the old law. "Illegal equipment" fines range from $100 to $250, not much solace for leadfoots! Glen Foster ------------------------------ From: "D. K. Fields" Subject: Re: Cellular phone scanners Date: 31 Jul 1992 11:28:00 -0500 Organization: Texas A&M University, College Station It is illegal to listen to cellular conversations. The equipment necessary to do so is LEGAL. Many mfg have blocked out cellular, just to avoid any potential problems. -- Duane Fields Friends don't Work# (409) 845-6904 Box 1315 let friends use Home# (409) 847-6760 College Station, Tx 77841 MS-DOS. dkf8117@tamsun.tamu.edu ------------------------------ From: RICHARD HOFFBECK Subject: Re: Cellular phone scanners Reply-To: plains!moose.cccs.umn.edu!rwh@uunet.uu.net Organization: Colon Cancer Control Study, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 17:02:00 GMT In article , willis@iris.rand.org (Willis H. Ware) writes: > RE: Mark Bell > > >>Cellular phone scanners: Are they illegal? I don't believe so. One > >>can buy a nice Bearcat scanner from DAK in Canoga Park , California, > >>for a little over $200. They put a message in the box that it is > >>"ILLEGAL to use the scanner over the range of 845-860 MhZ according > >>to Congressional law..." > > Yes, I know about DAK, its catalog, the publisher's story about tuning > into illicit conversation [at one time advertising copy said that he had > stumbled onto a call-girl ring operating via cellulars], and the slip in > the box. 1. It is not illegal to own a radio that receives the cellular frequencies. In fact, tunable TVs that cover UHF channels 76-83 will do quite nicely since this is the frequency range (869 MHz - 894 MHz) where the cellular service came from originally. 2. If you are looking for out of the box cellular coverage, try ICOM R1, ICOM 2SRA, ICOM 7000/7100 ICOM R-100, ICOM 24AT, AOR AR-1000, BEARCAT 210, and so on. Relatively easy mods are available for the BEARCAT 200/205 XLT, Radio Shack PRO-34/37, Radio Shack 2004/2005/2006. 3. The Communciations Act of 1934 makes it a crime to disclose what you hear on non-commercial frequencies. The ECPA makes it illegal to produce a receiver for the SOLE purpose of intercepting cellular calls, and makes it illegal to listen to cellular conversations. However, the FBI has basically said that they have better things to do than round up scanner buffs unless there is a significant sum of money changing hands. Recently, the FCC funding legislation had a provision requiring the FCC to develop rules that would deny type acceptance for receivers capable of receiving cellular frequencies, or being easy modified to do the same. It did not make it illegal to own a receiver but would effectively limit the stock to what was in place when the rules take effect. Again the FCC has pretty much said that they have bigger fish to fry. I recently heard that some similar Congressional requirements imposed on EPA during passed during the Carter have yet to make their way through the rule making process, i.e. I won't lose any sleep over the matter. administration > If anyone can lay hands on the exact law, we could have a look. If someone feels like logging on to CI$, there is a copy in one of the libraries in the HAMNET forum. Search for the keyword ECPA. --rick +-----------------------------------------------------------------+ | Richard Hoffbeck INTERNET: rwh@moose.cccs.umn.edu | | Colon Cancer Control Study ATT : (612) 627-4151 | | University of Minnesota CIS : 72406,521 | | Minneapolis, MN 55455 | +-----------------------------------------------------------------+ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 31 Jul 92 16:54:59 -0400 From: Susanna Elaine Johnson Subject: SSNs and Southern California The plot thickens. I was required to give my SSN to PURCHASE (with cash) a television, and there was much wailing and gnashing of teeth when I explained that, as a foreign national, I do not have one. I also very nearly went to jail last week when I tried to use a Chevron CANADA card at a Chevron USA gas bar. I have noticed that in SC it has to be exactly by the book, no exceptions, or the transaction is disallowed. I am thinking of writing a monogtaph on the subject, entitled "Ritual-Taboo Behaviour in a Technological Society". The above does not appear to be true in other parts of the US. Anna Johnson (sej3e@virginia.edu) ------------------------------ From: Nigel Allen Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 20:00:00 -0400 Subject: police files New York Awarded Funds to Improve Criminal History Records To: State and City Desks Contact: Stu Smith of the Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice, 202-307-0784 or 301-983-9354 (after hours) WASHINGTON, July 30 /U.S. Newswire/ -- The U.S. Department of Justice has awarded the state of New York $381,512 to continue its program of improving the quality of the state's criminal history recordkeeping, the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) announced today. The project, administered by BJS in the Office of Justice Programs (OJP), is part of a three-year, $27 million program established by the Attorney General to help states upgrade current systems used to maintain records of arrests, prosecutions, convictions and sentences. The Bureau of Justice Assistance is providing the funding through the Edward Byrne Memorial State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance Program. "The major objective of this cooperative agreement is to improve the overall quality of the state's criminal history record information by improving disposition reporting, " said BJS Director Steven D. Dillingham. "This administration is making every effort to assure the highest standards of accuracy and timeliness in criminal history record information across the country. "It is critical that law enforcement officers, prosecutors, judges and corrections officials have access to complete and accurate information on each individual within the purview of the criminal justice system," Dillingham commented. The New York Division of Criminal Justice Services will use the assistance to correct database problems identified during the first phase of the program and complete a study to determine if problems related to disposition collection can be systematically resolved. "The program emphasizes the recording of arrest, conviction and sentencing information in a form that will make felony history information more reliable and complete," Dillingham commented. "This is a crucial component of the overall objective of insuring that state criminal history records are up-to-date and available to all criminal justice agencies." Additional information about this program is available from BJS. Publications and statistical and research data may be obtained from the National Criminal Justice Reference Service, Box 6000, Rockville, Md. 20850. The telephone number is 301-251-5500. The toll-free number is 800-732-3277. -30- -- Canada Remote Systems - Toronto, Ontario/Detroit, MI World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044 ------------------------------ From: Eugen Raicu Subject: Interesting Scientific American article Date: Sat, 01 Aug 92 18:54:46 GMT Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) David Chaum, "Achieving Electronic Privacy," Scientific American volume 267 number 2 pp 96-101, August 1992. Table of contents blurb: All of your electronic transactions, from credit card purchases to bank widthrawals, are creating a digital dossier of your life. The author proposes an encryption system that would allow individuals and institutions to take advantage of the benefits of computer communications while protecting privacy. Abstract: A cryptographic invention known as a blind signature permits numbers to serve as electronic cash or to replace conventional identification. The author hopes it may return control of personal information to the individual. -- Eugen Raicu raicu@netcom.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 2 Aug 1992 23:51:06 -0500 From: David Lemson Subject: Re: Cellular phone scanners Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana Date: Mon, 3 Aug 1992 04:51:01 GMT willis@iris.rand.org (Willis H. Ware) writes: >RE: Mark Bell >>>"ILLEGAL to use the scanner over the range of 845-860 MhZ according >>>to Congressional law..." >But do remember that Virginia makes it illegal to OWN, much less operate, >a radar detector so such laws are possible -- at least until challenged in >court. If you open up most any scanner listing-type book, including the POLICE CALL series from Radio Shack, you will see references to the relevant laws here. It is actually a Federal Crime to listen to cellular conversations (I presume without a warrant). Of course, the fact that most TV's with UHF antennas can get them between channels 81-82-83 is beside the point. I don't believe it's illegal to 'own' such a scanner, just to use it for that purpose. Another interesting point is that it is not illegal to listen to cordless phones (46 MHz range), but it is illegal to divulge what you hear to anyone else. This same law is referenced in those books. -- David Lemson (217) 244-1205 University of Illinois NeXT Campus Consultant / CCSO NeXT Lab System Admin Internet : lemson@uiuc.edu UUCP :...!uiucuxc!uiucux1!lemson NeXTMail accepted BITNET : LEMSON@UIUCVMD ------------------------------ From: "Otto J. Makela" Subject: Re: Emerging Privacy Issues in Libraries Organization: The Crimson Permanent Assurance Company Date: Mon, 3 Aug 1992 11:40:39 GMT In article keelings@wl.aecl.ca writes: My only comment would be "What the heck does all this bureaucratic mumbo-jumbo mean in English?!?" "...commoditizing information..."?!? "commoditizing" = "flushing down the toilet". (Sorry, I just couldn't resist it...) -- /* * * Otto J. Makela * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * */ /* Phone: +358 41 613 847, BBS: +358 41 211 562 (V.32bis/USR-HST,24h/d) */ /* Mail: Kauppakatu 1B18/SF-40100 Jyvaskyla/Finland, ICBM: 62.14N25.44E */ /* * * Computers Rule 01001111 01001011 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * */ ------------------------------ From: Stewart Rowe Subject: Re: IRS: ssn for my kids ? Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, (USA) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 92 21:54:06 GMT If you wish to claim a deduction for a child or other dependent, you must include the dependent's SSN if over _ONE_ year of age at the end of the tax year. ------------------------------ End of Computer Privacy Digest V1 #069 ******************************