Date: Fri, 13 Aug 93 16:33:44 EST Errors-To: Comp-privacy Error Handler From: Computer Privacy Digest Moderator To: Comp-privacy@PICA.ARMY.MIL Subject: Computer Privacy Digest V3#014 Computer Privacy Digest Fri, 13 Aug 93 Volume 3 : Issue: 014 Today's Topics: Moderator: Dennis G. Rears Enhanced Driver's License NSA Seeks Delay in Clipper Re: First Person broadcast on privacy Re: Encryption policy. Does the "Stopper" 1-800 number use Caller ID or ANI 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 [129.139.160.133]. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: MP%MPA15C@mpa15ab.mv-oc.unisys.com Date: 12 AUG 93 10:12 Subject: Enhanced Driver's License The August 2, 1993 edition of _Government_Computer_News_ contains an article titled, "Feds listen as states describe benefits of kiosks". The article deals with efforts in California to create "Info/California kiosks" and in Florida to "to cut costs by building a centralized, on-line system that integrates federal and state benefits programs." Steve E. Kolodney, director of California's Office of Information Technology describes how California is "transforming driver's licenses into personal identification and authentication devices." "California licenses now look more like credit cards with magnetic stripes as well as the owner's picture, Social Security number and thumbprint. Kolodney said citizens can insert their enhanced licenses into state kiosks to reserve recreational facilities and obtain state information." Kolodney is also quoted as saying, "We have to start thinking of technology as infrastructure not information." The final line of the article is, "But Kolodney warned that all governments must develop clear policies for data ownership because these massive databases will have tremendous value." ________________________________________________________________________ Mark Perew Unisys Corp MREW/CORP | I sometimes hold it half a sin (714) 380-5484 Fax: (714) 380-6560 | To put to words the grief I feel mp%mpa15c@trenga.tredydev.unisys.com| For words, like Nature half reveal mp@mpa15c.mv-oc.unisys.com | And half conceal the Soul within. cb103@cleveland.freenet.edu | - Tennyson ============== "All opinions are mine," sayeth the poster ============== Please forward bounced mail to: Mark.Perew@ofa123.fidonet.org ------------------------------ Organization: CPSR Washington Office From: Dave Banisar Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1993 9:37:14 EST Subject: NSA Seeks Delay in Clipper [Moderator's Note: David Sobel submitted a copy of this, too. ._dennis ] NSA Seeks Delay in Clipper Case The National Security Agency (NSA) has asked a federal court for a one-year delay in a lawsuit challenging the secrecy of the government's "Clipper Chip" encryption proposal. The suit was filed by Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (CPSR) on May 28 and seeks the disclosure of all information concerning the controversial plan. In an affidavit submitted to the United States District Court for the District of Columbia on August 9, NSA Director of Policy Michael A. Smith states that NSA's search for records responsive to [CPSR's] request is under way, but is not yet complete. Because the Clipper Chip program is a significant one involving the participation of organizations in four of NSA's five Directorates and the Director's staff, the volume of responsive documents is likely to be quite large. Moreover, because the Clipper Chip program is highly complex and technical and is, in substantial part, classified for national security purposes, the review process cannot be accomplished quickly. CPSR called for the disclosure of all relevant information and full public debate on the proposal on April 16, the day it was announced. While NSA has insisted from the outset that the "Skipjack" encryption algorithm, which underlies the Clipper proposal, must remain secret, the Smith affidavit contains the first suggestion that the entire federal program is classified "in substantial part." In the interest of obtaining timely judicial review of the agency's broad classification claim, CPSR intends to oppose NSA's request for delay in the court proceedings. In another case involving government cryptography policy, CPSR has challenged NSA's classification of information concerning the development of the Digital Signature Standard (DSS). The court is currently considering the issue and a decision is expected soon. CPSR is a national public-interest alliance of computer industry professionals dedicated to examining the impact of technology on society. CPSR has 21 chapters in the U.S. and maintains offices in Palo Alto, California, and Washington, DC. For additional information on CPSR, call (415) 322-3778 or e-mail . David L. Sobel CPSR Legal Counsel ------------------------------ From: Mark Meuer Subject: Re: First Person broadcast on privacy Organization: /usr/lib/news/organi[sz]ation Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1993 21:43:11 GMT In article , Bill Stewart wrote: >(unless, of course, she *was* armed and violent, >which probably would have been mentioned on the tube if true.) Of course, since we can trust TV to give both complete and fair treatment in all news stories. :-) -mark -- Mark Meuer <>< | CAMAX, Inc | (612) 854-5300 Ext 376 | meuer@camax.com The process of making Mars' environment hospitable is called terraforming, which is a Latin term meaning "really dumb idea." -- David Prill ------------------------------ From: James R Ebright Subject: Re: Encryption policy. Date: 13 Aug 1993 03:32:30 GMT Organization: The Ohio State University In article irakliot@lance.colostate.edu writes: >Hope I'll get some responses here. Is encryption in email legal? Yes. How could it be otherwise? As long as the headers exist and the data is ascii characters, the net will pass it along. >Is it legal for an electronic mailing list, or a usenet newsgroup >to operate using encryption? Probably...but there is a key distribution problem :) [come to think of it, talk.bizzare is already encrypted!] > >If encryption is against the law, please site some references. Encryption is illegal for ham radio in the US. Government agencies are regulated as to the type of encryption they may use -- to make sure it is good enough but not too good :) I believe cross border traffic in France must be non-encrypted. -- Information farming at... For addr&phone: finger A/~~\A THE Ohio State University jebright@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu ((0 0))____ Jim Ebright e-mail: jre+@osu.edu \ / \ Support Privacy: Support Encryption (--)\ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Aug 93 00:43:58 PDT From: Kelly Bert Manning Subject: Does the "Stopper" 1-800 number use Caller ID or ANI I believe that I found 1-800-235-1414 posted in this group a while back and gave it a try to see if the free per call caller ID blocking that BC Tel is required to provide was working. I was not too surprised to find that it read my area code and number to me. I reported this to BC Tel, with a copy to the CRTC, and received a reply saying that there had been a programming problem in a couple of switches related to "ANI spill" which had been fixed. A second call to the number above gave me a repeat of my number being read to me, followed by a second voice saying that I could prevent "joker" from using his "caller ID box" to get my number by calling 1-900-STO-PPER. My understanding of US advertising laws is that this means that they got my number by Caller ID, not by ANI or some other technique. Am I wrong? A third call to the number above gave a different message, and mentioned 1-800-852-9932 as a new number to call "for a caller ID demonstration". When I called it my number was read to me again. Am I justified in pursuing this with BC Tel and the Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission as a failure to comply with the CRTC decision that Canadian phone companies must provide free Caller ID blocking or is STOPPER faking Caller ID with ANI? BC Tel has been a supporter of the Victoria Freenet, and seems to have a much better attitude toward customers than the local Cable TV Companies, so I don't want to give them a hard time about this if they don't deserve it. ------------------------------ End of Computer Privacy Digest V3 #014 ******************************