Date: Fri, 29 Apr 94 08:35:46 EST Errors-To: Comp-privacy Error Handler From: Computer Privacy Digest Moderator To: Comp-privacy@uwm.edu Subject: Computer Privacy Digest V4#059 Computer Privacy Digest Fri, 29 Apr 94 Volume 4 : Issue: 059 Today's Topics: Moderator: Leonard P. Levine Phillip Zimmermann's Encryption program anybody?? Phillip Zimmermann's Encryption program anybody?? Re: Visa Privacy Re: Visa Privacy Re: Lord Have Mercy On Us All :-( Re: Lord Have Mercy On Us All :-( SSN: Do Not Give Your Number to Anyone! Re: NSA remarks at "Lawyers and the Internet" Re: Credit check only with Permission Granted 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@uwm.edu and administrative requests to comp-privacy-request@uwm.edu. Back issues are available via anonymous ftp on ftp.cs.uwm.edu [129.89.9.18]. Login as "ftp" with password "yourid@yoursite". The archives are in the directory "pub/comp-privacy". Archives are also held at ftp.pica.army.mil [129.139.160.133]. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: bweston@lgc.com (Brent Weston) Date: 28 Apr 1994 20:15:29 GMT Subject: Phillip Zimmermann's Encryption program anybody?? Organization: Landmark Graphics Corporation I understand there is a good encryption program available called PGP (Pretty Good Privacy) written by Phillip Zimmermann and that a copy can be obtained on the net. Does anybody know where I may get a copy? Thanks in advance. -- Brent Weston | Landmark Graphics Corporation Software Engineer | 15150 Memorial Drive bweston@lgc.com | Houston, Texas, USA 77079-4304 | Phone: (713) 560-1421 Fax: (713) 560-1278 ------------------------------ From: bcieslak@mkelan5.remnet.ab.com (Brian Cieslak ) Date: 29 Apr 1994 08:10:39 Subject: Phillip Zimmermann's Encryption program anybody?? Organization: Allen-Bradley I recently read an article in the Wall street journal about an encryption program that is used by emailers on the internet called PGP "Pretty Good Privacy". I figured this would be a good place to start looking for information about computer privacy...Can anyone tell me of an FTP site where I can get a copy? (for personal use). Thanks ahead of time PS please post reply here as I am having some trouble receiving messages on our server. ------------------------------ From: terrell@sam.neosoft.com (Buford Terrell) Date: 28 Apr 1994 23:34:31 Subject: Re: Visa Privacy Organization: South Texas College of Law "Prof. L. P. Levine" writes: I am the co-author of a book called "A Foreign Visitor's Survival Guide to America". It has been suggested that I use the Freedom of Information act to obtain a list of people applying for visas to come to the United States to create a mailing list of people to send advertisements to. I would like any opinions on the ethics of doing this. If the names of visa applicants is not personal information exempt from disclosure under FOIA, then I see nothing ethically wrong with building a mailing list from those names. As the Supreme Court has repeatedly said in cases involving lawyer advertising, the First Amendment right of free speech includes the right to hear speech. If you truly believe your book is worthwhile and would be helpful to those people, by all means let them know where they can find that information. We all hate advertising so much that we forget that it really can serve a socially beneficial purpose. Buford C. Terrell South Texas College of Law ------------------------------ From: WHMurray@DOCKMASTER.NCSC.MIL Date: 27 Apr 94 07:24 EDT Subject: Re: Visa Privacy "Prof. L. P. Levine" writes: I am the co-author of a book called "A Foreign Visitor's Survival Guide to America". It has been suggested that I use the Freedom of Information act to obtain a list of people applying for visas to come to the United States to create a mailing list of people to send advertisements to. I would like any opinions on the ethics of doing this. Marilyn, the fundamental rule is that personal information should be used only for the purposes for which it was originally surrendered. While your case is close, I would judge it to be over the line. It is legal, probably not rude, but still an inappropriate use. It is not a use of the information that the subject might reasonably have anticipated when he gave it up. He did not anticipate that his name and address would be aggregated with those of others to create a marketing tool for a book, even one that he might otherwise want to know about. William Hugh Murray, Executive Consultant, Information System Security 49 Locust Avenue, Suite 104; New Canaan, Connecticut 06840 1-0-ATT-0-700-WMURRAY; WHMurray at DOCKMASTER.NCSC.MIL ------------------------------ From: elkube@access.digex.net (l.l.lipshitz) Date: 27 Apr 1994 11:07:06 -0400 Subject: Re: Lord Have Mercy On Us All :-( Organization: Elk Ube, Inc. Arguably, new technologies applied to protecting citizens is a good thing. However, what frightens me is the gradual incursion of military technology and personnel into the civilian domain. Doesn't the Memo of Understanding between the DoD and the Justice Dept. scare anyone else? We already have active military assistance in the War on Drugs and recommendations for further involvement. Here in the Washington, DC area, we've seriously entertained proposals for using National Guard units to patrol our streets to bolster the city's police force. I believe (don't quote me on this one!) military assistance has been suggested or is actually being used in efforts to stem illegal immigration. Perhaps I'm allowing my paranoid tendencies to take control here, but having the military defend citizens not against foreign threats but against other citizens is a frightening and repugnant notion. -elle elkube@access.digex.net (l.l.lipshitz) ------------------------------ From: Christopher Zguris <0004854540@mcimail.com> Date: 27 Apr 94 12:11 EST Subject: Re: Lord Have Mercy On Us All :-( vapspcx@cad.gatech.edu (S. Keith Graham) writes: Kevlar vests save officers lives. Cars let them pursue criminals. Radios let them intercept criminals. Genetic samples let them verify the identity of a criminal much more accurately than many eye witnesses. Video cameras in cars protect both the officer and, in some cases, the general public. Radar spots people sneaking into the country. And some of the technology, like non-lethal "take-down" weapons, will make it more likely for a citizen (guilty or innocent) to make it to court, and have their say. The only problem with non-lethal "take-down" weapons is the potential for abuse. Long before the Rodney King case made the stun gun and taser infamous, police officers here in New York City lost the ability to carry or use the stun gun becuase they used it to coerce confessions. In those cases, the non-lethal stun gun was most definately abused against citizens. The stun gun was used because it left only minimal obvious damage that could be documented, so the offending officers thought they could get away with their actions (many did, and I'm sure it's happened in other cities). An "offensive" weapon like a non-lethal stungun should not be compared to a "defensive" weapon like a Kevlar vest - a Kevlar vest cannot be abused. ------------------------------ From: jkwiatkowski@attmail.com (John Kwiatkowski ) Date: 28 Apr 94 07:40:50 GMT Subject: SSN: Do Not Give Your Number to Anyone! I saw your message posted in Security. Social Security Numbers were originally started for exactly that...social security reasons ONLY. People and businesses took it upon themselves to start using social security numbers as identifiers. The law says you DO NOT have to divulge this number to anyone except the Government for social security/tax purposes and an employer.THAT'S IT!! usiness,what they get (fake number) is their own fault. It's kinda like me asking you....How much money do you make a year...what's the date of birth of your family members..etc.IT'S NONE OF MY BUSINESS!If you give me false info...that's my problem for pressing you for info that doesn't concern me. I admire you for standing up and refusing to give out your social security number.PROTECT YOUR PRIVACY!!!Don't give in to anyone asking for your private info.THEY DON'T HAVE ANY RIGHT TO ASK FOR OR HAVE IT! John ------------------------------ From: padgett@tccslr.dnet.orl.mmc.com (padgett peterson) Date: 27 Apr 1994 12:40:27 GMT Subject: Re: NSA remarks at "Lawyers and the Internet" Organization: Martin-Marietta milles@fi.gs.com (Stevens Miller) said: Speaking in favor of the Clipper proposal was Stuart Baker of the NSA. I won't repeat his substantial arguments, but his formal approach (which Mike Godwin tells me is becoming a standard component of the government's pro-Clipper road show) is worth some attention. Parroting his own words at CFP, Baker told us: - The debate over the Clipper proposal is "really just a culture clash among net-heads." - Those opposing the proposal are late-coming counter-culturists, "who couldn't go to Woodstock because they had to do their trig homework." Well if you can't attack the facts, attack the people involved. Sounds like they are running out of arguments. Personally, I did not go to Woodstock because I was enjoying a government-paid vacation in South East Asia at the time. Now before anyone thinks I've changed my position, Clipper still sounds to me like a cheap and effective alternative to what is available today, it is the implimentation (read politics) that has flaws but these can be fixed. Until I have a Clipper or two to play with, I am going to reserve technical judgement. IMHO the government could abandon the whole key escrow business and not lose a thing. ------------------------------ From: Don Whiteside <59326796Z@servax.fiu.edu> Date: 28 Apr 1994 17:50:37 GMT Subject: Re: Credit check only with Permission Granted Organization: Florida International University, my eternal home rivaud@coyote.rain.org writes: I used to work for a BMW dealer who ran credit checks on people all the time without their prior consent. That is common practice in the biz. Pretty much every auto dealership does this. Think back to the last time you went car shopping. The second you expressed an interest in a test drive, they ask you for your driver's license. Then they dissapear for about 5 minutes (the more suave amoung them send somebody else) and get your credit report. Years ago, my father and I experimented with this by handing them his license sometimes and mine other times. He having a much longer credit history.... Without fail, the eagerness of the salespeople rose signifigantly when we used his license. Which just goes to show the effectiveness of this ploy - I paid cash. Donald Alan Whiteside School of Computer Science Eternal Student Florida International University ------------------------------ End of Computer Privacy Digest V4 #059 ****************************** .