Date: Thu, 19 May 94 19:52:03 EST Errors-To: Comp-privacy Error Handler From: Computer Privacy Digest Moderator To: Comp-privacy@uwm.edu Subject: Computer Privacy Digest V4#068 Computer Privacy Digest Thu, 19 May 94 Volume 4 : Issue: 068 Today's Topics: Moderator: Leonard P. Levine Tracking Drivers License & Car Dealer's Clipper chip bill number? Re: Article 21 of the Japanese Consitution Re: Electronic Coupons Re: IRS Privacy Principles Re: IRS Privacy Principles 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: "Prof. L. P. Levine" Date: 17 May 1994 14:56:49 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Tracking Organization: University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Taaken from RISKS-LIST: RISKS-FORUM Digest Tuesday 17 May 1994 (16:07): Date: 5 Apr 1994 15:31:31 -0700 From: Phil Agre "There is something a little eerie about picking up a car phone and having a voice describe your location to within a few feet on a pleasant if unremarkable street of colonial and tudor-style houses." That's a quote from a second article in the New York Times promoting the Avis project to track the company's rental cars through GPS hardware and wireless communications. The full reference is: Peter Marks, For a few lucky motorists, guidance by satellite, New York Times, 2 April 1994, pages 1, 16. The reporter apparently went for a ride with the system, and was enthralled. No doubt it was a fascinating experience. This article does at least mention privacy concerns, in a parenthetical note, as follows: "On the Nynex computer screens, the cars show up as small dots moving along the roads on the computer maps. Nynex officials say, however, that for the sake of privacy, a car's position will only show up on a screen for the duration of a driver's call to the Project Northstar number." Note that "privacy" only extends to what's presented on the operator's screen. Nothing is said about the more fundamental issue, what records are stored in the computer. Phil Agre, UCSD ------------------------------ From: Al Cohan <0004526627@mcimail.com> Date: 17 May 94 18:01 EST Subject: Drivers License & Car Dealer's My family for many years has been involved with the Car Business and it is interesting to note that30 to 40 years ago, when you asked for a test drive, the dealers usually threw you the keys and asked when you would be back. About 20 to 30 years ago, you got to drive with the salesman sitting next to you while you took the test drive. That worked fine until one day in sunny California, the driver stopped someone came over from the sidewalk and pulled the salesman out of the car and jumped in! BTW, there NEVER did recover the car! No, you must not only take a test drive with the salesman, but also leave either your drivers license or have the deal make a copy of your drivers license. The interesting this is the both driving without the license in your possession and making a copy of your license, are both against the law! What the dealer does with the license is conjecture, but I know TRW for one has a plan where for xx $$ per year they send you a notice everytime someone checks your credit - telling you who checked. I know of several applications for credit that have been denied our customers because they were shopping for the best lease rates on a large purchase of equipment. The granters of credit saw all of these other "inquiries" and assumed they were borrowing way past their credit limits with each one. Ya just can't tell how they are going to react. ------------------------------ From: travis@netrix.com (Travis Low) Date: 19 May 1994 20:46:46 GMT Subject: Clipper chip bill number? Organization: none Can someone please email me at travis@netrix.com and tell me the actual bill number for the clipper chip initiative on the house floor? --Travis ------------------------------ From: djones@CIM.McGill.CA (David Jones) Date: 17 May 1994 21:14:41 -0400 Subject: Re: Article 21 of the Japanese Consitution Organization: Centre for Intelligent Machines, McGill University Stanton McCandlish wrote: Article 21: Freedom of assembly and association as well as speech, press and all other forms of expression are guaranteed. 2) No censorship shall be maintained, nor shall the secrecy of any means of communication be violated. So how does the Japanese system handle: (a) people who cause harm by shouting "Fire!" (in Japanese of course :-) in a crowded theatre ?? (b) people who publish so-called "hate literature", inciting violence against an identified group. (c) people who create and publish "child pornography" (d) etc., etc. just curious. Article 21 seems to be stated like an absolute right. Are there "escape clauses" as in the Canadian Charter? ------------------------------ From: bernie@fantasyfarm.com (Bernie Cosell) Date: 18 May 1994 03:09:03 GMT Subject: Re: Electronic Coupons Organization: Fantasy Farm, Pearisburg, VA "Prof. L. P. Levine" writes: In the Milwaukee Sentinel's 5/16/94 Monday Business Section is an article about the introduction of electronic coupons in the local Pick and Save stores. Mega Mart Incorporated, the owner, will allow shoppers to wand their VIP Advantage Plus (discount) Cards through a reader as they enter the store and get a list of coupons printed based on their buying history. A representative of Mega Marts indicated that this history would be otherwise used only in a statistical manner and that the consumer's name would never be divulged to an outsider. The representative said that "any customer who signs up for VIP signs their permission to be involved." I'll point out that this is just as I"ve been trying to say for some time: our privacy is NOT going to be trampled by some incredible and unlikely grand conspiracy, but rather by 'bribing' folk, little by little, to give a little here, a little there. It is VERY hard to combat [IMO] because the actual incursions are so minor and the come-ons can be made so attractive [would you be willing to cut your food bill by 10% in exchange for the supermarket knowing whether you prefer Skippy to Jif?] Representative Marlin D. Schneider (Democrat from Wisconsin Rapids in the State Legislature) indicated that the State might be interested in seeing to it that this privacy becomes a part of state law, rather than just a good idea on the part of Mega Mart. I think this is a BAD idea. I think the gov't should just stay the hell OUT, rather than continuing to go around, muscling people, telling everyone what to do. The gov't that is powerful enough to be your big brother and protect your privacy, is powerful enough, well, to be big brother... He indicated that "while the guarantees are there today, they could be gone tomorrow." Just so. And that means that consumers who care can turn in their cards tomorrow. If the *agreement* I sign says "you'll use it for statistical purposes only", then it becomes a matter of contract law and they have to tell me if they change the conditions. I don't have ANY problem with getting a note in the mail saying "Here are the new terms and conditions, continued use of our card/service/whatever will be construed as acceptance of them" and summarily sending their card back, terminating the service, whatever. How is that so hard that it needs the government's stepping in and bullying everyone around. He was looking for a contract describing this privacy protection. Well, he should look for a contract when *HE* signs one. I don't think the state ought to compel the store to do anything of the sort, and for our part we should stop being such damn sheep and learn to start thinking for ourself and acting in our *own* interest. My personal take on this is that people will become increasingly upset about their loss of privacy when the system goes into operation. A discount coupon on a bottle of beer, indicating that this is just for you, will be an indication that they are being watched. I think they will know and will care when it hits them. But I still don't see what the big deal is. So they drop the card in the trash barrel on the way out of the store and _presto_ their privacy is restored. I wish that all threats to privacy were as easily dispatched. I think the bigger worry is that the greedy shoppers [perhaps fueled by the rather myopic 'privacy brigade'] will try to eat their cake and have it too. That is, KEEP the coupons but *FORCE* the store to impose 'privacy rules'. I think this would be a likely, but terrible outcome. The gov't already intrudes into FAR too much of our lives, they have many too many regulations telling everyone what to do and what not to do. -- Bernie Cosell bernie@fantasyfarm.com Fantasy Farm Fibers, Pearisburg, VA (703) 921-2358 ------------------------------ From: Laura Sullivan Date: 18 May 94 12:09:35 CDT Subject: Re: IRS Privacy Principles Can one assume that the IRS feels the need to put this in writing because of serious problems with employees violating taxpayers privacy and with accepting non-validated information? Last year, the IRS released an internal audit of its Southeastern region that revealed that many of its employees [166 in one news report and 386 in another] were caught snooping into tax records of relatives, neighbors, and celebrities. Criminal investigations ensued. Laura Sullivan lsulliv3@ua1vm.ua.edu School of Library and Information Studies University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa ------------------------------ From: msieving@cyclone.xnet.com (Mark Sieving) Date: 19 May 1994 23:31:02 GMT Subject: Re: IRS Privacy Principles Organization: XNet Information Systems Prof. L. P. Levine wrote: Can one assume that the IRS feels the need to put this in writing because of serious problems with employees violating taxpayers privacy and with accepting non-validated information? One could also assume that they put this in writing simply because that's good management practice. It doesn't imply any particular problem. ------------------------------ End of Computer Privacy Digest V4 #068 ****************************** .