Date: Tue, 12 Dec 95 13:21:43 EST Errors-To: Comp-privacy Error Handler From: Computer Privacy Digest Moderator To: Comp-privacy@uwm.edu Subject: Computer Privacy Digest V7#050 Computer Privacy Digest Tue, 12 Dec 95 Volume 7 : Issue: 050 Today's Topics: Moderator: Leonard P. Levine Re: Is it Possible to Not GET a SSN? Employer Abuse of Private Voicemail Re: Caller ID leakage Re: Infinity Transmitter Re: Infinity Transmitter Technical Surviellance Counter Measures WWW Page Info on CPD [unchanged since 11/22/95] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: horowitz@nosc.mil (Alan M. Horowitz) Date: 09 Dec 1995 15:08:08 GMT Subject: Re: Is it Possible to Not GET a SSN? Organization: NCCOSC RDT&E Division, San Diego, CA Bill McClatchie writes: Can't get diplomas, jobs, go to college, or amny other fine things in the US without being registereed with Uncle Sam. I didn't have any problems going to college without giving an SSN Yes. He just can't declare them on his taxes. pay a Horse hockey. You need a better lawyer ------------------------------ From: "anonymous" Date: 09 Dec 1995 13:51:58 -0600 (CST) Subject: Employer Abuse of Private Voicemail [moderator: poster requested an anonymous posting.] I am looking for clarification on the rules (laws) behind employee privacy with regards to company voicemail systems. I have some understanding of the general rights of the employer, as it relates to his ownership, and therefore ultimate control, of these systems. However, I have very recently been confided in by a close friend that her employer went as far as to "steal" her password into the system and then monitor her calls for some length of time. Without getting into a soap-opera type of discussions of the particulars, I will add that his motivation was one of jealousy and rejection, based on the fact that she had rejected his advances on numerous occasions, the least of the reasons not being that she is married. He has admitted his transgression out of "guilt" (his words) and she is under- standably furious. What recourse is there in this situation? As the owner of the company/system, does this release him from liability? Should she take measures to get proof or an admission of guilt by electronic means of her own (such as a personal tape recorder, etc.)? Ultimately, this will end up as a case of her word against his, and I have suggested going the tape recording route, if only so proof exists if it becomes ugly. What laws has he broken? Would this help her case in a sexual-harassment suit? Any and all comments are extremely welcome. ------------------------------ From: glr@ripco.com (Glen L. Roberts) Date: 09 Dec 1995 20:45:12 GMT Subject: Re: Caller ID leakage Organization: Full Disclosure Beth Givens wrote: Rumor has it that some Caller ID data for California calls has somehow "leaked" out -- both in the past and since December 1st. But we have not been able to verify that. If you have indeed seen California numbers on your Caller ID display devices, I'd appreciate hearing from you -- either via this forum or directly to my email address (bgivens@acusd.edu). If you don't mind divulging the first 6 digits of those numbers, that data would help track down the errant phone company switches. Thanks. Wiltel has passed Caller-ID long distance for about two years, including OUT OF CA... however, as of Dec 1, they stopped sending it OUT OF Pennsylvania! ------ Glen L. Roberts, Host Full Disclosure Live Privacy, Surveillance, Technology and Government! Tech Talk Network, WWCR Shortwave: 5065 khz. 8pm est/Sundays. Real Audio: 7 days/week, 24 hrs a day: http://pages.ripco.com:8080/~glr/glr.html ------ ------------------------------ From: Beth Givens Date: 10 Dec 1995 13:04:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: Infinity Transmitter Hugh Giblins asked about infinity transmitters in a recent CPD. An interesting and useful book, titled _The Phone Book: Who Is Listening_ by M. L. Shannon (Lysias Press, 1995), has a little information on this device. Here's the glossary definition: "A device installed on a phone line or inside a phone, used to secretly listen to conversations in the area. See also hook switch and harmonica bug." Yes, it's an eavesdropping device that enables someone from afar to listen to what's going on in the vicinity of one's phone when the phone is hung up ("on hook") as well as when it's in use. Another source for more information on infinity transmitters is Lee Lapin's _Book II: How to Get Anything on Anybody: The Encyclopedia of Personal Surveillance_, 1991, published by ISECO. Beth Givens Voice: 619-260-4160 Project Director Fax: 619-298-5681 Privacy Rights Clearinghouse Hotline (Calif. only): Center for Public Interest Law 800-773-7748 University of San Diego 619-298-3396 (elsewhere) 5998 Alcala Park e-mail: bgivens@acusd.edu San Diego, CA 92110 ------------------------------ From: glr@ripco.com (Glen L. Roberts) Date: 12 Dec 1995 13:34:02 GMT Subject: Re: Infinity Transmitter Organization: Full Disclosure Hugh Giblin wrote: High tech invasion of privacy is a concern as mentioned. Has anyone heard of an item called an "infinity transmitter"? This device which is essentially a long distance tap will activate one's phone and use it as a speaker/listening device. I don't believe they are legal other then for law-enforcement although you will see very watered-down versions in various electronic magazines. #1) This requires the attachment of a device on the phone or line of the target... #2) You can buy them as consumer security devices... to dial in at home and listen to your empty house... a couple hundred bucks... It is certainly legal to listen to your empty house... if a burgler was inside talking... and you listened in... well... it might be an interested question under the interception of oral communications statute... 18 USC 2500 et seq... It is no more legal for law enforcement to use such a device than you or I, UNLESS they have an appropriate warrant. ------ Glen L. Roberts, Host Full Disclosure Live Privacy, Surveillance, Technology and Government! Tech Talk Network, WWCR Shortwave: 5065 khz. 8pm est/Sundays. Real Audio: 7 days/week, 24 hrs a day: http://pages.ripco.com:8080/~glr/glr.html ------ ------------------------------ From: jmatk@tscm.com (James M. Atkinson, Communications Engineer) Date: 10 Dec 1995 05:12:05 -0500 Subject: Technical Surviellance Counter Measures WWW Page Organization: tscm.com A ton of new material on our web page, TSCM, Counter Surveillance and Debugging Page now on-line... Check it out... http://www.tscm.com/ -- jma ------------------------------ From: "Prof. L. P. Levine" Date: 22 Nov 1995 14:25:54 -0600 (CST) Subject: Info on CPD [unchanged since 11/22/95] Organization: University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee The Computer Privacy Digest is a forum for discussion on the effect of technology on privacy or vice versa. 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. This digest is a forum with information contributed via Internet eMail. Those who understand the technology also understand the ease of forgery in this very free medium. Statements, therefore, should be taken with a grain of salt and it should be clear that the actual contributor might not be the person whose email address is posted at the top. Any user who openly wishes to post anonymously should inform the moderator at the beginning of the posting. He will comply. If you read this from the comp.society.privacy newsgroup and wish to contribute a message, you should simply post your contribution. As a moderated newsgroup, attempts to post to the group are normally turned into eMail to the submission address below. On the other hand, if you read the digest eMailed to you, you generally need only use the Reply feature of your mailer to contribute. If you do so, it is best to modify the "Subject:" line of your mailing. Contributions to CPD should be submitted, with appropriate, substantive SUBJECT: line, otherwise they may be ignored. They must be relevant, sound, in good taste, objective, cogent, coherent, concise, and nonrepetitious. Diversity is welcome, but not personal attacks. Do not include entire previous messages in responses to them. Include your name & legitimate Internet FROM: address, especially from .UUCP and .BITNET folks. Anonymized mail is not accepted. All contributions considered as personal comments; usual disclaimers apply. All reuses of CPD material should respect stated copyright notices, and should cite the sources explicitly; as a courtesy; publications using CPD material should obtain permission from the contributors. Contributions generally are acknowledged within 24 hours of submission. If selected, they are printed within two or three days. The moderator reserves the right to delete extraneous quoted material. He may change the Subject: line of an article in order to make it easier for the reader to follow a discussion. He will not, however, alter or edit the text except for purely technical reasons. A library of back issues is available on ftp.cs.uwm.edu [129.89.9.18]. Login as "ftp" with password identifying yourid@yoursite. The archives are in the directory "pub/comp-privacy". People with gopher capability can most easily access the library at gopher.cs.uwm.edu. Web browsers will find it at gopher://gopher.cs.uwm.edu. ---------------------------------+----------------------------------------- Leonard P. Levine | Moderator of: Computer Privacy Digest Professor of Computer Science | and comp.society.privacy University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee | Post: comp-privacy@uwm.edu Box 784, Milwaukee WI 53201 | Information: comp-privacy-request@uwm.edu | Gopher: gopher.cs.uwm.edu levine@cs.uwm.edu | Web: gopher://gopher.cs.uwm.edu ---------------------------------+----------------------------------------- ------------------------------ End of Computer Privacy Digest V7 #050 ****************************** .