Date: Fri, 05 Jan 96 13:39:50 EST Errors-To: Comp-privacy Error Handler From: Computer Privacy Digest Moderator To: Comp-privacy@uwm.edu Subject: Computer Privacy Digest V8#003 Computer Privacy Digest Fri, 05 Jan 96 Volume 8 : Issue: 003 Today's Topics: Moderator: Leonard P. Levine Breasts on AOL Re: Compuserve Censoring USENET Re: Compuserve Censoring USENET Bully for US Gov't Boo to Wisconsin Re: Racial Classification Get Off Unwanted email Lists Public Universities and SSNs Checking Account Status is Public Re: The Year We Struggled with On-line Censorship Some Available Data Searches Info on CPD [unchanged since 11/22/95] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: cmoore@mailbag.com (Cathy Moore) Date: 03 Jan 1996 16:25:47 GMT Subject: Breasts on AOL Organization: Berbee Information Networks Corporation References: deselms@primenet.com (Gregg L. DesElms) writes: This story, of course, comes on the heels of the decidedly ridiculous brouhaha a month or so earlier in which America On-line, Inc. banned (and then nearly immediately withdrew said ban on) the use of the word "breast(s)" in user chat rooms, posting areas and e-mail. A minor quibble: I was using AOL at that time (I then gleefully dumped them) and was part of the breast cancer discussion group that brought attention to the problem. "Breast" was banned in chat room *names* and user profiles (self-descriptions by AOL "members"). As far as I know, AOL wasn't censoring "breast" in private e-mail, the chats themselves, or discussion group posts--at least none of the e-mail, chats, or discussion groups I was in. This may have been only because they didn't have the time and technology, and it certainly doesn't reduce the stupidity of the act. The story, in case no one has posted this before: In the summer, breast cancer survivors tried to form a chat room called "Breast cancer survivors." They were told that the chat room name was obscene. Someone tried variations, such as "boob cancer" and "hooter cancer." AOL accepted these--they were not "obscene." After lots of immediate and loud noise to AOL powers that be, "breast" became acceptable again in chat room names. (Or at least "breast cancer" did.) About two months later, a breast cancer survivor scanned through user profiles to find other women who described themselves as breast cancer survivors. She found that all these posts had been purged because of their allegedly obscene content. I did a similar profile search using "hooters" and all the other creative anatomical terms. Most of these showed up, used in all the dumb ways you would expect, in unpurged, un-"obscene" profiles. Several of us pointed out, *again*, to AOL powers that their obscenity filter not only was prohibiting mature discussion of a life-and-death issue, it wasn't working against other supposedly obscene content. We received no replies that I'm aware of. A breast cancer survivor with ties to the press then released the story to the media. While AOL didn't respond to my letter or to the letters from any other women I knew, it did respond *immediately* when the story was covered by the press. The day after media coverage began, one woman heard on the radio that AOL had changed its anti-"breast" policy in user profiles. She logged on and found it was true. Cathy ------------------------------ From: gmcgath@mv.mv.com (Gary McGath) Date: 03 Jan 1996 20:23:45 GMT Subject: Re: Compuserve Censoring USENET Organization: Conceptual Design References: fyoung@oxford.net (F Young) wrote: On the other hand, any government's attempt to block certain newsgroups would likely backfire. I would rather have adult materials restricted to adult newsgroups (like the current situation), rather than blocking those newsgroups and possibily making those seeking such materials to post randomnly to the remaining newsgroups. Of course, government have the power to block access to the Internet, period. One interesting fact which has come out is that three of the newsgroups banned in Germany are ClariNet newsgroups, and contain nothing but wire service stories, which are seldom if ever "pornographic." The groups are clari.news.crime.sex, clari.news.gays, and clari.news.sex. It may be that this action is more concerned with managing news than with "protecting" anyone from pornography. -- Gary McGath gmcgath@mv.mv.com http://www.mv.com/users/gmcgath One world, one vendor, one Web browser? No, thanks! ------------------------------ From: "Mich Kabay [NCSA Sys_Op]" <75300.3232@compuserve.com> Date: 04 Jan 96 10:27:19 EST Subject: Re: Compuserve Censoring USENET >From the German Press Agency news wire via CompuServe's Executive News Service; translated by MK with the help of Power Translator Deluxe 1.0 from Globalink Inc: Druck auf CompuServe wachst - Staatsanwaltschaft fordert Gutachten Munchen (dpa 96.01.03) - Der Druck auf den US-Online-Dienst CompuServe, die Zugangssperre fur 200 Dateien im weltumspannenden Computernetz Internet wieder aufzuheben, wachst. Nach Ermittlungen der Munchener Staatsanwaltschaft wegen des Verdachts der Verbreitung von Kinderpornographie hatte das Unternehmen Dateien mit angeblich illegalen Inhalten fur seine weltweit vier Millionen Kunden blockiert. .... Copyright German Press Agency, 1996 Pressure on CompuServe increases - office of the District Attorney demands expert opinions Munich (German Press Agency) - Pressure is increasing on the US online service CompuServe to cancel the embargo on access to 200 news groups on the Internet. After inquiries of the Munich office of the District Attorney on suspicion of dissemination of child pornography, CompuServe had blocked the access to the news groups containing allegedly illegal contents for its four million customers world wide. Key points: o Many protests and cancellations of subscriptions. o Blame centering on CompuServe management. o German subsidiary of CIS does not know when the ban on the alt.sex groups will be lifted. o Munich District Attorney's Office Chief State Prosecutor Manfred Wick said that Internet access providers should have the technical expertise to control access to such groups. o In the view of the office of the District Attorney, CompuServe must bear some responsibility for the data carried over its network. o The D.A. stated that the 200 news groups in question were included on a list submitted to CIS as part of an inquiry; CompuServe, state the prosecutors, chose on its own to ban access. o Protests are growing internationally, especially by civil rights groups and homosexual associations in the USA. o Protestors see the embargo as a restraint of free speech. o An action-group in San Francisco has called for a boycott of two German beer brands and plans a protest on Thursday in front of the Goethe-Institut. o An organization in Frankfurt is appealing to 4000 organizations dealing with children's welfare to participate in a meeting that they hope will include the Dept. of Justic to discuss methods of interfering with the display of child pornography on the Internet. o The leader of the German Association of Journalists, Hubert Engeroff, has called on the on-line service providers to exercise self-restraint. Managers should banish criminal materials such as pornography from their networks. M. E. Kabay, Ph.D. / Director of Education, National Computer Security Assn (Carlisle, PA) ------------------------------ From: "Prof. L. P. Levine" Date: 04 Jan 1996 19:17:30 -0600 (CST) Subject: Bully for US Gov't Boo to Wisconsin Organization: University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee I just got my new tax forms. My Social Security Number (SSN) did not appear on the federal form cover but was only on a label folded into the middle of the book. The state of Wisconsin, as usual, had my (and my wife's) SSN right on the top of the cover. Some years ago the Post Office, speaking for the federal government at that time, asserted that there was no reason to be concerned about the SSN appearing on the envelope or cover, as only postal workers (all honest) ever see the envelope before they place it into your (presumably locked) mailbox. They have gradually moved from this position and this year have finally fixed it, it seems. -- Leonard P. Levine e-mail levine@cs.uwm.edu Professor, Computer Science Office 1-414-229-5170 University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Fax 1-414-229-6958 Box 784, Milwaukee, WI 53201 PGP Public Key: finger llevine@blatz.cs.uwm.edu ------------------------------ From: Marshall Clow Date: 03 Jan 1996 20:06:00 -0800 Subject: Re: Racial Classification gmcgath@mv.MV.COM (Gary McGath) writes: An issue which I haven't seen discussed much on this forum is how to deal with requests to categorize oneself racially. Twice in the past two years I've been faced with such requests. I always answer "Native American", because I was born either in North or South America. :-) -- Marshall Clow Aladdin Systems Warning: Objects in calendar are closer than they appear. ------------------------------ From: Dave Rasmussen Date: 04 Jan 1996 13:51:56 -0600 (CST) Subject: Get Off Unwanted email Lists From: inside@insideconnect.com (Inside Connections) Date: 05 Nov 1995 12:44:27 -0800 Subject: The Solution To Unsolicited Email Hello Everyone: The Direct Electronic Mail Marketing Association D.E.M.M.A. has been created to bring structure and order to the increasing tidal wave of commercial email on the net. Our mission is to provide an environment where businesses and consumers can conduct business via email and prevent the spread of unsolicited email on the net. To help bring about this goal we have created a universal mail server for subscribing and unsubscribing to commercial email list. We also have a universal complaint address so victims of unsolicited mail can seek help and report violators. http://www.memo.net/demma/dema.html Our web site is still in it's infancy and will benefit from the constructive feedback of the list. We look forward to receiving your feedback and suggestions on the site as well as your thoughts on the mission of the D.E.M.M.A. Thank You Mark Eberra President Charter Member http://www.memo.net/demma/dema.html -- Dave Rasmussen - Information & Media Technologies (ex-CSD) Client Services Internet: dave@csd.uwm.edu Phone: 414-229-5133 2m HAM Radio: N9REJ USmail: Box 413 Bol213, Milwaukee, WI 53201 ------------------------------ From: wrf@ecse.rpi.edu (Wm. Randolph U Franklin) Date: 04 Jan 1996 22:47:20 GMT Subject: Public Universities and SSNs Organization: ECSE Dept, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY, 12180 USA Here are 2 examples of public universities asking for SSNs. UT Austin asks for the applicant's SSN on recommendation forms, and says that it is required. There is no privacy act notice. This would seem to be illegal. It is also intimidating since an applicant might be scared to make a fuss since the admissions process is so vague, and the applicant would never be able to prove that complaining was why he was rejected. The State University of New York at Stony Brook asks for SSNs on forms for conference participants, such as to get dorm housing and temporary parking permits. However, no one complained when I omitted my SSN on the latter. -- Wm. Randolph Franklin, wrf@ecse.rpi.edu, (518) 276-6077; Fax: -6261 ECSE Dept., 6026 JEC, Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst, Troy NY, 12180 USA ------------------------------ From: wrf@ecse.rpi.edu (Wm. Randolph U Franklin) Date: 04 Jan 1996 22:50:57 GMT Subject: Checking Account Status is Public Organization: ECSE Dept, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY, 12180 USA Every bank (and S&L etc) that I've checked with will tell you over the phone whether a check you're holding from one of their customers would clear if you deposited it. This means that if you know someone's account number, perhaps because they wrote you a check in the past, then you can call the bank, pretend to have a check from them for $X, and determine whether their balance is >=X. No bank manager that I've asked sees any privacy problems with this. -- Wm. Randolph Franklin, wrf@ecse.rpi.edu, (518) 276-6077; Fax: -6261 ECSE Dept., 6026 JEC, Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst, Troy NY, 12180 USA ------------------------------ From: bernie@fantasyfarm.com (Bernie Cosell) Date: 05 Jan 1996 03:06:41 GMT Subject: Re: The Year We Struggled with On-line Censorship Organization: Fantasy Farm Fibers References: gkastane@scsn.net (George Kastanes) wrote: ... The real issue is whether the internet or any media should be subject to censorship at all under any circumstances. ... ... We have laws that preclude dissemination of pornography based on community standards. That entire concept is in and of itself patently absurd. This view is certainly a significant aspect of the debate. The problem is that you are wildly out of line on the matter. There has never been a moment, from the time the Pilgrims first set foot on the continent throught the First Congress up to the present day, when there haven't been laws and regulations of the type you find so "patently absurd"; there is at least 300 years of legal tradition in this country to the contrary. Moreover, if you read the Supreme Court decisions about Pornography matters you will see that the question has only been "what" and "how", *never* has it been "whether". And so the notion that the laws about Pornography are somhow contrary to the First Amendment and are an unwarranted and unanticipated imposition on us poor network folks is really off the mark. If you are going to try to mount a real frontal assault on the "entire concept", then you are pursuing the most hopeless of fool's errands. Indeed, *every* other medium and public channel deals with these sorts of restrictions, and so it would be naive in the extreme not to assume that *some* sort of corresponding limitations will be imposed on the network. This is not to say that the Exon bill is a good thing... only that *some*sort* of legislation of that type is truly inevitable. The point? Well: if you want to waste your time and breath tilting at windmills, then that's fine but you'll have essentially dealt yourself out of the _real_ game that is going on and will mostly have to put up with whatever the legislators throw at us. On the other hand, a different approach is to figure out what the *right* legislation ought to be... to try to have your expertise and knowledge help shape _rational_ legisilation, rather than letting your ill-informedness on the underlying legal [and social] issues condemn you to the fringes. On the other hand, if you do want to pursue the quest, at least be aware of how tough a row it is going to be to hoe. You'll have to make a case that the network is a medium different from *any* other, and that that difference should be the reason to overturn hundreds of years of *unquestioned* legal precedent, rather than that difference meaning that some sort of new and innovative legislation is called for. Note that you won't find all that much support: the adult film and book folk, the their distribution channels and the retail outlets they use all are *already* unquestionably subject to the sort of regulations you're claiming are "absurd". -- Bernie Cosell Fantasy Farm Fibers bernie@fantasyfarm.com Pearisburg, VA --> Too many people, too few sheep <-- ------------------------------ From: "Prof. L. P. Levine" Date: 03 Jan 1996 20:21:17 -0600 (CST) Subject: Some Available Data Searches Organization: University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee The following is a coupling of two postings on alt.privacy . I am not sure of how authentic it is but I would bet that most of the material can be gleaned from sources like the following. It was copied from this non-moderated group without permission. -- Leonard P. Levine e-mail levine@cs.uwm.edu Professor, Computer Science Office 1-414-229-5170 University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Fax 1-414-229-6958 Box 784, Milwaukee, WI 53201 PGP Public Key: finger llevine@blatz.cs.uwm.edu From: slavisc@wizvax.net () Subject: SSN database searches Date: 03 Jan 1996 10:04:37 GMT Organization: Wizvax Communications, Troy, N.Y. 12180 USA Newsgroups: alt.privacy I found the following article in alt.private.investigator. The guy that posted this seems to suggest that any of the following services are available upon request to anyone willing to shell out the cash. Some of the services such as finding someone's SSN by suppling thier name and current address seem highly illegal. Can anyone tell me if this is indeed legal and who actually has access to these services. slavisc@wizvax.net Electronic Services Garland, TX 75042 EXPLANATION OF SEARCHES & PRICES NATIONAL DATABASES VERIFICATION/LOCATOR SEARCHES 1. SSN TRACING. Illustrates all names, current addresses, former addresses linked with this ssn. $68.00 2. NATIONAL KRIS-CROSS PLUS. Link listed phone number back to address, or link address back to listed phone number. $80.00 3. NATIONAL DOSSIER. This report usually will provide known addresses, SSN, telephone numbers, vessels, aircraft and neighbors' name, addresses and telephone numbers. $75.00 4. SURNAME SEARCHES. City search. $48.00, State Search. $55.00, Nationwide. $80.00. Each report will provide up to 50 names. 5. FIND SSN. Need name and current address. $55.00. 6. DEATH REPORTS. Provide first name, last name, DOB or DOD etc and we receive all of the most probable matches. Information returned is state where ssn was issued, 5 digit zip code of last known residence, 5 digit zip code of of last known payed benefit. $58.00. 7. VERIFY MEDICAL DOCTORS/STOCK BROKERS/SECURITY DEALERS LICENSE. Full name, ssn and state to search. $75.00 CRIMINAL RECORDS SEARCH 1. CRIMINAL HISTORIES REPORTS. Provides any Criminal charges or convictions from county, state or federal. Not all states provide a statewide search Need name, DOB, ssn, city, county and state. a. county search-$75.00, state search-$90.00, federal-$100.00 2. WORKERS COMPENSATION CLAIMS. Information usually returned accident date, type, employer. Some states have restrictions. $80.00 MOTOR VEHICLE REPORTS 1. MVR REPORTS. Driving records, vin, tag number. Info will contain information on DUI, DWI, reckless operation, speeding tickets, suspensions, etc. Drivers License by DL#. $55.00, Drivers License by DOB. $75.00. Tag #.$70.00 Alpha Search (vehicles owned). $95.00 Florida, Texas, Oregon quick turnaround. Some states have restrictions BUSINESS/CORPORATE SEARCHES 1. COMMERCIAL CREDIT. This report provides dates of Incorporation, historic payment guide, highest credit amount extended, payment trend, DBT (average number of days that is takes firm to pay bills. $50.00 for intial search fee, $95.00 if a report is returned. 2. UCC FILINGS. Filings all corporate record information filed with the state attorneys office by the company including Uniform Commercial code filings which is a record of a lien aganist a company. $90.00 3. TRADEMARKS SEARCH. Search by Trademark, Company name, Company by address, or serial number of Trademark. $68.00 REAL PROPERTY ASSET SEARCHES 1. PROPERTY SEARCHES. determine ownership of property, book, parcel, and platt number and accessed value. Not all states offer staewide search and some have limited counties. County $75.00 State $135.00. PUBLIC RECORDS DATABASES 1. PUBLIC RECORDS. These include judgements by state, bankruptcy by state. This includes any action on either individual or company. $68.00 2. FAA RECORDS. Records will identify current medical and ratings or Tail number can identify type of plane and current owner. $85.00 TEXAS DATABASES 1. TEXAS BOAT REGISTRATIONS. Search by name, address, title number or boat.motor ID number. Provides make, model year, serial number, title date. $65.00 2. TEXAS CORPORATIONS. Provide corporate number, corporate name, address. Report contains corporations status, filing date, resident agent, officers, documented vessels, vehicles and aircraft. $75.00 3. TEXAS ALCOHOL BEVERAGE LICENSES. Provide establishment name or license #, or owner's name and report will include owners name and mailing address, telephone number, date of license issue and expiration of licenses. $65.00 4. TEXAS VOTER REGISTRATION. Provide name or address, last name DOB. This report will provide age, DOB, voter certificate number, precinct, county, and mailing address. $65.00 DATA SEARCH SERVICES 1. 3000-A supply published or unpublished phone number and we supply subscriber name and address. $120.00 2. 3000-B supply name, address, & residental phone #; we supply current months IN-STATE or OUT OF STATE calls (separate searches please specify) w\dates. supply SSN if available. $135.00. 3. 3000-BB supply same info as above and we supply 3 months IN-STATE OR OUT OF STATE calls with dates. Current month and back. $200.00 4. 3000-C supply subjects name and current address and we supply phone number. Please supply ssn if available. $120.00 5. 3000-D supply phone number which has been changed to a non-published # and we will provide new phone # and current address. $128.00 6. 3000-DD supply subjects disconnected phone # and we supply last known information or forwarding information (whichever is available) $130.00 7. 3000-E supply subjects name, city, state and ssn# (if avaliable) and we supply current address and phone. $125.00 8. 3000-F supply subjects pager # (beeper) and we supply subscriber information as it appears through carrier. $140.00 9. 3000-G supply residental phone # and we supply name & address & current months IN-STATE or OUT OF STATE calls w/dates. $175.00 10. 3000-GG supply residential phone # and we supply name & address & 3 months IN STATE OR OUT OF STATE calls w/dates. $200.00 11. 3000-H supply subjects name, city, state & ssn and we supply address through Utilities. $135.00 12. 3000-J supply subjects name, PO Box # and ssn and we supply physical address on file with Post Office. $155.00 13. 3000-K supply current 800 or 900 number & we supply service name and address. $125.00 14. 3000-L supply subjects private PO Box information and we supply name and address on file. $150.00 15. 3000-M supply subjects cellular phone# and ssn (if available) and we supply the billing name and address. $135.00 16. 3000-N supply subjects name, address, cellular and ssn (if available) and we supply current months calls. $275.00 17. 3000-P supply subjects address including city & state, we supply name & phone number. $135.00 18. 3000-R supply subjects voice mail number and we supply name & address. $130.00 19. 3000-S supply subjects name, address, phone #, SSN and we supply ALL current Nationwide banking information. $365.00 20. 3000-Z supply name and SSN and we supply current employment. $175.00. (subjects address and phone number will help to expedite). ******IMPORTANT , PLEASE NOTE***** The 3000 series searches require a 5-6 business day turnaround time with the exception of 3000-S & 3000-Z. These require a 10-12 business days. All of your requests are private and held in strictest of confidence. All 3000 searches and services are Nationwide. All 3000 series searches are on a CONTINGENCY basis. All other reports and searches are billed for the services provided, not based upon the results of the information. The more information you provide will result in what information you will recieve. Some reports and searches require additional searches to obtain the results you are trying to obtain. PAYMENT POLICY. All searches and reports are NOT processed until payment IS RECEIVED. Credit is available ONLY to established accounts with net terms of 10 days only. No Record, set of records, or report supplied by Electronic Services is acceptable for use as an exhibit or as evidence. The reports supplied by Electronic Services are supplied for information purposes only. It is the sole responsiblity of the recipient of any information, to obtain evidential verification of all information which is of evidentail quality. Information is obtained from multitude databases, record keeping systems, and other sources over which Electronic Services and/or its suppliers have no control. These are fallible electronic and human sources and there can absolutley no warranty expressed or implied as to the accuracy, completeness, timeless, or availability of the records listed, nor to the fitness for the purpose of the recipent of such records or reports. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - From: malamb@ix.netcom.com(Michael Lamb ) Subject: SSN database searches Date: 03 Jan 1996 20:59:19 GMT Organization: Netcom Newsgroups: alt.privacy I have read this post before, and am sure that many others have as well - so I won't quote it back. Let me give you my background first, so you know where I come from on this: I spent ten years as a private investigator and also have considerable time as an active police officer. I am also concerned about the easy violations of privacy, many of which I used to my advantage when paid for it. The post you referred to is a scam - but ONLY in that their rates are about a zillion times what the service is worth. The information is in fact accessable. Some of their services are a bit shady, perhaps unlawful, but most are very legal. Let's drop the fact that many are public record (driving records, criminal records, etc) and readily accesible to any and all who know where to look. To the SSN part: One of my specialties as a PI was "skip/trace" - I would find people that didn't want to be found. I called TRW, and had them set up a terminal on my home desk. I opened accounts with TRW, TransUnion, and CBI-Equifax. I had immediate access to anybodys credit records. Now, here is the kicker. Legally, I could only access a complete credit report if I had a valid reason - i.e. was hired by a bank to find one of their skips. Since every full report inquiry I did would leave a "fingerprint", I didn't do this (although the temptation to look up my friends credit ratings was strong at times). But doing the SSN search, or name and address search, did not access any "confidential" information. I could type in "123 Maple Ave, yourcity, 12345-6789) and get the names and SSN's of anyone who had a credit rating and lived at that address within the last ten years. Quite legal. If I had your SSN, I could enter that in a query and find out all names and addresses associated with that SSN. All legal. Did you know that TransUnion also lists addresses by buying magazine and other databases? Even if you don't have a credit report, if you are deep underground - all you have to do is subscribe to "Outlaws Monthly" or whatever and your name will show up at that address. All legal. If I suspect you live at 123 maple, I pull a query on that address - everything associated to that address from just about every conceivable database is accessable. If your creditor or ex-wife gives me your ssn, then I can come up with a lot of legal and readily available information about you and where you may be. If I want to bend the rules a little, I can come up with much much more. All legal, or most of it anyway. Is this a violation of privacy? I think so, but I used it to my advantage. But I take precautions to make it difficult for anyone to use the same tricks on me. But don't even consider paying this jerks rates. A reputable local PI will pull all that information for you for about $50.00 total (plus expenses) - not charge you $80.00 + for a $5.00 doc and 2 minutes of connect time. ------------------------------ 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 V8 #003 ****************************** .