Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Hackers Issue 04
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
-= H A C K E R S =-
Issue #4, November, 1995
Edited by: Revolution
-------------------
Hackers Forums
-------------------
From the editor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Revolution
Letters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Hackers World Wide
-------------------
Technology
-------------------
Xterm hack . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aftermath
Beige Boxing in Australia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Aftermath
Computer fraud laws in Australia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aftermath
-------------------
Politics
-------------------
The Cyberangels. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CuD #7.86
FBI National Wiretap System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jim Warren
Campaign to Stop the CDA . . . . . . . . . Voters Telecommunications Watch
The End . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Revolution
----------------------------------------------------------------- -----------
copyright 1995 by Mike Scanlon All articles remain the property of their
authors, and may be reprinted with their permission. This zine may be
reprinted freely as a whole electronically, for hard copy rights mail the
editor. HACKERS is published monthly by Mike Scanlon, to be added to the
subscription list or to submit articles mail scanlonr@delphi.com
----------------------------------------------------------------- -----------
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
-= H A C K E R S =-
Issue #4, File #1 of 9
From the Editor
Between carrying four honors courses, pledging a fraternity, working,
and trying to go home every once in a while, its been pretty difficult getting
this issue together. But here it is, and as you can see, I've changed the
format a little bit. This was mostly done to try and split up the technology
articles from the political articles, so that those of use who have more of an
interest in one or the other will know basically what to scroll through.
The other section, Hackers Forums, will consist of monthly columns.
Right now all that consists of is this column, and for the first time this
month a letters column. In the near future, hopefully by at least January,
I'd like to add two more columns, a bug of the month column and a virus of the
month column. I would like to see these two columns authored by someone other
than myself, as I do not have the time to do either of these subjects the
justice they should be done. In other words, I would like to increse the
staff here at Hackers from one to at least two, perhaps three. Of course, I
could give these authors no financial compensation, the only reward you would
have would be seeing your work in a monthly publication. These authors would
be required to come up with one virus or security flaw each month, and right
a short piece on how it is written or exploited. If anyone is interested,
please email me your handle, email address you can be reached at, a short
personal bio, and a paragraph on why you deserve to be the virus/bug of the
month author. Send all of this to scanlonr@delphi.com, as usual.
Things at Hackers have been progressing, albeit slowly. The web page
has been grossly neglected, I apologize to everyone for that. Soon Hackers
will have an honest to goodness ftp site, thanks to daemon9, at
onyx.infonexus.com. My lcoal ACM chapter is still trying to get the equipment
to get that BBS up, that will definetly be going up within the next few
monthes.
So until next month, keep the articles and letters coming in, and
hopefully Hackers will continue to grow.
- Revolution
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
As always, the standard disclaimer applies. All of these articles are
provided for informational purposes only, Mike Scanlon and the respective
authors cannot be held accountable for any illegal acts they are used to
commit.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
-= H A C K E R S =-
Issue #4, File #2 of 9
Letters
Finally! A letters column! These letters have been accumulated over
the past few monthes. I would like to have a letters column again next month,
so if you have a question, or something to say about the mag, by all means,
write in!
From: IN%"I@NEED.YOUR.HELP" 11-OCT-1995 13:44:28.82
To: IN%"scanlonr@delphi.com"
I have the following: Keara H. 59 Massari Pueblo Colorado Zipcode = 81001, USA
U see I only have the *first letter* of the family name. In France with
the street name I know how to get names and phone numbers of ALL THE
PEOPLE living in that street
I WANT KEARA'S FULL NAME: looks to me like the only way will be to get
the phone book of zipcode 81001 and look at all the names beginning with
the letter H until I find the right street addr, right?
[I would call information at 555-1212, in whatever area code that happens to
be, and simply ask the operator the number of that house, and then the last
name. In Albany and Newark, at least, they have no problem with giving it
out, assuming the number is not unlisted. -Revolution]
>From ajs4283@hertz.njit.eduMon Oct 23 21:18:16 1995
Date: Wed, 4 Oct 1995 13:04:40 -0400 (EDT)
From: Anthony J Saunders <ajs4283@hertz.njit.edu>
To: michael r scanlon cis stnt <mrs3691@hertz.njit.edu>
Subject: Re: Hackers #3
BLLLEEEAAAUUURRRGGGHHH!!!
BLLLEEEAAAUUURRRGGGHHH!!!
BLLLEEEAAAUUURRRGGGHHH!!!
BLLLEEEAAAUUURRRGGGHHH!!!
BLLLEEEAAAUUURRRGGGHHH!!!
just to let you know what I think of ur zine!
<g>
[This commentary came from my roomate, who being a vegan refuses to eat any
animal products. Apparently he has become extremely anemic and disoriented,
and wouldn't know a good hacker mag if he fell over it. -Revolution]
>From jmcmilla@cycor.caWed Nov 8 15:39:53 1995
Date: Sun, 5 Nov 1995 23:01:19 +0000
From: James McMillan <jmcmilla@cycor.ca>
To: mrs3691@hertz.njit.edu
Subject: Cool zine you run
I am writing you concerning your e-zine HACKERS, I was wonderin what
criteria you have to meet to get article in it?
Is your e-zine the only hacking zine still in print?
Thanks
----------------------------------------------------------------
James McMillan jmcmilla@bud.peinet.pe.ca
P.E.I. Canada
"Don't forget to boogie" Bob "The Bear" Hite
----------------------------------------------------------------
[Just send it in. There aren't really any criteria, anything having to do
with H/P will do. Look at back issues if you have any doubts. Check out
Issue #2's Security resources article for information about other zines.
-Revolution]
From: IN%"cshink@lava.net" 24-OCT-1995 13:28:13.75
To: IN%"scanlonr@delphi.com"
CC:
Subj: Hackers
Please add my address, "cshink@lava.net" to your HACKERS mailing list. It's
really hard to get CURRENT H/P info, especially local (808) stuff. If you
know of other zines like yours around, I'd appreciate it.
_________________\|/__________________
----====cshink@lava.net===----
/|\
[Hmmm...Phrack comes to mind right off the top of my head. At ftp.eff.org
they have a good archive of older H/P mags. Check out Hackers #2, the article
by Chris Klaus about security resources. As for local 808 stuff, I couldn't
be certain. Try posting on your local boards. Which leads to a problem if
you don't know of any local boards. How about this...anyone who runs a local
H/P BBS, send in an add to be reprinted next month. If you know of anyone who
runs one, tell them to send an add in. -Revolution]
From: IN%"carbon@inforamp.net" 8-NOV-1995 21:23:45.46
Subj: Very bad shit in Canada
I received this today from the "Prez", Very shitty stuff , and a taste of
things to come????
I think this smells very bad....very bad indeed..
----------
Bell Canada is Trying to Destroy ISP's: An open letter to Mr. John T. McLennan,
President and CEO, Bell
Canada
Tuesday November 7th, 1995
Dear Carbon,
As you are likely aware by now, Bell Canada is refusing to provide new Centrex
III phone lines to Ontario
and Quebec ISP's. Further, Bell Canada is attempting to void existing Centrex
III agreements and is trying to force upon ISPs a solution that would increase
phone costs by approximately 300%.
Co-incidentially, Bell Canada intends to announce a rollout of its own
residential Internet service within the next 3-4 weeks.
If Bell is successful, the cost of Internet access for end users in Ontario and
Quebec will likely rise by a minimum of 30% (this was the experience in
BC when BC Tel voided contracts). This means that you will be forced to
pay more money for Internet access without any incremental gain in value.
I have mailed an open letter to Mr. John T. McLennan, President and CEO, Bell
Canada expressing our concerns. If you wish to obtain a copy, it may be
accessed from our main home page, http://www.idirect.com/belltext.html,
and is entitled "John Nemanic's open letter to John T. McLennan,
President and CEO of Bell Canada."
It is not our intent to demonize Bell since I honestly believe that refusal to
provide new Centrex III lines, attempts to dishonour Centrex contracts,
and force inferior solutions at 300% of our present cost, is the result
of a few senior managers promoting a policy without considering
the full implications of their course of action. Generally, I have found
that our Bell sales representatives, field staff and engineers to be of
very high quality and extremely attentive to customer concerns. It is my
fervent hope that they will not be unfairly grouped in with the actions
of a few of their so-called 'superiors'.
We are not requesting customers, at this time, show their displeasure by
participating in the proposed 'Billion Dollar Boycott' of Bell long
distance, cellular phone services, equipment etc. We want you to
form your own opinion and towards that end, a newly formed ISP association
will be mounting a PR and Web campaign to explain our point of view.
Indeed, we hope that sanity will prevail and that we can continue to work with
Bell Canada to deliver state of the art solutions at an affordable cost to our
customers.
Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
John A. Nemanic MBA, President
Internet Direct Canada Inc.
ComputerLink Online Inc.
Ph (416) 233-7150
E-mail: wolfmstr@idirect.com
http://www.idirect.com
Ontario's Leading Internet Access Provider and
Internet Applications Software Development Firm.
------
_________________________________________________________________ __________
C | a | r | b | o | n | B | o | y
My views are not neccesarily those of my ISP and are protected by
the CANADIAN CHARTER OF RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS and Freedom of Information and
Protection of Privacy Act [Revised Statutes of Ontario, 1990, Chapter F.31]
carbon@inforamp.net
C o p y R i g h t 1 9 9 5
Member, *The Guild & EFC
_________________________________________________________________ ___________
[Once again, big business attempts to take over the internet. I pray to the
almighty hacker that it may never happen. - Revolution]
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
-= H A C K E R S =-
Issue #4, File #3 of 9
Xterm Hack
By: Aftermath
[This file is a uuencoded version of a hack of the magic cookie xterm
authorization scheme. Aftermath has informed me that CERT has gotten wind of
this, so it may not work in the near future. -Revolution]
begin 600 xdm.tar.gz.uue
M'XL("%14C# WAD;2YT87( [%M?;!S'>5]2E"6N79=6[-A.:F!$->(==7>\
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M.PC)SN2DQ)W'-C242(ZH#O_A(J4N8HD7#T,0#UT\<$!*J@@#^$&IB\P$!G(
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M-V@(IXQPI)1Q^M='![ 88ZHM%6KM)R-QK4TX@B/$:C)P1F$+_(!<")M[0YQ
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ME_'>T<[V;#ESK6W&S7/%B^, YS!,:\Y9?+W6-KR*RWH'UV+7V;-ULEM)Y5S
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MHITGL&A7GVP>+>&S$,8F'YJ(CZ<2P,FT!PL6>[R!96^+@46;@6#1UA981T2
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$ * ?(
end
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
-= H A C K E R S =-
Issue #4, File #4 of 9
Beige Boxing in Australia
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
By: Aftermath
Disclamer:
This documents, and all the ideas presented are all hypothetical, and
for informational purposes only. The author cannot be held responsible for any
results which occure from the "practice" and use of any ideas presented. That
is to say, this document is only for your "better" understanding of how our
telecomunications system works, and to illustrate how easy it is to "abuse"
the current system.
Notes:
The actual process of building a beige box is extremely easy and the
instructions are widely available, so rather than write them out myself, you
can get them yourself. My recomendation is the one by Revolution. (The USA
plans will work fine in Australia!).
How To (Beige Box in Australia):
This would have to be one of the most simple phield phreaking methods
available, and if done correctly, probably one of the safest and with few
hastles. The idea behind the beige box is simply to "wire into" someone elses
phone line. Despite what you hear, this is VERY simple. In all essence, you
are simply putting another telephone on someone's line.
There are several ways to attain this goal. You can just attach your
phone to the overhead wires (usually done from within trees), attach yourself
at the houses socket (climb onto roof whilst the owners are away), climb into
The Telecom underground Pits or as I prefure, to use one of the very
convenient telecom inspection boxes. Here in is the instructions for the
convenient inspection boxes, but it's pretty much the same for the other ways.
What to Look For:
You've probably all already seen these boxes before, but never given
them a second glance (unless your like me). What you want is the little boxes
located on some (NOT all) stobie poles (as per diagram 1.1). Their either
black, white or cream with the telecom insignia stamped on them. From memory,
they're approx 10cm across and 18cm high, and usually easily accessible (just
above the ground or chest hight :). They're made of plastic, and the only
thing holding the sliding lid shut is a single phillips-head screw.
fi Ñ
[Diagram 1.1] fi Ñ <--- Stobie Pole
fi Ñ
fi Ñ
fi Ñ<-------- PVC Piping holding Wires
fi Ñ
fi Ñ
fi Ñ
fi Ñ
fi éü°ü¯
Black, White or Cream Box ----->Ñ Ñ
fi Ñ Ñ
fi Ñ 0<-------- Telecum Insignia
Single Phillips-Head Screw ------->. Ñ
fi øü¨üç
fi Ñ
fi Ñ
fi Ñ
fi Ñ
fi Ñ
˛˛üüüü°üüüü˛˛
How to Connect your Box:
Well, just grab your Beige Box and a phillips-head screwdriver (just a
bit bigger than the ones used on computers) and go find a box (usually one per
block, at least in my area anyway). After removing the lid (by sliding it
upwards), you should see a mess of wires (red, green and black) which are
paired together at the top of the box by small plastic clips (or sometimes
just tape) and telecum (I fucking hate this jelly shit!). I still seriously
want to know what this stuff is for! Extra lube for when the linesmen get
bored????!
Anyway, now you want to find two wires for the same line. Looking at
all the wires, you can ignore most of them. The one your after is the big
chunkey black one which splits into a red and a green wire in the middle of
a clear plastic case. You should be able to work out which one it is. Like,
it's thicker than the other wires. You can use the others, but they're not
always connected and thus can be a waste of time.
æ
[Diagram 2.1] æ<----- Main Carrier (Thick Black Wire)
æ
æ
_æ_
/ æ \
Clear Plastic Case --->Ñ æ Ñ
Ñ Ü Ñ
Ñ / \ Ñ
\Ñ_Ñ/
Red ----->Ñ Ñ<---- Any Colour (Usually Green)
Ñ Ñ
Ñ Ñ<-.__ Subscriber's Line
Ñ<---'
Now the fun begins. If you havn't got a steady hand, your in for a
little bit of vandalism here. You now need to strip the two wires you've
found (not completely! just enough to clip the alligator clips on your Beige
Box too!). To do this, I actually use the alligator clips, but it took a
little practice to be able to do this. Some people use pocket knives etc. It
doesn't matter, as long as you get some wire exposure on both wires. If you
break a wire, you can either try and re-wire it (re connect, afterall their's
heaps of slack), move to a new set of wires, or bolt and hope no-one's been
watching you!).
Ok, so now you've got two wires, with a little bit of each wire
exposed. Now simply attack one alligator clip to one wire, and the other
alligator clip to the other wire. You should now have a happy phone, with full
capabilities. ie, dial away dude!
If you find that there isn't a dialtone, try swapping the clips over.
If this fails, then fuck! You've either messed up somewhere or the box is
useless and you should move on to another box.
Extra Cool shit:
One other thing that I like doing is linking several phone lines
together and creating a sort of tele-conference. To do so, you'll need quite
a few bits of wire, and heaps of alligator clips. Note, you'll need to ring
the participant before linking it to the conference. I'm sure you can work out
the rest..
As an Afterthought:
Whilst writting this article, I forgot that Telecom is now called
Telstra. Don't let my use of Telecom confuse you, I am refuring to Telstra
(not that is really matters).
Also, after wiring into the phone, you may want to dial 1231 or 191231
to make sure it's not the phone number of anyone you don't want to bill (ie
your own or a friends phoneline!). I have to admit, I'm not sure if this will
still work. I always go to neighbourhoods where I don't know anyone so I've
never had to check the line's number. If either number doesn't work anymore,
I'm sure there's some other number you can dial to check.
Enjoy your new found knowledge!
If you wish to discuss these ideas, feel free to mail me
Aftermath (fish@suburbia.net) /CCN
Note: This article was origionally written on a 486. If your using a unix
machine, diagrams may be distorted. This is not my fault. sorry for any
inconveniences!
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<this has been a CCN production for Hackers Ezine!>=-
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
-= H A C K E R S =-
Issue #4, File #5 of 9
----------------------------------------------------------------- --------------
The Law Concerning Unauthorised Access to Computer Systems in Australia
----------------------------------------------------------------- --------------
By: Aftermath
Australia has some of the most comprehensive laws against computer crime in the
world. They cover not only Commonwealth-owned computers, but those that store
data on behalf of the Commonwealth (such as University machines) and any
computers accessed via telecommunication carriers such as Telecom and Optus.
This covers any machine connected via telephone line and modem, as well as all
AARNet and Internet computers.
A criminal act is committed as soon as a computer is accessed ``intentionally
and without authority''.
A more serious offence is committed if the machine is accessed ``with intent to
defraud'', or if it is accessed intentionally and without authority and it is
storing data which relate to the following categories (which cover almost any
type of data that might be found on a computer). It is a further offense if,
after first examining data listed in the following categories, someone
continues to examine data on:
* the personal affairs of any person
* trade secrets
* records of financial institutions
* the protection of public safety
* the enforcement of Territory, State or Commonwealth laws
* security, defence, or international relations of Australia
* confidential sources of information relating to the enforcement of
criminal law
* commercial information which could cause advantage or disadvantage to any
person
The most serious offences are:
* destroying, erasing, altering, or inserting data
* interfering with, interrupting, or obstructing the use of a computer
* impeding or preventing access to, or impairing the usefulness or
effectiveness of data
The above definitions could cover simply using the CPU of another machine
without authority to run a job, copy files, or just play games (`interfering
with the use of a computer').
All University computing facilities may call upon the Computer Crimes Section,
Australian Federal Police, to investigate illegal activity as above. Acceptable
evidence in court includes computer printouts, and the sworn testimony of
computing staff and specialists. Penalties range from six month to ten years
imprisonment, and result in a criminal record. The above is a summary of the
contents of the Crimes Act-Part VIA, Sections 76A, 76B, 76C, 76D and 76E.
----------------------------------------------------------------- --------------
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
-= H A C K E R S =-
Issue #4, File #6 of 9
CYBERANGELS: FAQ
From CuD 7.86, 10/1/95 http://www.soci.niv.edu/~cudigest
The Guardian Angels "CyberAngels" project is an all-volunteer
Internet patrol and monitoring project started by senior members of the world
famous "International Alliance of Guardian Angels", whose HQ is in New York
City.
We are a worldwide informal group of volunteers, whose mission is to be a
Cyberspace "Neighborhood Watch".
THE INTERNET IS OUR NEIGHBORHOOD - LET'S LOOK AFTER IT!
1) How did the CyberAngels project start?
The Cyberangels project was born in June 1995, after a discussion between
senior Guardian Angels about the apparent lawlessness of the Internet world
CyberCity. Guardian Angels leaders on the West Coast of the USA (Los Angeles
and San Francisco) had been online for the previous 2 years, and when
Guardian Angels Founder and President Curtis Sliwa himself went online in New
York City and got his email address, we began a serious discussion about
CyberCrime and how the Guardian Angels might respond to it.
Curtis Sliwa has a daily talk radio show on WABC in the New York state area.
Once he had an email address, he made the announcement over the radio, and
his email box immediately started to receive letters telling stories of
online harassment (stalking), hate mail, pedophiles trying to seduce children
in live chat areas, and complaints from worried parents about the easy access
their children had to hard core pornographic images.
Realizing that there was a big issue at stake here, Curtis began discussing
the Internet issues on his talk show, and as the debate raged daily, and the
letters kept pouring in, we realized that perhaps we were being asked to DO
SOMETHING.
We sat down and discussed what we the Guardian Angels could do to help
reassure parents and to make the Net a safer place for kids and others. The
answer was simple - we should do what we do in the streets. The Internet is
like a vast city: there are some rough neighborhoods in it, including "red
light" areas. Why not patrol the Internet, particularly in these "rough
neighborhoods" just like a Neighborhood Watch? Just like our own Guardian
Angels Community Safety Patrols. And why not recruit our volunteers from the
very people who inhabited this vast world CyberCity? Who better than to
cruise the Net watching out for people's safety than members of the Internet
community themselves? After all, who else could do it? Never an
organization to blame it on, or leave it to the government, we decided to do
something ourselves.
So the CyberAngels program was set up - an all volunteer team, providing a
CyberSpace Community Safety Patrol and an Internet monitoring service.
Current CyberAngels Chief Coordinator is Colin "Gabriel" Hatcher.
2) What is the purpose of the CyberAngels project?
The purpose of the project is
a) To promote and protect the idea that the same laws of decency and respect
for others that apply in our streets should apply also to the Internet.
b) To protect our children from online abuse.
c) To pressurize service providers to enforce their Terms of Service.
d) To give advice and assistance to victims of hate mail, harassment and
sexual abuse online.
e) To watch out for users violating terms of service by committing
cybercrimes and to report them to relevant authorities (Sysadmins, or even
Police).
f) To help to make unnecessary Government legislation by showing Government
that the World Net Community takes the safety of our children and the well
being of all its members seriously.
3) How does the project work?
Volunteers send their information to Gabriel at ganetwatch@aol.com and we
send them a copy of our FAQ. Each volunteer volunteers to spend a minimum of
2 hours per week cruising the Net and looking for places where they believe
there may be unacceptable activity. It is up to each member where they go
and what they look for, although sometimes we may send a bulletin to all
members advising them to search a particular area.
If a volunteer finds criminal activity on the Net, GANetWatch functions as a
clearing house for information. We do encourage members to report violations
themselves, but we ask that copies of all actions taken are forwarded to us.
Members may choose instead to simply report the problem to us and leave it
to our more experienced members to deal with.
We keep our members informed via email, with a regular update on what's going
on.
4) Why do we need volunteers?
The Internet Community is huge - around 40-50 million people, and growing
every day. There are hundreds of new Web sites each week. The more
volunteers we have, the more effective we can be. And by giving a little of
your time to looking after the welfare of the Net, you can make a real
difference!
WE NEED MORE VOLUNTEERS!
Anyone can be a CyberAngel. The only requirement is that you commit a
minimum of 2 hours per week to the project. No previous experience or
special skills are necessary...although a computer and an Internet account
would be useful! :)
JOIN US NOW! LOOK AFTER YOUR CYBERCITY!
We are anonymous in cyberspace. Noone cruises with a Cyberangels badge. And
we do not encourage our volunteers to identify themselves online. We DO NOT
advise our volunteers to challenge cybercriminals directly, neither by
arguing in live areas, nor by flaming in emails, nor by counter-postings on
message boards / newsgroups. Being a CyberAngel involves no risk or
danger. You are volunteering only to be eyes watching the Net.
5) What should volunteers be looking out for?
We are searching to uncover and prevent:
a) Child abuse and pedophilia;
b) The trading in images of child pornography;
b) Sexual harassment;
c) Hate crimes, including harassment;
d) Fraud schemes operating on the Net (particularly credit card fraud);
e) Software piracy;
f) Computer virus developments;
g) Terrorism, bomb-making, weapons trading etc.
Activities between consenting adults (providing they are within the law) are
not our concern.
Searching for the above violations our volunteers are encouraged to visit:
a) Live talk sites (Chat Rooms, IRC areas, MUDs etc);
b) Kids and Teens sites of all types;
c) Message boards, where visitors can leave postings;
d) Newsgroups (particularly "alt." newsgroups);
e) Any sites providing material / discussions / images / contacts of a
sexually explicit nature (there are thousands!) These are unsupervised areas
of the Net where children may roam. For example, parts of the World Wide Web
are online porno stores with the doors wide open, and with no staff inside.
Kids can easily surf by.... The only warning says "Don't come in here if you
are under 18". But there is noone there to check what is happening. And
naturally enough kids are wandering in and looking at the merchandise. This
is not acceptable on the streets of our cities, and yet we are allowing this
on the Net.
When discovering suspicious or criminal activity, CyberAngels should record
the date, time and place and nature of the violation and write down the
user's full ID and InterNet address. Mail can be forwarded to
ganetwatch@aol.com, or volunteers may copy and paste information to send.
Please follow our advice and DO NOT attempt to challenge cybercriminals
directly. Simply report the violations to us at Netwatch, and also to the
System Administrators, or Service Providers, of the cybercriminal. Email can
usually be sent to "Postmaster@..." or "Sysop@..." or "Sysadmin@...", or find
out by writing to/calling the company (the cybercriminal's Service Provider)
and asking them who you contact to report a violation.
As far as Web Sites are concerned, w e are encouraging parents to use some of
the new filtering software, that can screen out chosen areas of the WWW.
Organizations like **"Safesurf"** are campaigning for Websites to register
as "child friendly", and are on the cutting edge in helping to develop new
software for parents to regulate their children's access to the Internet. We
fully support Safesurf and are working together with them. Together we
believe that CyberAngels and Safesurf will form an irresistible alliance for
Good on the Net!
6) How will the project develop?
The first stage of our project is to involve volunteers in pressurizing
Internet Providers to enforce their terms of service. This involves the
accumulation of information and the reporting of violations to Service
Providers.
The second stage of our project involves the Police. Information about
crimes will be passed to the relevant Police authorities, particularly Sex
Crime departments and Fraud departments.
For the third stage of our project we will have a section on our Web Site
where we will be offering rewards for information about various
cybercriminals. There will be the equivalent of "Wanted" posters, asking for
further information about people who have already been reported to us, and
whom we have verified as cybercriminals.
7) Is this a US First Amendment Issue? What about Freedom of Speech? Don't
people have a right on the Internet to express their views freely? Are the
CyberAngels proposing censorship?
CyberAngels support the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
We are not trying to abolish free speech, but we believe that freedom of
speech should not be exercised if by exercising it you are violating someone
else's basic rights. For example I could claim freedom of speech to justify
talking sexually and obscenely to a young child - but we all know that that
is wrong. This is not a First Amendment issue. Breaking the law takes
precedence over "freedom of speech". We are all granted our freedom, but not
the freedom to hurt, corrupt, abuse or harass innocent people.
The First Amendment was not written to protect pedophiles. No criminal can
claim "freedom of expression" to justify a crime. Child pornographers on the
Net are criminals and should be brought to justice.
8) The Internet is huge and unregulated. Surely such a project is an
impossible task?
The fact that the Net is impossible to maintain crime-free is no reason for
us to do nothing. Each person does their part. If everyone picked up their
own trash, there would be no need for garbage collectors. The same could be
said of our streets. We are not naively hoping to eliminate crime from the
Net, only to play our part in protecting the innocent majority from the
violations of the tiny tiny minority.
The Internet Community consists of millions of people. That is millions of
potential CyberAngels.
TOGETHER WE CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE!
9) What kinds of changes would the Guardian Angels / CyberAngels like to see?
a) We would like to see an improvement in User identification. User ID is
impossible to verify or trace back. The very anonymity of Users is itself
causing an increase in rudeness, sexual abuse, flaming, and crimes like
pedophile activity. We the Net Users must take responsibility for the
problem ourselves. One of our demands is for more accountable User IDs on
the Net. When people are anonymous they are also free to be criminals. In a
riot you see rioters wearing masks to disguise their true identity. The same
thing is happening online. We would like to see User ID much more thoroughly
checked by Internet Service Providers.
b) We would like to see Websites registering as "Child Safe" or "Child
Friendly", so that parents can use the new software to restrict children's
access. We support Safesurf in their campaign on this issue.
c) We would like to see Internet Service Providers enforcing their Terms of
Service.
d) We would like to see a worldwide blacklist of known cybercriminals,
circulated to all Providers and regularly updated, so that these people could
be denied access to Internet accounts.
e) We would like to see the whole Internet Community united together to
protect the Net from all crimes and violations.
JOIN US, NOW!
[ Vigilantes on the net. This has got to be the biggest joke I have seen in
years. Please, boycott this group in every way possible. If they get what
they want, the internet will never be free again. -Revolution]
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
-= H A C K E R S =-
Issue #4, File #7 of 9
The FBI National Wiretap System
By: Jim Warren
The FBI has finally published the details of their half-BILLION-dollar
NATIONAL WIRETAP SYSTEM -- a gargantuan threat to the freedom, privacy and
civil liberties of every citizen in this nation.
Once deployed, what politician would dare oppose or impeach an unscrupulous
administration in control of such convenient, undetectable wiretapping --
that can listen FROM anywhere, TO anywhere, at a keystroke (e.g.
Nixon/Watergate)?
Once operational, what federal, state or local elected representative would
dare question or oppose law enforcers (e.g., for the decades that J. Edgar
Hoover ran massive wiretaps on politicians up to and including sitting
Presidents and his own Attorney General, he got almost everything he asked
for from Congress -- and from his Presidents -- and that was when
wiretapping was *hard* to do).
Once federal, state and local enforcers have everso-convenient wiretaps --
what Hollywood or television producer will dare create shows critical of
law enforcement, much less documentaries of enforcement abuses (e.g., for
the decades that J. Edgar Hoover wiretapped everyone from Desi Arnez to
Elvis Presley, there were essentially NO shows or movies criticial of the
FBI!)
And just think of how entertaining and useful this system will be for every
phone phreak, computer cracker, industrial espionage agent and foreign spy
-- as each one of them learn how to crack the system, implemented by the
nation's notioriously insecure telecommunications companies (if we are to
believe the FBI's cracker horror stories and claims of billions of dollars
of phone fraud).
And finally, once this system is operational, what government
whistle-blower would dare talk to a reporter?
If there was ever a need for outraged, massive howls of opposition to "our"
elected federal representatives -- and their replacement at the polls in
1996, if they fail to rescend this Orwellian mandate, much less if they
fund it -- the TIME IS NOW!
(Note: It is the Republicans who have been holding up this appropriation --
while FBI Director Louie Freeh has been pleading for it since early this
year. Wonder who would support it and who would oppose it, if a Republican
was in the White House? :-)
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
We Knew It Was Going to be Bad -- But We Didn't Realize How Bad
The FBI is demanding facilities to simultaneously wiretap 1 call in 100 in
many urban areas; and a maximum no less than 1 in 400 for the entire
nation!
Even if they are following the time-honored bureaucratic practice of
requesitioning 3-5 times what they actually want, this is MASSIVE!
According to the FBI's notice to the nation and to our telecommunidations
services providers, published in the Federal Register:
"... The capacity figures in this notice reflect the combined number of
simultaneous pen register, trap and trace, and communication interceptions
that law enforcement may conduct by October 25, 1998. ...
"Category I (the highest category) and Category II (the intermediate
category) represent those geographic areas where the majority of electronic
surveillance activity occurs. ... Other densely populated areas and some
suburban areas, with moderate electronic surveillance activity, are grouped
into Category II. ...
"Category III (the lowest category) represents law enforcement's minimum
acceptable capacity requirements for electronic surveillance activity. This
category covers all other geographic areas. ...
"The actual and maximum capacity requirements are presented as a percentage
of the engineered capacity of the equipment, facilities, and services that
provide a customer or subscriber with the ability to originate, terminate,
or direct communications. ..."
URBAN AREA WIRETAP REQUIREMENTS: MAXIMUM OF 1 CALL in 100; 1 in 200, *ACTUAL*
"Category I
"Actual Capacity - Each telecommunications carrier must provide the ability
to meet ... a number of simultaneous ... interceptions equal to 0.5% [1
call in 200] of the engineered capacity of the equipment, facilities, or
services that provide a customer or subscriber with the ability to
originate, terminate, or direct communications. ...
"Maximum Capacity - Each telecommunications carrier must ensure ...
communication interceptions equal to 1% [1 call in 100] of the engineered
capacity ..."
URBAN & SUBURBAN AREAS: 1 in 200 CALLS WIRETAPPED, MAXIMUM; 1 in 400, *ACTUAL*
"Category II ... Actual Capacity ... communication interceptions equal to
0.25% [1 call in 400] of the engineered capacity ...
"Maximum Capacity ... 0.5% of the engineered capacity of the equipment,
facilities, or services that provide a customer or subscriber with the
ability to originate, terminate, or direct communications.
MINIMUM FOR THE NATION: CAPABILITY TO SIMULTANEOUSLY WIRETAP 1 CALL in 400
"Category III ... Actual Capacity ... interceptions equal to 0.05% ...
"Maximum Capacity ... number of simultaneous ... interceptions equal to
0.25% [1 call in 400] ...
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
Up-to-Date Eaddrs for Congress Members & Congressional Committees
Though the prodigious efforts of librarian Grace York (graceyor@umich.edu),
there is a comprehensive list of congressional email addresses available on
the University of Michigan Library Gopher. Gopher to the University of
Michigan Library Gopher or telnet to una.hh.lib.umich.edu Login as gopher.
Path: Social Sciences/Government/U.S. Government: Legislative Branch/E-Mail
Addresses.
Access is also provided through the Documents Center's web site:
http://www.lib.umich.edu/libhome/Documents.center/federal.html and the
ULIBRARY Gopher's web interface: gopher://una.hh.lib.
umich.edu:70/00/socsci/poliscilaw/uslegi/conemail
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
Clinton Admin & FBI Imply This Will Be Used Only Under Court Order - NOT SO!
All of the law-n-order hype about this to congress-critters and the press
has *implied* that it would only be used under court order.
BULL SHIT!
Let's ignore the *fact* that it *will* be abused by those in power who make
unauthorized used of their authorized access to the system -- if history is
any implication.
The actual language of the 1994 authorizing legislation (titled, in true
Orwellian double-speak, the "Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement
Act," the CALEA) requires that:
"[Every] telecommunications carrier shall ensure that its equipment,
facilities, or services that provide a customer or subscriber with the
ability to originate, terminate, or direct communications are capable of --
"(1) expeditiously isolating and enabling the government, pursuant to a
court order or other lawful authorization, to intercept, to the exclusion
of any other communications, all wire and electronic communications carried
by the carrier within a service area to or from equipment, facilities, or
services of a subscriber of such carrier concurrently with their
transmission to or from the subscriber's equipment, facility, or service,
or at such later time as may be acceptable to the government; ..." [there's
*lots* more!]
Notice the part: "pursuant to a court order OR OTHER LAWFUL AUTHORIZATION."
*Which*, "other lawful authorizations?"
Us peons -- who *Shall* Be Subservient to Big Brother -- don't know.
Probably most members of Congress who so casually demanded that the
nation's telecomm carriers inflict this on us, and authorized half a
billion dollars to pay for it, don't know.
Some "lawful authorizations" to wiretap are certainly classified -- and, of
course, we victims can't be told about those secret authorizations. After
all, then they wouldn't be secret.
And I won't even get into what authorizations the President may have under
all of the secret war powers that Congress has given to him over the
decades, that have never rescinded. (Note that various Presidents have
formally declared numerous wars -- "War on Drugs," "War on Poverty," "War
on Crime," etc. -- and those declarations have never been withdrawn.)
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
FBI Says This Is Just to Keep Level Playing Field - But It's MASSIVE Change!
The FBI first attempted to weasel this into law in 1991, hidden in the
post-Gulf-War Omnibus Anti-Terrorism Bill. It took them until 1994 to
finally ram it through Congress, fast-tracked with no substantive hearings,
no roll-call vote in the [Democrat-controlled] House, and unanimous consent
vote in the [Democrat-controlled] Senate -- literally only hours before it
adjourned so incumbants could rush home to campaign for re-election. It was
quickly, and every-so-quietly, signed into law by ex-antiwar-activist
Clinton ... who shoulda known better. (Wonder what the FBI has on Clinton
in their files?)
Throughout this, the FBI (as front-man for the numerous federal, state and
local government snoop-n-peep agencies) whined that they needed this
half-gigabuck any-place, any-time wiretap system, "just to keep the wiretap
capabilities that law enforcement had 'always' had" (i.e., since the early
1900s).
BULL SHIT!
Government has never before had the ability to wiretap with so little effort.
Government has never before had the capability to wiretap FROM anyplace.
Government has never before had the capability to wiretap AT A KEYSTROKE.
For the most part, Government has never before the ability to tap UNDETECTABLY.
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
Local and State Incumbents & Enforcers Can Play Peeping Tom, Too
The statute includes this definition:
"The term "government" means the government of the United States and any
agency or instrumentality thereof, the District of Columbia, any
commonwealth, territory, or possession of the United States, and any State
or political subdivision thereof authorized by law to conduct electronic
surveillance."
Note that this means it allows ALL federal, state, county, city and other
"authorized" agents and agencies to use this pervasive peeping tool.
And just think about how much fun they will have on slow nights in the
office, once we have widespread use of videophones.
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
Watergate, Joe McCarthy, HUAC, Cointelpro, FBI Library "Awareness" Program,
J. Edgar Hoover, FBI Dirty Tricks, Lyndon Johnson
If this system were installed in the 1950s, imagine what the red-baiting
Joe McCarthy (and Senatorial side-kick Richard Nixon) could have done
through a friendly law enforcer?
Remember how many lives and careers were demolished by the House
Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC)?
Or the joy of the FBI's dirty-tricks program that successfully demolished
various law-abiding anti-war organizations.
Then there was the FBI's massive requests that librarians covertly monitor
all materials being checked-out by various library patrons, and report it
to agents.
And good ol' Lyndon Johnson didn't hesitate to sic the IRS on his political
opponents.
And FBI Director Hoover ... hell, he used his FBI facilities -- that will
now control the National Wiretap System -- to compile so much dirt on his
political opponents that no would question him or his practices or budget
demands, and President JFK and Attorney General Bobby K dared not remove
him, even though they were just short of open warefare with him.
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
Wiretap Action Alert from Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC)
Date: 2 Nov 1995 11:21:11 -0500
From: "Marc Rotenberg" <rotenberg@epic.org>
Subject: FBI Unveils National Wireta
To: "EPIC-News" <epic-news@epic.org>
[Please repost]
The New York Times reports today that the FBI has proposed "a
national wiretapping system of unprecedented size and scope that
would give law enforcement officials the capacity to monitor
simultaneously as many as one out of every 100 phone lines"
in some regions of the country. ("FBI Wants to Vastly Increase
Wiretapping," NYT, Nov. 2, 1995, at A1)
The story follows the October publication in the Federal Register
of the FBI plans to implement the Communications Assistance
for Law Enforcement Act, the controversial "digital telephony"
bill that was opposed by many groups last year but supported by
an industry association called the "Digital Privacy and Security
Working Group" after the government put up $500,000,000 to pay
for the new surveillance features. (See EPIC Alert 2.12)
The Times article also notes that there is now some question about whether
the law will ever go into effect. A provision to provide funding was
deleted last week after "several freshman Republicans, including
Representative Bob Barr of Georgia, a former federal prosecutor,
said he objected to the way the money for wiretapping would be raised
and that he had concerns about how the FBI might use such a sweeping
surveillance ability."
The article also says that "The scope of the FBI plan has startled
industry telephone executives, who said it was difficult to estimate
how much it would ultimately cost to carry out the capacity
increases."
EPIC is urging the on-line community to object to implementation of
the wiretap plan. More information can be found at our web page:
http://www.epic.org/privacy/wiretap/.
Marc Rotenberg
rotenberg@epic.org
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT) Offers Comprehensive Wiretap Analysis
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 1995 14:11:30 -0500
To: policy-posts@cdt.org
From: editor@cdt.org (editor@cdt.org)
Subject: CDT Policy Post No.26 -- FBI DigTel Surveillance Capacity Request
Under this header, Washington's CENTER FOR DEMOCRACY AND TECHNOLOGY
circulated an outstanding, 34-kilobyte analysis and detail of the FBI's
plan. Unfortunately, it said, "This document may be re-distributed freely
provided it remains in its entirety." Since I was loathe to inflict their
34KB plus the other items herein on unsuspecting GovAccess recipients, I
will only provide these pointers to where to get this *excellent* CDT
analysis, and the FBI's Federal Register notice that it references and
includes:
[Federal Register: October 16, 1995 (Volume 60, Number 199)]
[Notices]
[Page 53643-53646]
>From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
HOW TO SUBSCRIBE TO THE CDT POLICY POST LIST
To subscibe to the policy post distribution list, send mail to
"Majordomo@cdt.org" with:
subscribe policy-posts
in the body of the message (leave the subject line blank)
The Center for Democracy and Technology is a non-profit public interest
organization based in Washington, DC. The Center's mission is to develop
and advocate public policies that advance constitutional civil liberties
and democratic values in new computer and communications technologies.
General information: info@cdt.org
World Wide Web: URL:http://www.cdt.org
FTP URL:ftp://ftp.cdt.org/pub/cdt/
Snail Mail: The Center for Democracy and Technology
1001 G Street NW * Suite 500 East * Washington, DC 20001
(v) +1.202.637.9800 * (f) +1.202.637.0968
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
Is Someone Already Watching All International Net Traffic?
The following is the transcript of an actual communications trace that a
friend ran, while I was sitting next to him, watching -- reprinted here
with his permission.
He did a "traceroute" of two messages that he sent from his machine in
Switzerland (he'd telneted into it while we were at a computer conference
in California).
Traceroute automatically reports each Internet node through which a message
passes, as it proceeds from origin to destination.
He did two traceroutes. The first was from Switzerland to an addressee at
Netcom in San Jose, California. The second was from Switzerland to an
addressee in Israel.
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 95 02:54:58 +0200
From: kelvin@fourmilab.ch (John Walker)
To: jwarren@well.com
Subject: Traceroute
> /usr2/kelvin> traceroute netcom11.netcom.com
traceroute to netcom11.netcom.com (192.100.81.121), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets
1 eunet-router (193.8.230.64) 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms
2 146.228.231.1 (146.228.231.1) 326 ms 345 ms 307 ms
3 Bern5.CH.EU.NET (146.228.14.5) 447 ms 408 ms 364 ms
4 146.228.107.1 (146.228.107.1) 127 ms 37 ms 36 ms
5 Zuerich1.CH.EU.NET (146.228.10.80) 37 ms 38 ms 175 ms
6 (134.222.9.1) 65 ms 109 ms 252 ms
7 lp (134.222.35.2) 196 ms 179 ms 405 ms
8 Vienna1.VA.ALTER.NET (137.39.11.1) 191 ms 179 ms 313 ms
9 fddi.mae-east.netcom.net (192.41.177.210) 336 ms 204 ms 303 ms
10 t3-2.dc-gw4-2.netcom.net (163.179.220.181) 182 ms 251 ms 187 ms
11 t3-2.chw-il-gw1.netcom.net (163.179.220.186) 305 ms 586 ms 518 ms
12 t3-2.scl-gw1.netcom.net (163.179.220.190) 537 ms 693 ms 797 ms
13 t3-1.netcomgw.netcom.net (163.179.220.193) 698 ms 549 ms 754 ms
14 netcom11.netcom.com (192.100.81.121) 890 ms 1922 ms 1696 ms
> /usr2/kelvin> traceroute jerusalem1.datasrv.co.il
traceroute to jerusalem1.datasrv.co.il (192.114.21.101), 30 hops max, 40
byte packets
1 eunet-router (193.8.230.64) 2 ms 3 ms 2 ms
2 146.228.231.1 (146.228.231.1) 933 ms 853 ms 874 ms
3 Bern5.CH.EU.NET (146.228.14.5) 1040 ms 450 ms 525 ms
4 146.228.107.1 (146.228.107.1) 453 ms 424 ms 188 ms
5 Zuerich1.CH.EU.NET (146.228.10.80) 64 ms 61 ms 47 ms
6 (134.222.9.1) 80 ms 312 ms 84 ms
7 lp (134.222.35.2) 270 ms 400 ms 216 ms
8 Vienna2.VA.ALTER.NET (137.39.11.2) 660 ms 1509 ms 886 ms
9 dataserv-gw.ALTER.NET (137.39.155.38) 1829 ms 1094 ms 1306 ms
10 orion.datasrv.co.il (192.114.20.22) 1756 ms 1280 ms 1309 ms
11 ...
Notice that both messages went through an unnamed site -- 134.222.9.1 and
then a strangely-named site, "lp (134.222.35.2)" -- then through the same
Vienna, Virginia (USA) site ... and thereafter, on to their destination.
I.e., the second message went through Virginia to get from Switzerland to
Israel.
The whois servers at the InterNIC and at nic.ddn.mil for MILNET Information
report, ``No match for "134.222.9.1". '' and `` No match for
"134.222.35.2".''
Now let me see ... which spy agencies are located in or near Virginia?
--jim
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
[This is where I normally insert quotes or humor. This is not a quote.]
While on a September lecture trip to Washington, I was invited to dinner
with an "associate" Secretary of Defense [title purposely disguised] who's
responsibilities include surveillance and security technology, including
cryptography and the National Security Agency.
GovAccess readers will be happy to know that the administration's "Clipper
II" key-escrow proposal has little chance of being adopted, and also --
without exception, the NSA does not spy on nor evesdrop on U.S. citizens,
foreign or domestically. I was assured of this. --jim warren
Mo' as it Is.
--jim
Jim Warren, GovAccess list-owner/editor (jwarren@well.com)
Advocate & columnist, MicroTimes, Government Technology, BoardWatch, etc.
345 Swett Rd., Woodside CA 94062; voice/415-851-7075; fax/<# upon request>
To add or drop GovAccess, email to Majordomo@well.com ('Subject' ignored)
with message: [un]subscribe GovAccess YourEmailAddress (insert your eaddr)
For brief description of GovAccess, send the message: info GovAccess
Past postings are at ftp.cpsr.org: /cpsr/states/california/govaccess
and by WWW at http://www.cpsr.org/cpsr/states/california/govaccess .
Also forwarded to USENET's comp.org.cpsr.talk by CPSR's Al Whaley.
May be copied & reposted except for any items that explicitly prohibit it.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
-= H A C K E R S =-
Issue #4, File #8 of 9
CAMPAIGN TO STOP THE EXON/COATS COMMUNICATIONS DECENCY ACT
(SEE THE LIST OF CAMPAIGN COALITION MEMBERS AT THE END)
By: Voters Telecommunications Watch
Update: -Latest News:
The Christian Coalition is pushing Congress to censor
the net more heavily than even Sen. J.J. Exon ever imagined.
There is the very real possibility that they may succeed.
You should be very worried. We are.
-What You Can Do Now:
Follow the directions below and call House Speaker
Gingrich and Senate Leader Dole. Implore them not
to allow parents to make choices for their children,
instead of government censors.
Volunteer to join the fight by helping organize in your
home town.
CAMPAIGN TO STOP THE UNCONSTITUTIONAL COMMUNICATIONS DECENCY ACT
Nov 2, 1995
PLEASE WIDELY REDISTRIBUTE THIS DOCUMENT WITH THIS BANNER INTACT
REDISTRIBUTE ONLY UNTIL December 1, 1995
REPRODUCE THIS ALERT ONLY IN RELEVANT FORUMS
_________________________________________________________________ _______
CONTENTS
The Latest News
What You Can Do Now
The letter from Ed Meese and the Christian Right
Chronology of the CDA
For More Information
List Of Participating Organizations
_________________________________________________________________ _______
THE LATEST NEWS
Since the very first day that Senator J.J. Exon (D-NE) proposed censorship
legislation for the Internet, the Christian Right has pushed for the most
restrictive regulations they could think of.
The Religious Right (which does not necessarily speak for all religious
people concerned with this issue) recently tipped their hand in a letter
to Sen. Larry Pressler (R-SD) and Rep. Thomas Bliley (R-VA) requesting
a new and more restrictive net censorship proposal.
There are essentially three new dangerous elements of their campaign
to shut down cyberspace:
INTERNET PROVIDERS, ONLINE SERVICES, AND LIBRARIES CRIMINALLY LIABLE FOR
EXPRESSION ONLINE
The Religious Right has proposed to hold anyone who provides access to the
Internet or other interactive media, including online services providers,
ISP's, BBS's, Libraries, and Schools, criminally liable for all speech
carried on the network.
In order to avoid liability under this provision, service providers would be
forced to monitor user's electronic communications to be assured that
no "indecent" material is transmitted across their networks.
This proposal is MORE RESTRICTIVE than the Exon Communications Decency Act,
or any other net censorship legislation currently in Congress.
In their letter to Congress, the Religious Right says:
[Providers] would simply be required to avoid KNOWING violations of
the law. [emphasis added]
However, the "knowing" standard is vague enough that the mere knowledge
that such material exists could be sufficient to trigger criminal liability.
A single complaint or even a news report could force a service provider to
take down a web page, remove posts to chat rooms or other discussion
forums, or shut down listservs in order to avoid going to jail and facing
huge fines.
A STANDARD FOR INDECENCY
The proposals pushed by the Christian Coalition relies on the
unconstitutional "indecency standard". Like the Exon Communications
Decency Act, the Christian Coalition seeks to regulate all indecent
speech online.
Indecency is a broad category that includes everything from George Carlin's
"seven dirty words" to such classic novels and "The Catcher in the Rye" and
"Lady Chatterly's Lover".
The Supreme Court has ruled that restrictions on indecent speech are
Constitutional only if they rely on the "least restrictive means". Broad
indecency restrictions on interactive media do not satisfy the "least
restrictive means" test, because interactive media allows users and
parents tremendous control over the information they receive.
Any legislation which attempts to apply an indecency restriction to the
Internet is unconstitutional on its face.
The Christian Coalition's proposal that relies on an indecency
restriction contemplates dumbing down every conversation, web page,
newsgroup, and mailing list on the Internet to the level of what is
not offensive to children.
What kind of discussions between adults are possible in an arena
where everything has been reduced to the level of the Lion King?
UNPRECEDENTED CONTROL OVER ONLINE SPEECH FOR THE FCC
The Christian Coalition would give the FCC broad jurisdiction over
cyberspace. It would allow the FCC jurisdiction over your online
speech, and over the design Internet software, such as web browsers and
filtering programs that parents can use to control their children's
access to the Internet.
The Internet has developed from a government project to a market-driven
economic boom for thousands of businesses. Giving the FCC authority over
this medium would significantly hinder the growth of this new industry.
_________________________________________________________________ _______
WHAT YOU CAN DO NOW
1. The proposals from the Religious Right will literally destroy online
speech as we know it. The odds of stopping this are not certain.
There is a very real chance that this legislation will pass, and
we will experience a period of uncertainty and chilling of speech
while an appropriate test case attempts to reach the Supreme Court
(should it even get there!)
The Religious Right has a strong grass-roots network. We need to
counter their energy and ensure cyberspace is not lost due to them.
IMMEDIATELY CALL House Speaker Gingrich (R-GA) and Senate Leader
Dole (R-KS) and urge them to oppose the Christian Coalition's
proposal.
Name, Address, and Party Phone Fax
======================== ============== ==============
R GA Gingrich, Newt 1-202-225-4501 1-202-225-4656
R KS Dole, Robert 1-202-224-6521 1-202-224-8952
If you're at a loss for words, try one of the following:
Please oppose the recent proposal from the Religious Right to
censor the Internet. The only effective way to address children's
access to the Internet is through parental control tools outlined
by the Cox/White/Wyden approach.
or
As a religious person and a parent, I oppose the Religious Right's
attempts to censor the Internet. I am the best person to monitor
my child's access to the Internet using parental control tools
as outlined in the Cox/White/Wyden approach.
2. Join the online fight by becoming a volunteer for your district!
Check to see if you're legislator is in the list below. If they are
not, consult the free ZIPPER service that matches Zip Codes to
Congressional districts with about 85% accuracy at:
URL:http://www.stardot.com/~lukeseem/zip.html
The conference committee legislators are:
House: Barr (R-GA), Barton (R-TX), Berman (R-CA), Bliley (R-VA),
Boucher (D-VA), Brown (D-OH), Bryant (D-TX), Buyer (R-IN),
Conyers (D-MI), Dingell (D-MI), Eshoo (D-CA), Fields (R-TX),
Flanagan (R-IL), Frisa (R-NY), Gallegly (R-CA), Goodlatte (R-VA),
Gordon (D-TN), Hastert (R-IL), Hoke (R-OH), Hyde (R-IL),
Jackson-Lee (D-TX), Klug (R-WI), Lincoln (D-AR), Markey (D-MA),
Moorhead (R-CA), Oxley (R-OH), Paxon (R-NY), Rush (D-IL),
Schaefer (R-CO), Schroeder (D-CO), Scott (D-VA), Stearns (R-FL),
White (R-WA)
Senate: Burns (R-MT), Exon (D-NE), Ford (D-KY), Gorton (R-WA),
Hollings (D-SC), Inouye (D-HI), Lott (R-MS), McCain (R-AZ),
Pressler (R-SD), Rockefeller (D-WV), Stevens (R-AK)
If your legislator is on the conference committee, you have a chance
to influence their vote on this issue with your power as a constituent.
Volunteer to help educate your legislator by sending mail to
volunteer@vtw.org. A coalition volunteer will be in touch with you.
You can starting working to help spread the word in your district by
sending this letter to five friends. Ask them to call Dole and Gingrich
as well.
3. The People for the American Way (PFAW) and the American Civil Liberties
Union are organizing a letter from ORGANIZATIONS to the Conference
Committee to oppose the censorship provisions.
If you are a representative of an organization that would like to
signon to this letter, you should contact jlesser@pfaw.org IMMEDIATELY.
4. We can't suggest relaxing at this point. The stakes are too high, and
the risk is too great. Everything now hangs in the balance.
_________________________________________________________________ _______
THE LETTER FROM ED MEESE AND THE CHRISTIAN RIGHT
October 16, 1995
The Honorable Thomas J. Bliley, Jr. Chairman
Committee on Commerce
United States House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515
The Honorable Larry Pressler, Chairman
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510
Re: Computer Pornography Provisions in Telecommunications Bill
Dear Mr. Chairmen:
We are writing to urge the conference committee seeking to reconcile the
telecommunications bills passed by the House and Senate include in the
final bill the strongest possible criminal law provisions to address the
growing and immediate problem of computer pornography without any
exemptions, defenses, or political favors of any kind accorded to those
who knowingly participate in the distribution of obscenity to anyone or
indecency to children. While there is no perfect solution to the problem
of computer pornography, Congress could not hope to solve this problem by
holding liable only some who are responsible for the problem.
The recent Justice Department prosecution project targeting those who
violated federal child pornography law using America On-Line is
instructive in this regard. More than ninety individuals were targeted for
prosecution although many others, perhaps as many as 3,000 according to
one press report, were originally targeted by the Department of Justice as
potential violators of child pornography laws. Apparently due to a
shortage of investigative and prosecutorial resources, the project was
limited. Since there are insufficient resources to investigate and
prosecute but a fraction of those that are trafficking in child
pornography by computer, then there will likely be even fewer resources
available to investigate and prosecute those involved in obscenity and
indecency.
Thousands of individuals both in this country and abroad are regularly
placing obscenity and indecency on the Internet. It is not possible to
make anything more than a dent in the serious problem of computer
pornography if Congress is willing to hold liable only those who place
such material on the Internet while at the same time giving legal
exemptions or defenses to service or access providers who profit from and
are instrumental to the distribution of such material. The Justice
Department normally targest the major offenders of laws. In obscenity
cases prosecuted to date, it has targeted large companies which have been
responsible for the nationwide distribution of obscenity and who have made
large profits by violating federal laws. Prosecution of such companies has
made a substantial impact in curbing the distribution of obscenity, with
many such offenders going out of business altogether. So too will
prosecution of access providers which _knowingly_ traffic in obscenity
have a substantial impact, a far greater impact than just the prosecution
of a person who places one or a few prohibited images on the Internet.
Such a person could not traffic in pornography without the aid or
facilitation of the service or access providers. Indeed, if Congress
includes provisions protecting access or service providers in whatever
bill is finally passed, it is likely that most in this country who are
trafficking in indecency to children or obscenity would continue to do so
since the threat of prosecution would be minuscule, given the numbers of
those currently involved in this activity. It is also likely that those
outside our country who are engaged in these activities would continue to
do so since it would be nearly impossible to extradite them to the United
States for prosecution. Thus, unless all who knowingly participate in such
matters are subject to the law, the Internet will remain the same and
Congress will have failed in its responsibilities to the children and
families of America.
Federal law has traditionally assigned equal liability both for those who
commit a crime and those who aid and abet a crime. See Title 18 U.S.C.
Code Section 2: "(a) whoever [sic] commits an offense against the United
States or aids, abets, councils [sic], commands, induces, or procures its
commission, is punishable as a principle [sic]." Service or access
providers who knowingly participate in the distribution of indecency to
children or in obscenity to anyone are aiders and abettors in the
commission of those crimes and thus should have liability under any law
Congress passes. Current federal law on child pornography provides no no
exemption or defense for access providers. Thus, the child pornography law
provides a strong deterrent against trafficking in child pornography for
those who would otherwise knowingly participate in its distribution by
computer whether pedophile or access provider.
The changes in law which we support would not hold an access provider
criminally liable for all illegal pornography on the Internet which their
services may be used to obtain. Nor would it require that access providers
check all communications to ensure that no violations of the law are
occurring. They would simply be required to avoid knowing violations of
the law. This is an obligation imposed on all citizens. Technology exists
today for access providers, through a simple process, to target or flag
and remove files containing objectionable material.
We support the House-passed language insofar as it addresses obscenity by
amendment Title 18, Sections 1462, 1465, and 1467 of the United States
Code. The provision restricting transmission of indecency in the House-passed
bill, an amendment to Section 1465, is inadequate, and we urge that it be
substantially revised.
Attached is the specific language we support which includes the House
passed language on obscenity and includes revisions on both the House
passed language on indecency, which would amend Title 18 and the
Senate-passed language on indecency, which would amend Title 47. The
combination of these provisions, we believe, would provide effective laws
to curb obscenity and indecency on the Internet by establishing that all
who knowingly participate in the distribution or facilitation of obscenity
to anyone or indecency to children would be subject to the law.
Thank you for your concern and attention to this matter.
[signed]
Edwin Meese III
Ralph Reed
Christian Coalition
Donald E. Wildmon
American Family Association
Alan Sears, Former Executive Director
Atty General's Commission on Pornography
Phyllis Shafly
Eagle Forum
Beverly LaHaye
Concerned Women for America
Reverend Louis P. Sheldon
Traditional Values Coalition
Jay Sekulow
American Center for Law and Justice
Paul Weyrich
Free Congress Foundation
Paul McGeady
Morality in Media
Len Munsil
National Family Legal Foundation
Robert Peters
Morality in Media
Kenneth Sukhia
Former United States Attorney, N.D., FL
Former Chairman, Atty General's Advisory Committee
Subcommittee on Child Exploitation and Obscenity
--------------------------
Section 1465 of Title 18, United States Code, is amended to punish
distribution by computer of indecent material to minors by adding at the
end the following:
Whoever knowingly communicates, transmits, or makes available for
communication or transmission, in or effecting interstate or foreign
commerce an indecent communication by computer to any person the
communicator or transmitter believes has not attained the age of 18 years
of age, knowing that such communication will be obtained by a person
believed to be under 18 years of age, shall be fined under this title or
imprisoned not more than five years, or both.
TITLE IV -- OBSCENE, HARASSING, AND WRONGFUL UTILIZATION OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY
SEC. 401. SHORT TITLE
This title may be cited as the "Communications Decency Act of
1995".
Sec. 402. OBSCENE OR HARASSING USE OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES UNDER
THE COMMUNICATIONS ACT OF 1934
Section 223 (47 U.S.C. 223) is amended --
(1) by striking subsection (a) and inserting in lieu of [sic]:
``(a) Whoever--
``(1) in the District of Columbia or in interstate or foreign
communications --
``(A) by means of telecommunications device knowingly--
``(i) makes, creates, or solicits, and
``(ii) initiates the transmission of,
any comment, request, suggestion, proposal, image, or other
communication which is obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, or
indecent, with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass
another person;
``(B) makes a telephone call or utilizes a
telecommunications device, whether or not conversation or
communication ensues, without disclosing his identity and
with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass any person
at the called number or who receives the communication;
``(C) makes or causes the telephone of another repeatedly
or continuously to ring, with intent to harass any person at
the called number; or
``(D) makes repeated telephone calls or repeatedly
initiates communication with a telecommunications device,
during which conversation or communication ensues, solely to
harass any person at the called number or who receives the
communication;
``(2) knowingly permits any telecommunications facility
under his control to be used for any activity prohibited by
paragraph (1) with the intent that it be used for
such activity,
shall be fined not more than $100,000 or imprisoned not more
than two years, or both.''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new subsections:
``(d) Whoever--
``(1) knowingly within the United States or in foreign
communications with the United States by means of
telecommunications device makes or makes available any
indecent communication in any form including any comment,
request, suggestion, proposal, or image, to any person under
18 years of age regardless of whether the
maker of such communication placed the call or initiated the
communication; or
``(2) knowingly permits any telecommunications facility
under such person's control to be used for an activity
prohibited by paragraph (1) with the intent that it be
used for such activity,
shall be fined not more than $100,000 or imprisoned not more
than two years or both.
``(e) Defenses to subsections (a) and (d), restrictions on
access, judicial remedies respecting restrictions for
persons providing information services and
access to information services--
"(1) It is a defense to prosecution that a person has complied
with regulations designed to restrict access to indecent
communications to those 18 years old or older as enacted by the
Federal Communications Commission which shall prepare final
regulations within 120 days of the passage of this bill. Until
such regulations become effective, it is a defense to
prosecution that the person has blocked or restricted access
to indecent communications to any person under 18 years
of age through the use of verified credit card, adult access
code, or adult personal identification number (PIN).
Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to treat
enhanced information services as common carriage."
"(2) No cause of action may be brought in any
court or any administrative agency against any person on account
of any activity which is not in violation of any law punishable
by criminal or civil penalty, which activity the person has taken in
good faith to implement a defense authorized under this section or
otherwise to restrict or prevent the transmission of, or access to,
a communication specified in this section.
(f) Nothing in this subsection shall preclude any State or
local government from enacting and enforcing laws and regulations
which do not result in the imposition of inconsistent obligations on
the provision of interstate services. Nothing in this subsection
shall preclude any State or local government from governing conduct
not covered by subsection (d)(2)."
(g) Nothing in subsection (a), (d), or (e) or in the
defenses to prosecution under (e) shall be construed
to affect or limit the application or enforcement of any other
Federal law.
(h) The use of the term 'telecommunications device' in this
section shall not impose new obligations on (one-way) broadcast
radio or (one-way) broadcast television operators licensed by the
Commission or (one-way) cable services registered with the
Federal Communications Commission and covered by obscenity and
indecency provisions elsewhere in this Act.
Sec. 403. OBSCENE PROGRAMMING ON CABLE TELEVISION.
Section 639 (47 U.S.C. 559) is amended by striking "10,000" and
inserting "$100,000"
Sec. 404. BROADCASTING OBSCENE LANGUAGE ON THE RADIO.
Section 1466 of Title 18, United States Code, is amended by
striking out "$10,000" and inserting "$100,000".
Sec. 405 SEPARABILITY
"(a) If any provision of this Title, including amendments to this
Title of [sic] the application thereof to any person or circumstance is
held invalid, the remainder of this Title and the application of such
provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected
thereby."
_________________________________________________________________ _______
CHRONOLOGY OF THE COMMUNICATIONS DECENCY ACT
Sep 26, '95 Sen. Russ Feingold urges committee members to drop
Managers Amendment and the CDA from the Telecommunications
Deregulation bill
Aug 4, '95 House passes HR1555 which goes into conference with S652.
Aug 4, '95 House votes to attach Managers Amendment (which contains
new criminal penalties for speech online) to
Telecommunications Reform bill (HR1555).
Aug 4, '95 House votes 421-4 to attach HR1978 to Telecommunications
Reform bill (HR1555).
Jun 30, '95 Cox and Wyden introduce the "Internet Freedom and Family
Empowerment Act" (HR 1978) as an alternative to the CDA.
Jun 21, '95 Several prominent House members publicly announce their
opposition to the CDA, including Rep. Newt Gingrich (R-GA),
Rep. Chris Cox (R-CA), and Rep. Ron Wyden (D-OR).
Jun 14, '95 The Senate passes the CDA as attached to the Telecomm
reform bill (S 652) by a vote of 84-16. The Leahy bill
(S 714) is not passed.
May 24, '95 The House Telecomm Reform bill (HR 1555) leaves committee
in the House with the Leahy alternative attached to it,
thanks to Rep. Ron Klink of (D-PA). The Communications
Decency Act is not attached to it.
Apr 7, '95 Sen. Leahy (D-VT) introduces S.714, an alternative to
the Exon/Gorton bill, which commissions the Dept. of
Justice to study the problem to see if additional legislation
(such as the CDA) is necessary.
Mar 23, '95 S314 amended and attached to the telecommunications reform
bill by Sen. Gorton (R-WA). Language provides some provider
protection, but continues to infringe upon email privacy
and free speech.
Feb 21, '95 HR1004 referred to the House Commerce and Judiciary committees
Feb 21, '95 HR1004 introduced by Rep. Johnson (D-SD)
Feb 1, '95 S314 referred to the Senate Commerce committee
Feb 1, '95 S314 introduced by Sen. Exon (D-NE) and Gorton (R-WA).
_________________________________________________________________ _______
FOR MORE INFORMATION
Web Sites
URL:http://www.vtw.org/exon/
URL:http://epic.org/
URL:http://www.eff.org/pub/Alerts/
URL:http://www.cdt.org/cda.html
URL:http://outpost.callnet.com/outpost.html
FTP Archives
URL:ftp://ftp.cdt.org/pub/cdt/policy/freespeech/00-INDEX.FREESPEE CH
URL:ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/Alerts/
Gopher Archives:
URL:gopher://gopher.panix.com/11/vtw/exon
URL:gopher://gopher.eff.org/11/Alerts
Email:
vtw@vtw.org (put "send alert" in the subject line for the latest
alert, or "send cdafaq" for the CDA FAQ)
cda-info@cdt.org (General CDA information)
cda-stat@cdt.org (Current status of the CDA)
_________________________________________________________________ _______
LIST OF PARTICIPATING ORGANIZATIONS
In order to use the net more effectively, several organizations have
joined forces on a single Congressional net campaign to stop the
Communications Decency Act.
American Civil Liberties Union * American Communication Association *
American Council for the Arts * Arts & Technology Society * Association
of Alternative Newsweeklies * biancaTroll productions * Boston
Coalition for Freedom of Expression * Californians Against Censorship
Together * Center For Democracy And Technology * Centre for Democratic
Communications * Center for Public Representation * Citizen's Voice -
New Zealand * Cloud 9 Internet *Computer Communicators Association *
Computel Network Services * Computer Professionals for Social
Responsibility * Cross Connection * Cyber-Rights Campaign * CyberQueer
Lounge * Dutch Digital Citizens' Movement * ECHO Communications Group,
Inc. * Electronic Frontier Canada * Electronic Frontier Foundation *
Electronic Frontier Foundation - Austin * Electronic Frontiers
Australia * Electronic Frontiers Houston * Electronic Frontiers New
Hampshire * Electronic Privacy Information Center * Feminists For Free
Expression * First Amendment Teach-In * Florida Coalition Against
Censorship * FranceCom, Inc. Web Advertising Services * Friendly
Anti-Censorship Taskforce for Students * Hands Off! The Net * Inland
Book Company * Inner Circle Technologies, Inc. * Inst. for Global
Communications * Internet On-Ramp, Inc. * Internet Users Consortium *
Joint Artists' and Music Promotions Political Action Committee * The
Libertarian Party * Marijuana Policy Project * Metropolitan Data
Networks Ltd. * MindVox * MN Grassroots Party * National Bicycle
Greenway * National Campaign for Freedom of Expression * National
Coalition Against Censorship * National Gay and Lesbian Task Force *
National Public Telecomputing Network * National Writers Union * Oregon
Coast RISC * Panix Public Access Internet * People for the American Way
* Republican Liberty Caucus * Rock Out Censorship * Society for
Electronic Access * The Thing International BBS Network * The WELL *
Voters Telecommunications Watch
(Note: All 'Electronic Frontier' organizations are independent entities,
not EFF chapters or divisions.)
_________________________________________________________________ _______
End Alert
================================================================= =======
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
-= H A C K E R S =-
Issue #4, File #9 of 9
The End
Once again, another issue of Hackers reaches its end. If you've got
an article or letter, send it on in, if you would like to author one of those
columns, make sure you get a hold of me. Next issue, be on the lookout for
the X-philes, a damn good introduction to the phone system by the Xenon
Foundation. And wherever you hack, may the ethic be with you!
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
