home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
-
-
- ****************************************************************************
- >C O M P U T E R U N D E R G R O U N D<
- >D I G E S T<
- *** Volume 1, Issue #1.02 (April 2, 1990) **
- ****************************************************************************
-
- MODERATORS: Jim Thomas / Gordon Meyer
- REPLY TO: TK0JUT2@NIU.bitnet
- SUBSCRIBE TO: INTERNET:TK0JUT2@NIU.BITNET@UICVM.uic.edu
-
- COMPUTER UNDERGROUND DIGEST is an open forum dedicated to sharing
- information among computerists and to the presentation and debate of
- diverse views.
- --------------------------------------------------------------------
- DISCLAIMER: The views represented herein do not necessarily represent the
- views of the moderators. Contributors assume all responsibility
- for assuring that articles submitted do not violate copyright
- protections.
- --------------------------------------------------------------------
-
- -------------------------------------------------------------------
- IN THIS ISSUE:
-
- File 1: Messages Received
- File 2: Hacking in England (news article)
- File 3: The FBI and BBS Surveillance (PHRACK Reprint)
- --------------------------------------------------------------------
-
- This is the third issue, and if you haven't received either of the first
- two even though you have subscribed, let us know. It means that mail is not
- getting through the gateway. If you know of anybody who has added their
- name to the mailing list but has not received any issues yet, let us know.
- We apologize for the problems, especially duplicate files, in the CuD 1.02
- mailing. We are still working out mailing glitches.
-
- As some of you noticed, file headers still contain the addresses of all
- those to whom the batch is sent. We have broken the batches down into
- groups of about 25, so you are only seeing a portion of the list. However,
- this is still unacceptable. We are working on the problem. Until then, we
- will either break batches down into groups of 5, or, most likely, send them
- out individually, which is a drag with about 150 subscribers. We are
- experimenting with LISTSERV, and have asked comserve for suggestions.
-
- If you know of anybody who has added their name to the mailing list but has
- not received any issues yet, let us know. We apologize for the problems,
- especially duplicate files, in the CuD 1.02 mailing. We are still working
- out mailing glitches.
-
- --------------------------------------------------------------
-
- We have received many, many requests of the files we listed. Providing an
- archive service may not have been one of our better ideas. At the moment
- (middle of the term) we don't have the time to comply with the heavy
- request load. But, we remain convinced that such an archival service is
- needed, because such files are not currently preserved in libraries. So,
- we are exploring options. We have encountered the following problems:
-
- 1. Time (or lack of it) and digging out files on an ad hoc basis
-
- 2. Size: Most of the ascii files are over 100 K, and some systems have
- kicked these back. A complete set of some files would run as high as 5
- megs, and to send these out would jam most systems, even if sent out over a
- few days.
-
- Possible solutions:
-
- 1. Upload them to a local (DeKalb) BBS from which they could be downloaded.
- We would have to obtain university permission, but there is currently a
- multi-line BBS here that could handle such requests.
-
- 2. Send them out by snail mail to anybody who wanted to send disks and a
- self-addressed, stamped envelop. We could then put them in a ZIP file to
- reduce space by about 60 percent and return them.
-
- Any other suggestions??
-
- From the material we're getting, it looks like we can put an issue out
- about once a week. We will send them in the early part of the week to avoid
- weekend mail-jams.
-
- --------------------------------------------------------------------
-
- "COMPUTER ABUSE" OR "CONTROLOGY?"
-
- In a forthcoming article (CONTEMPORARY CRISES, 1990), Ray Michalowski and
- Erdwin Pfuhl argue that in the years following the 1986 passage of the
- federal computer abuse laws, and despite additional state laws, there were
- very few prosecutions or indictments of hackers. Yet, in recent months,
- hacker prosecutions seem to be making local and national news. Is there
- *really* an upsurge in abuse, or are law enforcement authorities
- over-reacting to media hype and hysteria by dramatizing their "concern"
- through over-enforcement? Jason Ditton (in his book CONTROLOGY) and Mark
- Fishman have argued that too often "crime waves" are do not reflect an
- increase in unacceptable behaviors as much as they do social responses to
- public fears or publicity surrounding a given type of incident. More
- simply, there are often not "crime waves," but rather "control waves." To
- dramatize competency and effectiveness, government agencies and law
- enforcement officials respond to images of "danger" by dramatizing their
- concern in the form of "crackdowns." The current Draconian anti-drug
- legislation is one example. We suppose that the good news is that whenever
- the government declares war on something, it's been lost (witness the "war
- on poverty," the "war on crime," the "war on drugs"). This military
- metaphor does not work well as a social policy, but the repercussions are a
- fiscal drain and a gradual loss of Constitutional freedoms. If you come
- across stories in your local papers on any aspect of computer prosecution
- (use of computers in felonies, prosecution, indictments, or arrests of
- hackers, confiscation of computer equipment, etc.), please transcribe the
- articles (including source, date and page numbers), and pass them along.
- HOWEVER, BE SURE NO COPYRIGHTS ARE INFRINGED. We assume that contributors
- have checked, because we cannot check every article that comes in. Thanks.
-
- J&G
-
- --------------------------------------------------------------------
-
-
-
- ***************************************************************
- *** Computer Underground Digest Issue #1.02 / File 1 of 3 ***
- ***************************************************************
-
- From: mnemonic@walt.cc.utexas.edu(Mike Godwin)
- Message-Id: <9003311359.AA25162@vondrake.cc.utexas.edu>
- To: TK0JUT2%NIU.BITNET@UICVM.uic.edu
- Subject: Re: Computer Underground Digest, Issue 1.01
-
- Writes Mark Seiden:
-
- "(Note for the Tomorrow File: A new source of revenue for lawyers: store
- your hacker-client's backup tapes, which would then be protected as
- privileged communication?)"
-
- Unfortunately, backup tapes probably are probably not "privileged communication"
- within the meaning of attorney-client privilege. A court or magistrate could
- almost certainly order its production by the attorney in whose custody it was.
- The only possible theory of non disclosure that comes to mind is the
- work-product doctrine, and even that doctrine would apply only if the backup
- were made specifically for the purpose of preparing for litigation.
-
- In general, attorney-client privilege only applies to things that clients
- SAY (or write) to their attorneys, not things they GIVE to their attorneys.
-
- And, incidentally, the attorney-client privilege cannot, in itself, be "a
- source of revenue" for lawyers. Once you've contracted for an attorney-client
- relationship, your attorney has to keep privileged communications secret even
- if you *don't* ask him to or pay for him to.
-
- (You can, of course, give him specific permission to disclose such information.)
-
-
- --Mike
-
- ==============================================================================
-
- ----------------------------------
- Pat Townson of TELECOM DIGEST passed the following along to us. %eds%.
- Any responses?!?
- --------------------
-
- Subject: More L.O.D.
- To: "Submission to comp.dcom.telecom" <telecom@eecs.nwu.edu>
- Date: Mon, 2 Apr 90 16:03:54 EST
- From: Don H Kemp <dhk@teletech.uucp>
- Message-Id: <9004021603.AA12172@teletech.UUCP>
-
- As reported in AT&T's Consultant Liason Program electronic
- newsletter "Newsbriefs":
-
- >
- > LEGION OF DOOM -- ... A government affadavit alleged that in June
- > hackers believed to be Legion of Doom members planted software
- > "time bombs" in AT&T's 5ESS switching computers in Denver, Atlanta
- > and New Jersey. These programs ... were defused by AT&T security
- > personnel before they could disrupt phone service. ... New York
- > Newsday, p. 15, 4/1.
- >
-
- --
- Don H Kemp "Always listen to experts. They'll
- B B & K Associates, Inc. tell you what can't be done, and
- Rutland, VT why. Then do it."
- uunet!uvm-gen!teletech!dhk Lazarus Long
-
-
-
- =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
- + END THIS FILE +
- +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+===+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=
-