home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
Hackers Underworld 2: Forbidden Knowledge
/
Hackers Underworld 2: Forbidden Knowledge.iso
/
UNDERGRD
/
VOL_3
/
CUD315B.TXT
< prev
next >
Wrap
Text File
|
1994-11-01
|
39KB
|
736 lines
------------------------------
From: Various
Subject: The CU in the News
Date: May 1, 1991
********************************************************************
*** CuD #3.15: File 2 of 3: The CU in the News ***
********************************************************************
From: the moderators' <72307.1502@COMPUSERVE.COM>
Subject: BBS estimates
Date: 19 Apr 91 02:54:22 EDT
One of the dilemmas facing researchers covering the Net is estimating
how many small BBSs exist at any given time. Thankfully there is no
national registration of systems, but still it is useful to have some
idea of the type of impact BBS regulation (either by decree or de facto)
could have. I recently found some more estimates of the number of BBSs and
modems in this country.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Source: "Modem Mania: More Households Go Online Every Day"
Dennis B. Collins
California Computer News
April 1991
p26
Get your scissors. Here come some statistics you'll want to save. I've
been doing a lot of research lately regarding computer bulletin board
systems (BBSs). Prodigy's research and development department said that
30 percent of American homes have some sort of PC. Of these homes, 20
percent have a modem. This means that six percent of all homes have the
capability to obtain computer data via phone line! The Information Age
is now in its infancy - it is here and it is real. It is also growing at
a rate of 400 percent a year.
CompuServe and Prodigy both claim 750,000 paying customers. Prodigy
stresses that their figures reflect modems at home only. They have no
count of businesses. Local system operators tell me a significant number
of calls originate from offices - their "guesstimate" is that office use
may increase the figures by another 20 percent.
(...)
The question keeps coming up: How many BBSs are there? Nobody knows.
In Sacramento, the best guess is about 200. Worldwide, the number is
quickly growing. About two years ago I obtained a list of BBS members of
FidoNet. At the time there were about 6,000 member systems. The
January 1991 Node lists over 11,000 BBSs worldwide! It is important to
note that there are several large networks, of which FidoNet is only
one. U.S. Robotics claims to have a list of 12,000 BBSs that use their
modems in this country alone. [if this estimate is based on their sales
of HST modems to sysops, it is open to debate. - Moderators'] It is clear
that millions of individuals are using PC telecommunications and the numbers
are getting larger.
------------------------------
From: The moderators' <72307.1502@COMPUSERVE.COM>
Subject: Pirate or Bootlegger?
Date: 18 Apr 91 01:12:07 EDT
In the past we have complained about the software industrys' lack of
differentiation between software piracy and the sale of bootleg copies
of commercial products. However a recent article in "Lan Times"
reflected a new care in correctly identifying two distinct segments of
the software copyright problem. We reprint the first few paragraphs
here as an illustration of how clarifying each area (piracy vs
bootlegging) can aid in understanding a complex problem. We hope that
other journalists, and even the SPA, adopt this more precise language in
future treatments of the topic.
++++++++++++++++++++
Source: "Software Piracy Now Costs Industry Billions: But software
authentication devices can protect your investment from thieves"
Charles P. Koontz
Previews
LAN TIMES March 18, 1991
pp75-76
About a zillion years ago when I first read _Swiss Family Robinson_, I
always wondered why the Robinson family was so fearful of Malaysian
pirates. After all, I was accustomed to the proper civilized pirates in
all the Errol Flynn movies. But it turns out the Malaysian variety were
much worse. The same is true of the pirates that prey on the modern
software industry.
In the software industry, the civilized pirates are the ones who copy an
occasionally program from a friend without paying for it.. Most of us at
lest know someone who's done it. I've heard of places where none of the
software in an office is legal.
Civilized pirates are still thieves and they break the law, but they
have a better attitude. They should look into shareware as an
alternative source. It's almost as cheap and often every bit as good.
In the software industry, the crook who makes a living by making and
selling copied software is the modern equivalent of a Malaysian pirate.
The fact that a lot of them are located in the orient where piracy may
not be illegal helps the analogy. It seems however that the practice is
spreading to more local climates.
The process is fairly simple and requires only a small investment to get
started. At the simplest level, all the pirate needs is a copy of a
popular program, a PC, and a place to duplicate the distribution
diskettes. More sophisticated pirates have factories employing dozens
of workers running high-speed disk duplicators and copy machines so they
can include the manual in their shrink-wrapped counterfeit package. Some
even copy the silk screening on the manual covers. They then find a
legitimate outlet for the software. The customer only finds out that
the company is bogus when he calls for technical support, if the real
manufacturer tracks serial numbers.
Software piracy has become a part of the cost of doing business for
major software manufacturers. The Software Publishers Association (SPA)
estimates that piracy costs the software industry between 1.5 and 2
billion dollars annually in the USA alone. Worldwide estimates range
from 4 to 5 billion dollars. The legitimate domestic software market
accounts for only 3 billion dollars annually. The SPA estimates that
for every copy of legal software package, there is at least one illegal
copy. If you think this is an exaggeration, just consider all the
illegal copies you know about.
[rest of article discusses hardware anti-piracy devices]
------------------------------
From: dogface!bei@CS.UTEXAS.EDU(Bob Izenberg)
Subject: Dutch Hackers article and reaction
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 91 05:14:53 CDT
FROM THE SUNDAY, APRIL 21ST NEW YORK TIMES
Dutch break into U.S. computers from 'hacker haven'
By John Markoff
New York Times Service
Beyond the reach of American law, a group of Dutch computer intruders
has been openly defying United States military, space and intelligence
authorities for almost six months.
Recently the intruders broke into a U.S. military computer while being
filmed by a Dutch television crew.
The intruders, working over local telephone lines that enable them to
tap American computer networks at almost no cost, have not done
serious damage and haven't penetrated the most secure government
computer systems, federal investigators say.
The group, however, has entered a wide range of computer systems with
unclassified information, including those at the Kennedy Space Center,
the Pentagon's Pacific Fleet Command, the Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory and Stanford University.
U.S. government officials said they had been tracking the interlopers,
but no arrests have been made because there are no legal restrictions
in the Netherlands on unauthorized computer access.
"This has been a terrible problem," said Gail Thackeray, a former
Arizona assistant attorney general who has prosecuted computer crimes.
"Until recently there have been few countries that have computer crime
laws. These countries are acting as hacker havens."
American law-enforcement officials said they believed there were three
or four members of the Dutch group, but would not release any names.
A Dutch television news report in February showed a member of the
group at the University of Utrecht reading information off a computer
screen showing what he said was missile test information taken from a
U.S. military computer. His back was to the camera, and he was not
identified.
Because there are no comput