Volume Number EFFECTOR ONLINE In th

Found at: gopher.meulie.net:70/EFFector/effect01.05

########## |   Volume I                               Number 5   |
########## |                                                     |
###        |                   EFFECTOR ONLINE                   |
#######    |                                                     |
#######    |                    In this issue:                   |
###        |           NetNews: Prodigy's Stage.Dat              |
########## |       Crooks,Big Brother,Biden,and the F.B.I.       |
########## |          Privacy: The Real Vs. The Ideal            |
           |     Five (Common?) Misperceptions about the NREN    |
########## |         Macrotransformation: The 'Telecosm'         |
########## |        Crunch, Stoll, and Optick at the CFP         |
###        |              A Daytrip to Prodigy Land              |
#######    |            -==--==--==-<:>-==--==--==-              |
#######    |                      Editors:                       |
###        |         Gerard Van der Leun (boswell@eff.org)       |
###        |             Mike Godwin (mnemonic@eff.org)          |
###        |            Mitchell Kapor (mkapor@eff.org)          |
           |                                                     |
########## |   The general contents of Effector Online may be    |
########## |        freely reproduced throughout the Net.        |
###        |   To reproduce signed material herein outside the   |
#######    |    Net, please secure the express permission of     |
#######    |                     the author.                     |
###        |                                                     |
###        |             Published Fortnightly by                |
###        |    The Electronic Frontier Foundation (eff.org)     |
effector n, Computer Sci. A device for producing a desired change.

                                FAST BREAKS:
                 Net News from throughout known Cyberspace

>>The Stage.Dat Flap:
     Prodigy took it on the chin yet again this month. A rumor began to
circulate around the nets, (followed by numerous assertions of the
"truth" of these rumors) that Prodigy, through a part of their program
known as Stage.Dat, was actively spying on and collecting information
from its users' hard disks.  Exactly why Prodigy would want to do this
nformation it collected. It was also unclear whether or not the
Stage.Dat program sucked user data off the hard disk in the first place.
None of this mattered to numerous online factions ready to believe
anything evil about Prodigy in the wake of the company's recent orgy of
user abuse.
     Ultimately, the Stage.Dat file was found to be harmless and the
users' suspicions without foundation. When the Prodigy software creates
Stage.Dat, it essentially "lays claim" to a chunk of the hard disk. Any
boundries of Stage.Dat will naturally be contained in the file.  Nothing
malign can be laid at Prodigy's door.  It merely continues to pay the
as Stage.Dat.

>>Tracking Steve Jackson 
     Many people have asked what has happened since the EFF filed suit
against the U.S. Secret Service and others two weeks ago.  Other than a
The wheels of justice grind slow and fine.  The EFF will be in this for
the long haul, but lawsuits don't have dramatic new twists and turns on
a weekly basis, no matter what we see on L.A. Law. 
     In the meantime, watch this space. 

>>EFF Opposes Federal Restrictions on Encryption Use
     The Electronic Frontier Foundation opposes Senate Bill.266 and any
other proposed federal statute that would limit the private use of
encryption technology.
     If the language in SB 266 had the force of law, it would require
commercial and noncommercial service providers and system operators to
technology on these systems, since no service provider or system operator
     We at the EFF believe that, in an era of increasing technological
encroachments upon everyone's privacy, public key encryption presents at
least a partial defense for individuals and organizations that are
concerned about privacy. We believe that making the use of such
encryption technology illegal, or creating strong legal disincentives for
ts use, would deprive Americans of an important tool they can now use to
little to keep such technology, already well-documented and widely
available, out of the hands of the terrorist and criminal entities with
the face of the government's own policies, since the Department of
Defense has long subsidized the development of commercial encryption
     Currently, it is legal for any citizen to encrypt a letter and send it
through the U.S. mail system. Because we believe that computer-network
communication will assume an increasingly important role in the lives of
all Americans, we oppose any statutory scheme that would grant less
    In a late breaking development, the ACLU and the EFF have been in
contact with Senator Biden's staff. The staff has agreed to sit down with
us and hear our concerns.  Any people with information or concerns about
S.266 are invited to send email to Mitchell Kapor (mkapor@eff.org).

>>EFF Assists Challenge of Computer-Use Prohibition In Atlanta Case
     The Electronic Frontier Foundation has sought amicus curiae status
to assist in challenging a condition of a computer-crime defendant's
     Defendants Robert Riggs, Adam Grant, and Frank Darden, who pled
of a memorandum concerning the E911 emergency telephone system,
a prohibition on personal use and ownership of computers. Because
the EFF believes this prohibition was overbroad, infringing upon
the First Amendment rights of the defendants and extending far beyond
the scope of federal sentencing law, the Foundation has chosen to
assist defendant Robert Riggs in his challenge of the prohibition.
     It is EFF's position that the restriction on computer-use is not
as set out in federal sentencing law. We believe that computer use
s so fundamentally related to First Amendment rights of expression
and association that restrictions on such use, even when imposed
on convicted defendants, must meet high standards of Constitutional

>>Two Distinguished Professionals Join EFF Board
     Mitchell Kapor recently announced the election of Esther Dyson and
Jerry Berman to the Board of The Electronic Frontier Foundation. In
making the announcement, Kapor said, "These are two terrific people and
Esther knows the industry and the issues as well as anyone on the planet.
And Jerry Berman's experience with the legal aspects of all the EFF
ssues -- stemming from his first-rate work with the ACLU -- is is

>>Anonymous FTP Available At EFF
     The EFF's anonymous FTP area is now set up.  If you are on the 
(  Login as "anonymous" and use your e-mail address as the

eff% ftp eff.org
Connected to eff.org.
Name (eff.org:ckd): anonymous

     From there you can use the normal ftp commands to look around, change
'help' at the ftp prompt.
     Files available include back issues of Effector Online, information
about the EFF's activities and goals, and documents on the Steve Jackson
Games lawsuit.  For more information, contact ftphelp@eff.org.

>>System Manager Joins EFF Staff
     Christopher Davis recently joined the EFF's staff as Network
Administrator and System Manager. He is responsible for the day-to-day
operations of eff.org (a Sun 4/110), several Macintoshes in the office,
the local network, and printers. A 1990 Magna Cum Laude graduate from
Boston University, he holds a Bachelor of Science in Management



                             by Denise Caruso

Dateline: May 5, 1991

     How do you both keep Big Brother at bay and criminals out of 
circulation when computer technology has become a easy, powerful 
enhancement to traditional spying techniques such as wiretapping 
and encryption?
     Yet another ugly question looming on the electronic frontier.
     It looms large as debate rages about a proposal tucked into a
Senate bill on terrorism, S. 266, which "suggests" that makers of
computer security equipment consider building trap-doors into their
     Though at first it was thought that the S. 266 provision was 
cooked up by the National Security Agency, most now believe it was 
engineered by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Of late, the FBI 
quietly got a similar suggestion placed in another Senate crime bill,
S.618, "the Violent Crime Control Act of 1991."
     The FBI wants to easily intercept and interpret encrypted phone calls,
authority to do so by the courts. Gorges are rising in the technology
community as a result. What happens in a court of law, for example, when
a vendor hasn't followed this "suggestion"?
     Another argument asks whether a suspected criminal, being forced to
     Also, does forcing me to compromise the security of my data infringe on
my right to self defense? Since encryption is considered a munition,
making it less reliable could be tantamount to, say, forcing me to use a
varmint rifle instead of a sawed-off 12-gauge. You got it: "When
encryption is outlawed, only outlaws will use encryption."
     These examples don't even begin to address the significant industry
aspects of such a proposal. A group of heavy-hitting companies including
Apple Computer, Novell, Lotus Development, Microsoft, Sun Microsystems
and Digital Equipment are almost finished drafting a plan to implement
encryption technology from RSA Data Security in Redwood City.
     Why do you think companies like these (they're competitors, in case you
their products? They've lived the experience of not having it: Hacker
nvasions and compromised passwords. Viruses infecting diskettes that
telephone lines and local-area networks.
     And there is a growing customer clamor for secure electronic data
nterchange or EDI, an electronically transmitted document that is as
legally binding as a written and signed paper contract. Who would use an
EDI security product with a built-in back door? Intruders don't need
     Here's another interesting scenario. The Prodigy Information Service
the contents of a user's computer files. But Apple Computer (with
use, etc., via its AppleLink online service.
     This is not particularly high-tech or even unusual. America Online,
use. It saves the enormous cost and hassle of sending diskettes to
thousands of users. The phone link is a two-way connection: if AO wanted
to read the contents of my hard disk, it could, as could Apple or any
online service -- or well-equipped individual, for that matter -- who
     In a world where online communications makes it ridiculously easy to
counterproductive to introduce doubt and suspicion into the good news of
a growing data protection industry. It's bad enough that bills such as
S. 266 and S. 618 would probably kill the cryptography business in the
United States and strengthen it offshore. But worse yet is that the
     I want crime to stop. I want terrorism to stop. But do we want to secure
the networks or not? I have never seen evidence that power in the hands
of government authority didn't corrupt. I have never heard of a
compromise-able network that didn't get compromised. With increasing
think they're a good idea.

     Copyright 1991 by Denise Caruso. (dcaruso@well.sf.ca.us)
     Reproduced by permission of the author. 


                          Recent Microsoft ad:
        "Some people don't see the advantages of combining
         Microsoft applications. But then some people
         didn't see what would come of mixing nitro and



                 by Jim Warren (jwarren@well.sf.ca.us)

[Editor's note:  At the Computer Freedom & Privacy Conference,
Marc Rotenberg vigorously defended the following position:
  "No organization shall make secondary use of personal information
   without the individual's affirmative consent."
After the event, Jim Warren, the organizer and Chair of the CFP
Conference considered ramifications of such a policy, posted some thoughts
on the WELL, and edited and condensed them at our request for publication,

  Here are some specific examples of how "affirmative consent" might impact
use of personal information:
  Although there were a multitude of co-sponsors of the March CFP
Conference, CPSR was the sponsor and is the legal owner of the database
  Should CPSR be prohibited from using that list for anything
other than validating registrant's access to the Conference?
  CPSR had a fund-raising reception at the Conference hotel.  Should CPSR
be prohibited from mailing invitations to Conference registrants?  The
to one of the co-sponsor's fund-raiser.
  Would it make a difference if the invitation did or did not request a
  Please note that some percentage of the participants almost certainly oppose
  Those who provided their personal information in this database -- names,
addresses, phones, etc., -- for the singular purpose of being permitted to
attend the Conference.
  Should they be notified of the availability of audio-tapes, video-tapes
and printed Proceedings of the Conference?  I.e., should their computerized
to the CFP Conference?  How about its use for mailing information about
  What if someone is -- gawd forbid! -- someone makes a profit from products
or services offered by such direct mail to those database names?  Like nasty,
awful capitalist publishers -- who take the entrepreneurial risk of
  If affirmative consent is required, but was not obtained in the first
[unsolicited, direct-mail] advertisement of the Conference, how can CPSR
obtain the required consent without mailing a solicitation for which they
  Should only those who asked for information about tapes and published
and books would have to be much higher than if unauthorized solicitation were
made to the much-broader potential customer-base.
  Should the database owner, CPSR, be permitted to use the personal
nformation on the CFP registrants' to solicit new members?
  Should CPSR be permitted to use it to mail notices about the U.S. Privacy
Council -- that was created during the Conference, but was not an official
Conference activity?  Note:  Conference registrants included direct-marketing
  Should CPSR use the CFP database to distribute advocacy of their
Freedom of Information Act litigation against the FBI?  After all, the
names and addresses for the singular purpose of registering for the
Conference.  (This is a hypothetical.  I know of no CPSR plans to produce
or mail such an announcement.)
  Or, should CPSR use the personal profiling information collected from
[though without affirmative consent] only to those likely to be
nterested in promoting privacy, or supporting FOIA actions against the FBI
-- avoiding those who would probably be uninterested or offended?
  This is exactly what the direct-marketing groups try to do.  They use
  There are other practical issues.  As a minor datapoint -- the CFP
Conference would probably be in the black and would have been better
organized, had it not been for the *many*, many hours spent by my
assistant, entering, checking and endlessly modifying the privacy locks
Conference registrants could check.  It was *very* costly data-processing.
  Or, here's an example of government efficiency versus privacy:
We had a number of government employees attend the CFP Conference.  Most
  The purchase orders were some approximation of Standard Form 182 or DD1556
-- those eleventeen-part forms that are supposed to provide all needed
nformation to all involved bureaucrats and outside parties.
  Thus, they included registrants' *home* addresses, home phones, social
of continuous service, position-levels, pay grades, type of
appointments, whether they were handicapped and education levels.
  This included information on at least one attendee from an investigative
agency, plus others responsible for their agency's privacy project!
  Some of the forms arrived with all this typewritten info clearly
visible -- to me, my staff and CPSR, the legal owner of those records.
  Other forms had some of the really important personal stuff blocked out.
Not, of course, the home address or personal work phone-extension or
education level.  I mean *important*, secret stuff -- like the "first five
letters of the last name" and years and months of service.  In fairness,
one form did block out the social security number and date of birth.
Another had the home phone X'ed out by typewriter.  However, all left most
  Had they computerized the records, they could have avoided inappropriate
computer record, as needed.  But, that would create one of those terrifying
computerized records containing all that personal information.
  Here's an example of selective privacy, granted only to certain powerful
  An organization of California judges joined forces with a statewide police
officers' association and persuaded the Legislature and Governor to pass
their personal information in some otherwise-public records (e.g., voter
  More recently, information-provider companies proudly demonstrated to a
meeting of judges how much information they had compiled on the judges, their
families, personal habits, biases, etc. -- sold to attorneys with litigants
freaked!  First, they considered going back to the Legislature to ask for
they'd tolerate the same lack of privacy of everyone else -- a laudable
  Should some public officials have greater privacy rights than the
How about their residency information -- so citizens are unable to verify
  How about their property assessment records -- prohibiting concerned
citizens from verifying that officials are fairly assessed?
  If judges can seal records -- as they can, to some extent -- to protect
them and their families, then cannot the same case be made for all political
figures, the wealthy and the powerful?  How about Hollywood stars and
and men?  How about the elderly and frail -- less able to defend themselves?
How about all those big bucks political donors who would prefer to have no
  In fact, how about everyone who wants to keep their "public" records
  To what extent do citizens want to be prohibited from accessing records by
and rampant abuse.
  Sealed voter registrations deter citizens' ability to communicate with the
electorate and make independent citizen review functionally impossible.
  Let us think carefully before we too-quickly seal records in the sacred
name of "privacy," or we may later discover that we have destroyed our
citizenry's ability to effectively communicate with itself and make informed

                Reproduced by permission of the author. 


             Excerpt from conversation between customer support person 
             and customer working for a well-known military-affiliated 
             research lab: 

   Support:"You're not our only customer, you know."
   Customer:"But we're one of the few with tactical nuclear weapons."


             Five (Common?) Misconceptions About the NREN

                by Tom Valovic (tvacorn@well.sf.ca. us)

     1. NREN will solve the most critical problem in the US telecom
nfrastructure namely, the lack of band width capacity in the local loop.
((Comment: NREN, either via Gore or ANI, will not even begin to address
this problem.))
     2. NREN will provide certain advanced capabilities that don't exist
today, but that can be considered the wave of the future. For example,
for use in private enterprise R&D, etc..
((Comment: Many of the kinds of applications frequently invoked to justify
NREN are already being done today, and a fair measure involve either
trials or actual service being developed by the RBOCs. One example is
Nynex's SMDS trial in Boston which links four major medical centers for
teleradiology and other applications. There are many such activities
underway, in many areas of the country. They have nothing whatsoever to
networked CAD/CAM to do collaborative R&D among geographically dispersed
     3. NREN will allow the US to stay competitive with the Japanese in
((Comment: The Japanese have an aggressive program in place to deploy
fiber throughout NTT's subscriber base i.e. residential applications. We
the local exchange -- is where we are falling behind with respect to the
telecom policies and programs of some other developed countries,
ncluding Japan. The lack of progress has much to do with the CATV/telco
Again, NREN as currently conceived, will do nothing to address this.))
     4. NREN/K-12 represents a major set of solutions to the educational
crisis in the US.
((Comment: Maybe. But as Stephen Wolff pointed out at a recent NREN
brightest", whereas educational problems in the US cut across a broad
Congress via modem first has to learn how to read.  Further, there is 
already an abundance of computer technology in K-12 today that's being 
technology at the educational system (K-12, at least) will continue to
be ineffective.))
     5. NREN will provide the "data superhighways of the future" on a
nationwide basis if its implemented.
((Comment: This is somewhat misleading since these data superhighways
already exist in the form of interexchange carrier fiber capacity that's
already been deployed by the likes of ATT, Sprint, MCI, and a large
Alternate (non-RBOC) fiber is also being deployed in many major metro
areas by ALC's like Teleport (Merrill Lynch), MFS, Eastern TeleLogic,
for the "data superhighways of the future". Much of this capacity, at
least as far as the major metro areas are concerned, is available right
now. The real issues are cost and access --which, in theory, NREN does

(BTW, the foregoing is *not* an argument against NREN, but rather an
attempt to demonstrate that some of the arguments now being used to justify
t are based on somewhat dubious assumptions.)

                Reproduced by permission of the author. 

   "The less you know about home computers, the more
    you'll want the new IBM PS/1."
                 -- Ad in The Edmonton Journal

          A Review of "Into the Telecosm" by George Gilder

            by Scott Loftesness (Compuserve: 76703,407 )  

     In my reading this week, I came across an article by 
George Gilder in the latest issue of the Harvard Business Review.  "Into
the Telecosm" urges action at the state and national levels to begin
ultimately would provide a fiber connection to every American home.
     Gilder claims that the rapidly advancing technologies of microchips,
electromagnetic waves, and fiber optics will transform commerce:
     "In the next decade or so, microchips will contain a billion or more
transistors, expanding a millionfold the cost-effectiveness of computer
     The problem, according to Gilder, is that only one of these technologies
- computer power - is developing at a rapid pace.  The big problem area
s communications or, rather, the lack of it.  "Today the wiring is
     Progress in the computer area is indeed impressive.  Gilder cites
quadrupling the number of transistors on a chip every three years and
examples of the incredible progress being made on the hardware side of
computing.  Much of this new power is being put to work on images of one
nfrastructure can't handle what the new telecomputers require in terms
of information bandwidth.  "You cannot send an ocean through pipes
      "While the efficiencies of decentralized computing spring
from the laws of solid-state physics - the "microcosm" - breakthroughs
n communications will spring from the "telecosm," a domain of reality
law of the microcosm militates for increasingly distributed computing;
the telecosm enables powerful links between computers.  The challenge is
to close the gap between microcosm and telecosm, between the logical
     Gilder points out that much of the work in the computer industry is
today's networks, on compression hardware and software products.
Claiming that the communications crisis is more "a failure of
magination than of technology," Gilder points out that a major piece of
the potential solution is at hand:
     "In a crisp formula, Nicholas Negroponte of MIT's Media Lab outlines the
needed change: what currently goes through wires, chiefly voice, will
move to the air;  what currently goes through the air, chiefly video,
fiber-optic cables in a switched digital system as convenient as the
telephone today."
     Citing this "reversal" issue as a key one for policy makers, Gilder
n delivering video from over-the-air to fiber optics.  Citing the
common industry objections to this approach, Gilder claims "costly fiber
optics is just as mythical as scarce spectrum."  The problem is the
from laying fiber to homes.
     Fearing a situation analogous to the videotape recorder, Gilder fears
that the delays in deploying fiber to the home will result in the U.S.
again losing a critically important technology leadership position in
opti-electronic technology and that the U.S. fiber optic production
capacity is at exposed to lower cost competition from Japan, a country
that apparently is getting very serious about installing fiber to the
a large chunk of that spending is for private business networks that
the ultimate distribution system for its services and products.  To open
new markets, business leaders need a national network, not simply a
Babel of business networks."
     A very important effect of this kind of transition to fiber to the home,
according to Gilder, will be the transition from broadcast to narrowcast
that the technology will now permit.  Fiber will enable cause a shift
"from a mass-produced and mass-consumed horizontal commodity to a
vertical feast with a galore of niches and specialties."  Marginal costs
of delivering another program choice drop to almost nothing.  The
two-way nature of the medium enables a huge number of new sources of
today to the creators of programming tomorrow.
     Gilder urges business leaders to take action to force the reform of the
"telecom snarl that imperils creativity and progress in computers and
communications."  The problem is political.  The vested interests "all
focus on the destruction and mobilize to prevent it. In the U.S., the
broadcasters are marshaling their forces to preserve what
they claim are the special virtues of free and universal broadcast
nstalling fiber-optic networks.  Meanwhile, television networks and
manufacturers around the world are holding out the promise of HDTV,
     Gilder's article makes very interesting reading for a very interesting
time. In April, the National Telecommunications and Information
Administration (NTIA) of the U.S. Department of Commerce is scheduled to
nfrastructure."  How strongly will the administration advocate a
national broadband network?  
     As they say on TV, "film at 11."

               Reproduced by permission of the author.

    Real Americans talk About Why They Chose the 
     Sun SPARCstation 2000 (tm):

         "Last week we had a fella from Digital come out
          and look at the soybean crop.  After 20
          minutes, Ma chased him off and threw his
          keyboard out the window.  We`re from old
          Norwegian stock, and we know a thing or two
          about bus controllers."
                 -- Buck Flange, Arkansas, Texas
[Collected internally from a gag article at Sun...]

           Crunch, Stoll, Optik and the Other Usual Suspects
       A Snapshot of the Computer Freedom and Privacy Conference

                    by Kevin Kelly (kk@well.sf.ca.us)

     I was blown away by this conference. I expected a decent education 
and left today feeling I had attended an EVENT. Impressions is all I can
offer right now.
     Crunch coming up to Phiber Optik who is talking to me. "Boy this is
a weird conference. All my friends are here, but so is my prosecutor."
     "Yeah," says Phiber, "my prosecutor is here, too!"
     I didn't have a personal prosecutor and sort of felt left out. Just 
before Crunch had appeared, Phiber was telling me about his late night 
booth and Parker is giving Phiber fatherly advice (you should go to school),
about tunneling through cyberspace. Oh.... to have been there!
     Cliff Stoll scampering on the floor in agitated delirium telling his
"I disagree with everything you ever wrote." I nearly got knuckled by
     Sterling telling the university of Florida crime professor his version
of what happened to all the computer cops. He weaves in references to
turf battles, and the fact that 'my computer is better than any of the
computers the feds have to work with'. Later, the crime professor
admits on a panel that half of all the computer trained cops with a 
     John Gilmore's rousing speech. "I want to be able to rent a video
     I spent a lot of time with David Chaum, the totally anonymous 
electronic money guy, whom Gilmore was referencing, and I now believe 
Gilmore's dream is possible (though unlikely as put).


                       A Day In The Life of Prodigy

                             by Mitchell Kapor

 I spent half a day at Prodigy the other week with a dozen senior
 managers.  Reconstructed and condensed dialog from my notes:

 MK> Why do you feel it's necessary to pre-screen postings to public
 conference areas?

 P> Two reasons.  Prodigy is a family oriented service.  We have to
 screen out offensive material.  Also, topic drift.  Many of our
 subscribers are more interested in information than in conversation so
 we remove irrelevant comments.  Of course, those affected never *think*
 they're being irrelevant.

 MK> You could offer uncensored public conferencing without fear of
 offense if you offered a free blocking option that would let
 subscribers block particular conferences so their children couldn't
 read them.  You could also have your editors create digests of
 conferences for the information-minded to read.  (Prodigy refers to the
 people who screen conference postings as editors, not censors.  All have
 journalism backgrounds, I was told.)

 P> We never thought of that.

     From this I concluded that promotion of free and open inquiry simply
 didn't sit very high in their pantheon of values.
     I also mentioned that the Well had a method of on-line dispute
 resolution which did not involve throwing people off the system.  (I
 didn't mention that it works by endless rehashing of issues intermixed
 with invective until everyone is too tired to go on. :-) ).  I sang the
 praises of virtual community self-managed as developed in these parts.
     About a week later I got a follow up call from one of the folks at
 the meeting who asked me to arrange a meeting for Prodigy management to
 visit the Well and learn what it's all about.  I asked Cliff and he
 agreed.  I'm not sure how much of the Well is going to rub off on the
 Prodigy. Their corporate immune system can knock out almost any foreign
 meme, but we can always hope for a mild memetic infection.


         Topic 192:  'Misuse of Copyrighted material on the Well' 
          Not without merit (jrc)  Thu, May  9, '91 _16 Lines

Friends, this break in the action is brought to you by rent-a-flamer.
Fed up with garbage that you've been seeing flow across your screen? Are
your favorites getting abused by lowlife meatheads? And yet, are you
afraid to get involved in the endless wrangle and end up like (oops,
almost mentioned a userid there) so many hapless souls who now only post
n Forth and who want to meet jax face to face.

Well, hey! We've got a staff of experts waiting to serve you. Just tell
use which loathsome self-righteous toadstool you want us to go after,
and one of our Bonded Flamers will get on the case and in his/her face
Right This Minute! Pick your issue: You own your words, passive hosting
techniques, racial epithets, technical competence *or* who did what

$50 per hour plus all online charge. Void where prohibited.


         Computer Freedom and Privacy Conference Available Now!

  Audio-tapes of the First Conference on Computers, Freedom & Privacy
Tue-Thu Conference sessions are now available.  They may be ordered
    Recording, Etc./Soper  
    633 Cowper Street 
    Palo Alto CA 94301
    (800)227-9980 [for calls from beyond California]
    (415)321-9261 by fax

    1.  Constitution in the Information Age
          Laurence Tribe, Harvard Law School Professor; J.Warren/Chair
   Tuesday, March 26th:
    2.  Trends in Computers & Networks
          D.Chaum, P.Denning, D.Farber, M.Hellman, P.Neumann,J.Quarterman;
    3.  International Perspectives & Impacts
          D.Flaherty, R.Plesser, T.Riley, R.Veeder; R.Plesser/Chair
    4.  Personal Information & Privacy - I
          J.Baker, J.Goldman, M.Rotenberg, A.Westin; L.Hoffman/Chair
    5.  Personal Information & Privacy - II
          S.Davies, E.Hendricks, T.Mandel, W.Ware; L.Hoffman/Chair
    6.  Network Environments of the Future
          Eli Noam, Columbia University Professor; M.Rotenberg/Chair
   Wednesday, March 27th:
    7.  Law Enforcement Practices & Problems
          D.Boll, D.Delaney, D.Ingraham, R.Snyder; G.Tenney/Chair
    8.  Law Enforcement & Civil Liberties
          S.Beckman, C.Figallo, M.Gibbons, M.Kapor, M.Rasch,
          K.Rosenblatt, S.Zenner; D.Denning/Chair
    9.  Legislation & Regulation
          J.Berman, P.Bernstein, B.Julian, S.McLellan,
          E.Maxwell, C.Schriffries; B.Jacobson/Chair
   10.  Computer-Based Surveillance of Individuals
          D.Flaherty, J.Krug, D.Marx, K.Nussbaum; S.Nycum/Chair
   11.  Security Capabilities, Privacy & Integrity
          William Bayse, FBI Asst.Director; D.Denning/Chair
   Thursday, March 28th:
   12.  Electronic Speech, Press & Assembly
          D.Hughes, E.Lieberman, J.McMullen, G.Perry, J.Rickard,
          L.Rose; E.Lieberman/Chair
   13.  Access to Government Information
          D.Burnham, H.Hammitt, K.Mawdsley, R.Veeder; H.Hammitt/Chair
   14.  Ethics & Education
          S.Bowman, J.Budd, D.Denning, J.Gilmore, R.Hollinger,
          D.Parker; T.Winograd/Chair
   15.  Where Do We Go From Here?
          P.Bernstein, M.Culnan, D.Hughes, D.Ingraham, M.Kapor,
          E.Lieberman, D.Parker, C.Schiffires, R.Veeder, J.Warren/Chair

nt'l: any one audio-tape ( 1 tape )   $14.95 +sales tax*  +$2.50 US
+$ 5.00 US five-tape tape-set ( 5 tapes)   $34.95 +sales tax*  +$5.00 US
+$10.00 US
  Set A:  tapes 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6(Noam)
  Set B:  tapes 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11(Bayse)
  Set C:  tapes 12, 13, 14, 15 and 1(Tribe) full-Conference set (15
tapes)  $59.95 +sales tax*  +$7.50 US   +$20.00 US * - include 6.5% for
*Recording, Etc.*; MasterCharge, Visa & American Express OK.

   Where is the REAL Legion of Doom When The Government Needs Them?
                                         (Found in rec.arts.comics)

From: wga@po.CWRU.Edu (Will G. Austin)
Subject: The Legion of Doom

    The members of the Legion of Doom (that I remember) were:

        Lex Luthor              Giganta
        Brainiac                Black Manta
        Toyman                  Riddler
        Sinestro                Scarecrow
        Capt. Cold
        Solomon Grundy


                          ENDNOTES AND FEEDBACK

    We are always interested in news, pointers, tall tales, true stories,
quotes, jokes and brilliant strokes related to life on the Electronic
    Write to us with comments and criticism, or write for us if you
    We'll be back in a fortnight with another edition.

        In the meantime, you are still on the Electronic Frontier.
                            Be careful out there.