EFFector Online Volume October org

=========================================================================

  ________________             _______________          _______________

 /_______________/\           /_______________\        /\______________\

 \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \          |||||||||||||||||       / ////////////////  

  \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/          |||||||||||||||||      / ////////////////

   \\\\\\_______/\            ||||||_______\        / //////_____\  

    \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \           ||||||||||||||       / /////////////

     \\\\\\\\\\\\\/____       ||||||||||||||      / ///////////// 

      \\\\\___________/\      |||||              / ////   

       \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \     |||||             / ////  

        \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/     |||||             \////

=========================================================================

EFFector Online Volume 07 No. 13     October 7, 1994      editors@eff.org

A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation        ISSN 1062-9424

EFF Organizational Changes: New Exec. Dir., New Privacy Project

Rep. Edwards Announcement on Digital Telephony, Oct. 7, 1994

National Research Council Study of National Cryptography Policy

Computers, Freedom and Privacy '95 - Call for Participation

EFF's Godwin to Speak at Criminal Law in Cyberspace Conf., 10/27/94

OTA Report - Information Security & Privacy in Network Environments

GPO Puts Bills Online, but Wants You to Pay for Them Twice

Horde of New NII Documents Online at EFF

What YOU Can Do

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: EFF Organizational Changes: New Exec. Dir., New Privacy Project

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

** Taubman Executive Director, Berman Policy Director **

September 28, 1994

The Chairman and Board of Directors of the Electronic Frontier Foundation

(EFF) today announced the immediate appointment of Andrew E.  Taubman as

Executive Director of EFF.  The Board of Directors approved the hiring of

Mr.  Taubman at its most recent meeting in mid-July.  At the same time,

Jerry Berman, Executive Director since January 1992, was appointed the

Director of Policy.  The move was made to effect the best placement of

talents and experience.  Mr.  Taubman will focus on EFF as an organization,

continue in recognition of the increased significance of EFF's political

"I am delighted to welcome Drew to EFF, where we expect him to play a 

major role in orchestrating the next phase of development of the 

organization.  The Board went through a long and thoughtful process to 

find the best candidate, and in Drew we believe we have him," said 

Mitchell Kapor, co-founder of EFF.

The Taubman Group, a Cleveland-based management consultancy created in 

Foundation's Caring Program For Children, Cincinnati; Director of 

Development and Alumni Affairs/Associate Director of the University of 

Cincinnati Foundation, Ohio; Associate Director of Development at Wright 

State University, Dayton, Ohio; Cultural Arts Director of The Leo 

Yassenoff Center, Columbus, Ohio; and Development Officer, Public 

Television and Radio at Michigan State University, East Lansing, 

Michigan.  His community involvement as a committee member/officer or 

trustee has been regular and diversified in health care and the arts.  He 

education, and the arts.

Mr. Taubman received his BA in Arts Administration from Michigan State 

University and has continued his professional education with a focus on 

the non-profit sector.  

** EFF Privacy and Technology Project **

An additional organizational change at EFF was the creation in May of the 

Goldman, former Director of the Privacy and Technology Project at the 

ACLU.  Ms. Goldman is assisted by Staff Counsel Deirdre K. Mulligan, a 

** Legal Services and Community Building **

Concurrent with the implementation of these recent changes, EFF's Board 

of Directors is committed to continued support for Legal Services and 

ncreased development of the Community Building aspect of EFF's mission.

"I am very optimistic about this change," said co-founder John Perry 

Barlow.  "Jerry Berman needs to be in a position to focus on policy, and 

than require his continuous attention to administrative detail.  EFF has 

a revitalized focus on community services and understanding the issues 

nvolved in civilizing cyberspace.  Drew Taubman is exactly the person to

For further information, please contact Kathleen Zaffina at 

kzaffina@eff.org or 202/347-5400.

------------------------------

Subject: Rep. Edwards Announcement on Digital Telephony, Oct. 7, 1994

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Representative Don Edwards (D-CA), Chairman of the House Judiciary

Subcommittee on Civil and Constitutional Rights, and principal House

author of the Digital Telephony bill which passed the House Wednesday,

asked EFF to forward the attached memo to the net community.

This memo does not represent EFF statements or policy.  Please direct

any comments to the office of Rep. Edwards.

Thank you

_____________________________________________________________________________

Date:           October 7, 1994

To:             Persons Interested in the Digital Telephony "Wiretap" Bill

From:           Don Edwards

                Chairman

                Subcommittee on Civil and Constitutional Rights

                House Judiciary Committee

My legislation, H.R. 4922, would be a major improvement over the current

Currently, the FBI holds the upper hand regarding decisions about security

and privacy, in a relationship that is shielded from public scrutiny.

mind.  Indeed, in opposing my bill the phone companies argued that no

legislation was needed because they were working to accommodate law

enforcement's demands without legislation.  For me, therefore, the key

questions were whether that accommodation would be developed in the

the requirements of law enforcement. 

** Closed Door Meetings or Sunshine **

For over a year, an industry committee that includes all of the major phone

companies, cellular providers and equipment manufacturers has been working

to ensure wiretap accessibility in new and existing systems.

The sloe mission of the committee is to satisfy law enforcement's stated

"needs".  Privacy is not within the charter of standards for digital

Advanced Intelligent Network, and cable TV systems.  The process is totally

closed to the public.  All participants in the meetings are required to

continue behind closed doors.

** Three Principles of Accountability **

This status quo is unacceptable.  Deliberations of industry and law

enforcement regarding the future of the telecommunications system should be

controlled in three ways, which my legislation would achieve:

(1)  Statutory parameters must be set on the scope of what can be required

of telephone companies.  Under current practice, law enforcement is

bill, in contrast, has substantially narrowed law enforcement's capability

(2)  Privacy must be a requirement on an equal footing with law enforcement

nterests.  Our bill, for the first time ever, requires telephone companies

to affirmatively protect the privacy and security of communications not

authorized to be intercepted, and gives the FCC regulatory authority over

ndustry compliance with privacy standards.  Up until now, phone companies

not had Been an artifact of telephone technology.

(3)  There must be sunshine and accountability.  Without H.R. 4922, the

"accommodate" law enforcement.  My bill requires that industry standards be

Accounting office will report every two years on what modifications have

been made in telecommunications systems and what modifications are being

** Internet Exempted from Wiretap Requirements in HR 4922 **

Finally, I should remind all interested persons that the bill does not

cover the Internet.  The report on the bill clearly states:

"The definition of telecommunications carrier does not include persons or

entities to the extent that they are engaged in providing information

_____________________________________________________________________________

For a copy of the latest version of the bill, see:

ftp.eff.org, /pub/EFF/Policy/Digital_Telephony/digtel94.bill

See digtel94_analysis.eff in the same directory for EFF's analysis of the

Leahy/Edwards Digital Telephony legislation.

------------------------------

Subject: National Research Council Study of National Cryptography Policy

------------------------------------------------------------------------ 

** A Study of National Cryptography Policy **

             September 14, 1994

Cryptographic technologies are critical to a wide variety of important

military and civilian applications involving sensitive or classified

nformation that must be protected from unauthorized disclosure.  In

addition, cryptography is a key component of most authentication

technologies, i.e., technologies to guarantee the identity of a message's

U.S. economic competitiveness, national security, law enforcement

nterests, and protection of the rights of private U.S. citizens.

comprehensive study from the National Research Council on

cryptographic technologies and national cryptography policy.  The study

consultations, invited and contributed papers, and testimony at regional

nvited to submit input to the committee as described below.

The study plans to address the following issues:

    * the impact of current and possible future restrictions and standards

      regarding cryptographic technology on

        - the availability of such technology to foreign and domestic

          parties with interests hostile to or competitive with the

          national security, economic, commercial, and privacy

          interests of the U.S. government, U.S. industry, and private

          U.S. citizens;

        - the competitiveness of U.S. manufacturers of such technology

          in the international market;

        - the competitiveness and performance of commercial U.S.

          users of such technology;

        - U.S. national security and law enforcement interests;

    * the strength of various cryptographic technologies known and

      anticipated that are relevant for commercial and private purposes;

    * current and anticipated demand for information systems security

      based on cryptography;

    * the impact of foreign restrictions on the use of, importation of, and

      the market for cryptographic technology;

    * the extent to which current cryptography policy is adequate for

      protecting U.S. interests in privacy, public safety, national

      security, and economic competitiveness;

    * strengths and weaknesses of current key escrow implementation

      schemes;

    * how technology now and in the future can affect the feasible policy

      options for balancing the national security and law enforcement

      interests of government and the privacy and commercial interests

      of U.S. industry and private U.S. citizens;

    * recommendations for the process through which national security,

      law enforcement, commercial, and privacy interests are balanced

      in the formulation of national cryptography policy.

The study will be conducted by a 17-member committee (listed at the

end of this document) that collectively has expertise in computer and

communications technology; cryptographic technologies and

cryptanalysis; foreign, national security, and intelligence affairs; law

enforcement; science policy; trade policy; commercial and business

users of cryptographic technologies); and interests in privacy and civil

liberties.  A subpanel of the full committee will be cleared at the SI

level and have access to all relevant information to ensure that the

findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the unclassified report

are consistent with what is known in the classified world.

The project plan calls for the study to be delivered approximately two

years after full processing of all necessary security clearances.

However, the NRC will make every attempt to deliver the study sooner,

and it currently believes that the core work of the study will be

completed about 18 to 20 months after funding for the study has been

The final report of the study committee is subject to NRC review

The main text of the report will be unclassified; classified annexes (if

any) will be made available only to those with the appropriate security

clearances.

** Providing Input to the Committee **

The questions that the study is expected to examine are provided above.

Members of the interested public are invited to submit their views on

these questions and any other questions that you believe the committee

through these channels as well; the committee will respond affirmatively

to as many such requests as possible, but time and resource constraints

  CRYPTO@NAS.EDU.

U.S. Mail:

      Cryptography Project

      Computer Science and Telecommunications Board

      National Research Council

      Mail Stop HA-560

      2101 Constitution Avenue, NW

      Washington, DC  20418

** Committee to Study National Cryptography Policy **

Kenneth Dam, committee chair, was Deputy Secretary of State (1982-

Law at the University of Chicago Law School.

General W. Y. Smith, retired, committee vice-chair, is president

emeritus of the Institute for Defense Analyses, and has also served in a

number of military posts including that of deputy commander in chief of

the U.S. European Command in Germany.

Lee Bollinger, formerly dean of the University of Michigan Law School,

s currently provost of Dartmouth College and a constitutional scholar.

Ann Caracristi, retired, was Deputy Director of the National Security

Agency (1980-1982).

Benjamin Civiletti was U.S. Attorney General (1979-1981), and is

currently in private practice with the law firm Venable, Baetjer, Howard

and Civiletti.

Colin Crook is senior technology officer for Citicorp.

Samuel Fuller is vice president of corporate research at Digital

Equipment Corporation.

Leslie Gelb is president of the Council on Foreign Relations.  He served

as Assistant Secretary of State for Politico-Military Affairs

(1977-1980).

Ronald Graham is a director of information sciences at AT&T Bell Labs

and a professor of mathematics at Rutgers University.

Martin Hellman is professor of electrical engineering at Stanford

University.  Dr. Hellman was one of the inventors of public key

encryption.

Julius Katz is president of Hills & Company, and was deputy United

States trade representative (1989-1993).

at SRI International.  He is the chairman of the ACM committee on

computers and public policy, and a member of the ACM study group on

cryptography policy.

Raymond Ozzie is president of Iris Associates, a wholly-owned

  developer of Lotus Notes.

Kumar Patel is vice chancellor for research at UCLA.

Edward Schmults was Deputy Attorney General of the United States

(1981-1984) and is a former senior vice president for external relations

and general counsel for the GTE Corporation.

Elliot Stone is executive director of the Massachusetts Health Data

Consortium, which is responsible for the collection and analysis of the

Willis Ware, retired, is with the RAND Corporation as senior computer

Advisory Board which was established by the Computer Security Act of

** Staff and Organizations **  

Marjory Blumenthal is director of the Computer Science and

Telecommunications Board (CSTB).

Herbert Lin is study director and senior staff officer of the CSTB.

via Internet at HLIN@NAS.EDU.

The National Research Council (NRC) is the operating arm of the

Academy complex, which includes the National Academy of Sciences,

the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine.

The NRC provides impartial and independent advice to the federal

technical talent to answer questions of national significance.  In

addition, the NRC often acts as a neutral party in convening meetings

among multiple stakeholders on various controversial issues, thereby

facilitating the generation of consensus.

Within the NRC, the CSTB considers technical and policy issues

technologies as critical resources and sources of national economic

CSTB@NAS.EDU or by calling 202-334-2605.

------------------------------

Subject: Computers, Freedom and Privacy '95 - Call for Participation

--------------------------------------------------------------------

The Fifth Conference on Computers, Freedom and Privacy -- CFP'95

Call for Participation

Sponsored by the Association for Computing Machinery and

Stanford Law School

San Francisco Airport Marriott Hotel

Burlingame, California

This is an invitation to submit session and topic proposals for inclusion in

the program of the Fifth Conference on Computers, Freedom and Privacy.

SCOPE

The advance of computer and telecommunications technologies holds great

efficiency in commerce to improved public health and safety and increased

transform our lives. New computer and telecommunications technologies are

bringing new meanings to our freedoms to speak, associate, be left alone,

learn, and exercise political power.

At the same time these technologies pose threats to the ideals of a just,

free, and open society. Political, social, and economic fairness may hinge on

ensuring those who are poor, disabled, or otherwise disadvantaged have access

to these technologies. Personal privacy is increasingly at risk from invasion

by high-tech surveillance and eavesdropping. The myriad databases containing

Technological advances also enable new forms of illegal activity, posing new

these crimes can threaten the traditional barriers between the individual and

the state.

Even such fundamental notions as speech, assembly and property are being

transformed by these technologies, throwing into question the basic

Constitutional protections that have guarded them. Similarly, information

knows no borders; as the scope of economies becomes global and as networked

communities transcend international boundaries, ways must be found to

The Fifth Conference on Computers, Freedom and Privacy will assemble experts,

advocates and interested people from a broad spectrum of disciplines and

backgrounds in a balanced public forum to explore and better understand how

computer and telecommunications technologies are affecting freedom and privacy

n society. Participants will include people from the fields of computer

Topics covered in previous CFP conferences include:

Access to Government Information

Computers in the Workplace

Electronic Speech, Press and Assembly

Governance of Cyberspace

Role of Libraries on the Information Superhighway

Free Speech, Cryptography, and the Public Communications Network

We are also actively seeking proposals with respect to other possible topics

on the general subject of computers, freedom and privacy. Some new topics we

are considering include:

Telecommuting: Liberation or Exploitation?

Courtesy, and the Freedom to be Obnoxious

Commercial Life on the Net

How Does the Net Threaten Government Power?

Are Computers Killing Intellectual Property?

Universal Access to Network Services

The Meaning of Freedom in the Computer Age

Government-Mandated Databases

All proposals should be accompanied by a position statement of at least one

and other multi-person presentations should include a list of proposed

        CFP'95 Proposals

        Stanford Law and Technology Policy Center

        Stanford Law School

        Stanford, California 94305-8610

or by email to:  cfp95@forsythe.stanford.edu with the word "Proposal" in the

thorough consideration for inclusion in the formal program. The deadline for

STUDENT PAPER COMPETITION

Full time students are invited to enter the student paper competition. Winners

telecommunications technologies are affecting freedom and privacy in society.

All papers should be submitted to Professor Gary T. Marx by 20 November 1994.

Authors may submit their papers either by sending them as straight text via

email to:  Gary.Marx@colorado.edu or by sending six printed copies to:

University of Colorado

Campus Box 327

Boulder, Colorado 80309-0327

(303) 492-1697

Submitters should include the name of their institution, degree program, and a

nstitution and that the paper is an original, unpublished work of their own.

For more information on the CFP'95 program and advance registration, as it

becomes available, write to:

        CFP'95 Information

        Stanford Law and Technology Policy Center

        Stanford Law School

        Stanford, California 94305-8610

or send email to:  cfp95@forsythe.stanford.edu with the word "Information" in

the subject line.

------------------------------

Subject: EFF's Godwin to Speak at Criminal Law in Cyberspace Conf., 10/27/94

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

District of Columbia Bar Association

The New Technology Committee of the Computer Law Section, and the Criminal

Law and Individual Rights Section, invite you to a Panel Discussion entitled:

** CRIMINAL LAW IN CYBERSPACE:  OUTLAWS ON THE NET ** 

Speakers:      Scott Charney, Chief, Computer Crimes

               Unit of the U.S. Department of Justice

               Mike Godwin, Counsel to the Electronic Frontier Foundation

               Mark D. Rasch, Arent Fox Kintner Plotkin & Kahn

Moderator:     Andrew Grosso, Co-Chair, New Technology Committee

Whenever a new technology becomes prevalent, the law enters a period of

nvolving that technology, and for protecting the rights of people affected

by it.  We are now in such a period for the Internet and the developing

National Information Infrastructure (NII).  Of all legal fields, the struggle

concerning the criminal law is the most pronounced, since old statutes

must be narrowly construed to protect civil liberties, while used in a

creative fashion in order to deter malevolent acts which have never seen

before.   This program focuses on computer network crime having national

and international ramifications, including several recent investigations and

This panel brings together noted experts in the field of civil liberties and

computer crime to discusses the issues presented by the latest

Crimes Unit of the U. S. Department of Justice, and is actively involved

n the formulation of federal policy with regard to computer-related

crimes.  Mike Godwin is the On Line Legal Counsel for the Electronic

Frontier Foundation who is a respected defender of civil liberties for

telecommunications users.  Mark D. Rasch is prominent defense attorney

Justice, prosecuted the "Internet Worm" case  in 1989.  Andrew Grosso,

the panel moderator, is a Co-Chair of the New Technology Committee and

a former federal prosecutor.  Written materials by the panelists will

be distributed.

Date:     Thursday, October 27, 1994

Time:     12:00 Noon

           1250 H Street, N.W.

Cost:     Box Lunch:       $25.00 for Section members and

                             students; $30.00 for Non-Members.

          Program Only:    $19.00 for Section Members and students;

                             $24.00 for Non-Members.

** Registration Form **

Mail to:  Computer Law Section

          D.C. Bar, 1250 H Street, N.W. 6th Floor

          Washington, D.C.  20005-3908

Enclosed is my check for __________ made payable to the DC Bar.

Checks must be received by October 25.  Sorry, phone reservations cannot

be accepted.

Name(s)               Phone(s)               Bar No(s).         Bar Member?

 _____________         ____________           ___________          Yes/No

 _____________         ____________           ___________          Yes/No

 _____________         ____________           ___________          Yes/No

------------------------------

Subject: OTA Report - Information Security & Privacy in Network Environments

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

U.S. CONGRESS

OFFICE OF TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT

Washington, DC  20510

** Information Security and Privacy in Network Environments **

The OTA report "Information Security and Privacy in Network

Environments" is now available.  The report was released on

September 23, 1994.  Ordering information and details about

electronic access are at the end of this file.

** Congress Must Step in to Protect Personal Privacy **

As electronic transactions and records become central to

everything from commerce and tax records to health care, new

concerns arise for the security and privacy of networked

nformation.  These concerns, if not properly resolved,

threaten to limit networking's full potential in terms of

of Technology Assessment (OTA) in a report released today.

Some 20 to 30 million people worldwide can exchange messages

over the Internet.  Every day U.S. banks transfer about $1

trillion among themselves, and New York markets trade an

average of $2 trillion in securities.  Nearly all of these

transactions pass over information networks.

The report "Information Security and Privacy in Network

Environments" focuses on safeguarding unclassified

nformation in networks, not on the security or

of network services to ensure information access.

Appropriate safeguards must account for--and anticipate--

technical, institutional, and social changes that

ncreasingly shift responsibility for safeguarding

nformation to the end users, says OTA.  The laws currently

ntellectual property were largely developed for a time when

telegraphs, typewriters, and mimeographs were the commonly

used office technologies and business was conducted with

cryptography, are achieving new prominence.  OTA emphasizes

that decisions about cryptography policy will affect the

everyday lives of most Americans because cryptography will

commerce, and manage copyrighted material in electronic

form.  Congress has a vital role in formulating national

cryptography policy, says OTA, and more generally in

transactions and protecting personal privacy in a networked

A field of applied mathematics/computer science,

cryptography is the technique of concealing the contents of

a message by a code or a cipher.  The message is

unintelligible without special knowledge of some secret

(closely held) information, the key that "unlocks" the

encrypted text and reveals the original text.  Key

management is fundamental to security.  It includes

The federal government still has the most expertise in

cryptography, says OTA.  As a developer, user, and regulator

of safeguard technologies, the federal government faces a

fundamental tension between two important policy objectives:

fostering the development and widespread use of cost-

effective safeguards; and--through use of federal standards

and export controls--controlling the proliferation of

commercial safeguard technologies that can impair U.S.

The concern is reflected in the ongoing debates over key-

escrow encryption and the government's Escrowed Encryption

Standard (EES).  The Clinton Administration announced the

"escrowed-encryption" initiative, often called the "Clipper

chip," in 1993.  This type of encryption is intended to

allow easy decryption by law enforcement when the equivalent

of a wiretap has been authorized.  The Department of

Commerce issued the EES, developed by the National Security

Agency (NSA), as a federal information processing standard

for encrypting unclassified information in February 1994.

The initiative in general and the EES in particular have

controversy and unpopularity stem in large part from privacy

concerns and the fact that government-designated "escrow

agents" will hold the users' cryptographic keys.

Congress has asked the National Research Council (NRC) to

conduct a major study, expected to be available in 1996,

the course of such a review.  Because the timing of the NRC

of key-escrow encryption, one option would be to place a

a congressional policy review.

An important outcome of a broad review of national

cryptography policy, says OTA, would be the development of

more open processes to determine how cryptography will be

nfrastructures to support electronic commerce and network

use of copyrighted materials.   More openness would build

trust and confidence in government operations and leadership

and allow for public consensus-building.

OTA examines and offers policy options for congressional

consideration in three areas: 1) cryptography policy,

ncluding federal information processing standards and

export controls; 2) guidance on safeguarding unclassified

nformation in federal agencies; and 3) legal issues and

nformation security, including electronic commerce,

Requesters for the report are the Senate Committee on

Governmental Affairs and the House Subcommittee on

Telecommunications and Finance.

OTA is a nonpartisan analytical agency that serves the U.S.

Congress.  Its purpose is to aid Congress with the complex

and often highly technical issues that increasingly affect

our society.

** Congressional Comment **

Senator John Glenn (D-OH) Chairman, Senate Committee on

Governmental Affairs:

"In the new electronic age, we are relying more and

more on information technology to streamline government,

educate our children, make health care more accessible and

affordable, and make our businesses more productive and

competitive.  This rush to embrace a new age of technology

must not, however, obscure our ongoing responsibility to

"Because we need policies and practices to match the

asking the Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) to study

am very happy to say that OTA's report provides an excellent

clear steps that Congress and the Executive Branch should

consider if we are to develop policies and practices equal

to the task of providing security and privacy protections in

an increasingly networked world.

"The Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs, which I

chair has already rung warning bells in this area.  Our

oversight of agency operations has uncovered threats to

Department of Defense computers and IRS employees browsing

through computerized taxpayer records.  We must recognize

that new technologies, particularly the development of

computer networks, are leapfrogging security and privacy

controls designed for a simpler time.  Policies and

match for the instantaneous world-wide flow of data through

computer networks.

"Addressing the needs of this new world demands that we

find fair balancing points among often competing imperatives

for personal privacy, law enforcement, national security,

OTA's very insightful report highlights the need for the

accountability.  Therefore, in the next Congress, this

Committee will continue its oversight of agency operations

and will pursue legislation to ensure that government

agencies handle data from citizens and businesses

maintaining security are held accountable for breaches or

misuse of their responsibilities.

"I commend the Office of Technology Assessment for its

timely and very insightful contribution to the development

of policies and practices that can match the realities of

the emerging electronic information age."

Senator William V. Roth, Jr. (R-DE), Ranking Republican,

Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs:

"Since 1988, computer network security breaches have

 --today's information highway.  The ability of the

at stake.  For example, the Internal Revenue Service is

among those agencies who rely increasingly on computer

networks for such things as filing tax returns.  Anyone who

through their personal financial data.

"We need to recognize the potential danger and act

accordingly.  Last year, I asked the Office of Technology

Assessment to look at such problems and recommend changes.

are poorly structured to deal with information security.

Moreover, the report underscores the fact that much more

** How to Obtain This Report **

* ORDERING INFORMATION:  For copies of the 252-page report

"Information Security and Privacy in Network Environments"

for congressional use, please call (202) 224-9241.  Copies

for noncongressional use are available from the

Superintendent of Documents for $16.00 each.  To order, call

(202) 512-0132 (GPO's main bookstore) or (202) 512-1800 and

ndicate stock number 052-003-01387-8.  Or you can send

your check or your VISA or MasterCard number and expiration

For free 8-page summaries, please call (202) 224-8996.

Federal Express service is available for an additional $8.50

* ELECTRONIC ACCESS:  The full report is available

electronically.  To download via ftp from OTA, use the

following procedures: ftp to otabbs.ota.gov (152.63.20.13)

Login as anonymous.  Password is your e-mail address.  The

files are located in /pub/information.security and the file

names and sizes are:

FOREWORD.TXT       (3K)

ADVISORY.PANEL.TXT (3K)

STAFF.TXT          (1K)

TOC.TXT            (2K)

CH1.TXT            (93K)

CH2.TXT            (169)

CH3.TXT            (172K)

CH4.TXT            (299K)

APPC.TXT           (36K)

APPD.TXT           (3K)

APPE.TXT           (4K)

Appendix A--Congressional Letters of Request and

Appendix B--Computer Security Act and Related

Documents--are not available electronically.

------------------------------

Subject: GPO Puts Bills Online, but Wants You to Pay for Them Twice

-------------------------------------------------------------------

The US Federal Government Printing Office announced last week that it 

"now has all Congressional Bills available online", as part of its "GPO

Access" program.  "The Congressional Bills database contains all published

versions of House and Senate bills introduced since the start of the 103d

Congress."

Though the GPO promises updates to the database by 6am each publishing day,

the service is still of limited usefulness to those trying to track the

online access to the bills, and the Federal Register, even though your taxes

copyright and are often available from a variety of internet servers

(generally piecemeal - sites tend to archive only those documents related

to their own interests, though others are more comprehensive but lagging

behind or prohibitively expensive).  The Library of Congress' own LOCIS

this method of access leaves a lot to be desired compared to ftp, gopher,

or WWW access.

The GPO's Sept. 27, 1994 press release outlined several payment schedules

access.

Other problems include failure to implement the system in accordance with

features), and failure to provide all of the available material to

On the bright side, access to Federal Depository Library patrons is free,

of the bills for a fee can be regarded as something of a good start (i.e.,

t did not require additional legislation to whip the GPO into gear).  But

s this enough to make this move by the GPO applaudable?  Or is this

For the original GPO press release, see:

ftp.eff.org, /pub/Alerts/gpo_online.announce

[Note: "Flaming" the GPO admins will not help.  What might go a long way,

over time, to getting these problems resolved are reasoned submissions

explaining why failure to adhere to the WAIS standard, and why charging for

access to something that is far cheaper to produce than its paper

equivalent (and already paid for anyway), are perhaps misguided solutions.

Readers might additionally like to know that Congress's General Accounting

Office (GAO) is now putting it's material online, but also for a fee.]

------------------------------

Subject: Horde of New NII Documents Online at EFF

-------------------------------------------------

There's been a flurry of document-releasing recently at the Information

Telecommunications and Information Administration, and the Patent &

Trademark Office.  EFF is archiving many of the more important documents,

ncluding several time-sensitive notices of inquiry, annoucements of

conferences, and requests for comments, all of which YOU can participate in.

How much of this is hype and how much of this deserves serious attention

s a good question, but one might wish to keep in mind that the more

agencies talk about regulating NII issues at the same time they are talking

about the NII being more like (or just plain being) the Internet, the

closer they are to talking about regulating the Internet outright.  Speak

up now or forever hold thy peace.  There are several Requests for Comment

ncluded in here, and you owe it to yourself to submit clear and direct

comments letting regulators know what you think needs to be done or not done.

Available from:

ftp.eff.org, /pub/EFF/Policy/OP/

[NOTE: Due to large number of IITF docs, IITF material may be moved to

a Gov_docs subdirectory of .../OP - if you find that the files aren't there,

cat_iitf.charter - Charter of the IITF Committee on Applications and Tech.

fed_med_edu_agri_nii_funding.notices - pile of Federal govt. funding mechan-

                                       ism and grant notices re: agricultur-

                                       al telecom, telemedicine, and distance

                                       learning.

                Maybe some less parochial memes are catching on?

                     Working Group

itf.faq - factsheet on IITF, what it is, and what it does.

itf_0912.report - monthly IITF Committee Report for Sept. 1994

itf_goals_nii.paper - Selection of IITF papers, "The Information Infrastruc-

                       ture: Reaching Society's Goals".

nii_access_051394_ntia_cpuc_hearing.summary - Summary of NTIA and Calif. Pub.

                                              Utility Commission hearing

                                              on open access and the NII

nii_access_051394_ntia_cpuc_hearing.transcript - transcript of above hearing

nii_prinicples_progress.report - Clinton Administration "NII Progress Report"

                                 and "NII Principles and Actions: A Checklist

                                 of Progress" report, 93-94.  

                                 See also WWW version at: 

                                 gopher://www.arpa.mil:80/0/NII_Report_94.html

nist_nii_framework.report - NIST report, "Framework for NII Services".

                            See http://www.eff.org/papers/otherpapers.html

                            for WWW version with graphics.

npr_it_082294.report - NPR report, "Reengineering Through Information

                       Technology"

ntia_iitf_nii_94_hearings.report - NTIA/IITF summary of 1994 hearings

                                   on NII, open access and universal service.

                                   Subtitled "America Speaks Out", natch.

ntia_iitf_uniserv_conf.announce - Announcement of NTIA/IITF virtual

                                  conference on universal service and the

                                  NII.  * TIME SENSITIVE - DEADLINE: OCT. 14,

                                 1994 *

ntia_uniserv_access.noi - NTIA Notice of Inquiry on NII universal service

                          & open access issues.  * TIME SENSITIVE - DEADLINE:

                          DEC. 14, 1994

omb_gils.notice - OMB bulletin on establishment of a Government Information

                  Locator Service (GILS)

                            and IITF) on Commercial Security in the NII.

                            * TIME SENSITIVE - DEADLINE: OCT. 13, 1994 *

                            in response to PTO's Request for Comments on

                            draft report on the NII and Intellectual Property

                            Rights. * TIME SENSITIVE - DEADLINE: OCT. 21,

                            1994 *

                                 Infrastructure to Work"

                                   individuals and organizations on the

                                   above report

                                    Irving's Sept. 20 1994 US Senate testimony

                                    before the Antitrust, Monopolies and Bus-

                                    iness Rights Subcommittee of the Judiciary

                                    on S. 1822, the would-be Communications

                                    Act of 1994 (Senate companion to the

                                    Markey bill, HR. 3636, which implemented

                                    most of EFF's Open Platform NII

                                    provisions)

                                           testimony to House of Rep. on

                                           satellite-based technologies and

                                           the GII

tpwg_cat_iitf.charter - Charter of the Technology Policy Working Group of 

                        the Committee on Applications and Technology of IITF

------------------------------

Subject: What YOU Can Do

------------------------

"The net poses a fundamental threat not only to the authority of the

think, and influence one another without any institutional supervision

Chip."

  - John Seabrook, "My First Flame", _New_Yorker_ 06/06/94

Ensuring the democratic potential of the technologies of computer-mediated

communication requires active participation in the political processes that

are accustomed to making decisions about the future of technology, media,

education, and public access to information, with far-reaching and

long-lasting effects on citizens and their lives, but are accustomed to

corporations, and other government representatives.

Now, more than ever, EFF is working to make sure that you can play an

active role in making these choices. Our members are making themselves heard

on the whole range of issues. EFF collected over 5000 letters of support

for Rep. Maria Cantwell's bill to liberalize restrictions on cryptography. 

We also gathered over 1400 letters supporting Sen. Leahy's open hearings on

the proposed Clipper encryption scheme, which were held in May 1994.  And

EFF collected over 90% of the public comments that were submitted to NIST

Additionally, EFF has worked for the passage of legislation that would

ensure open access to the information infrastructure of today and tomorrow,

and continues to provide some of the best online resources on privacy,

ntellectual freedom, the legalities of networking, and public access to

You *know* privacy, freedom of speech and ability to make your voice heard

n government are important. You have probably participated in our online

campaigns and forums.  Have you become a member of EFF yet?  The best way to

opinions heard.  EFF members are informed and are making a difference.  Join

EFF today!

For EFF membership info, send queries to membership@eff.org, or send any

message to info@eff.org for basic EFF info, and a membership form.

------------------------------

Administrivia

=============

EFFector Online is published by:

The Electronic Frontier Foundation

Washington DC 20001 USA

+1 202 347 5400 (voice)

+1 202 393 5509 (fax)

+1 202 638 6119 (BBS - 16.8k ZyXEL)

+1 202 638 6120 (BBS - 14.4k V.32bis)

     Coordination, production and shipping by:

     Stanton McCandlish, Online Activist/SysOp/Archivist 

Reproduction of this publication in electronic media is encouraged.  Signed

articles do not necessarily represent the views of EFF.  To reproduce

ually at will.

To subscribe to EFFector via email, send message body of "subscribe

effector-online" (no "quotes") to listserve@eff.org, which will add you 

to a subscription list for EFFector.

To get the latest issue, send any message to er@eff.org, and it will be

mailed to you automagically.  You can also get ftp.eff.org,

/pub/EFF/Newsletters/EFFector/current at any time.

------------------------------

--------------------------

Membership & donations: membership@eff.org

Legal services: ssteele@eff.org

Hardcopy publications: pubs@eff.org

Technical questions/problems, access to mailing lists: eff@eff.org

General EFF, legal, policy or online resources queries: ask@eff.org

End of EFFector Online v07 #13

******************************

$$